The more decisions you have to take, the greater the risk of taking a
bad decision. In a tailored development environment more decisions are
taken for you, thereby eliminating possibilities of taking bad
decisions. /Erling Hellenäs
Den 2017-11-17 kl. 12:28, skrev Raul Miller:
I do not like to rely on "NSA touched it" reasoning - that's too broad
of a brush. That said, I have problems with SELinux - its fine-grained
failure modes make understanding what the computer is doing difficult
for me to understand. That said, given how little effort most people
place into understanding how malware propagates, and solving those
problems, it's also difficult to identify better alternatives. (Which
leads me back to my original post in this thread.)
So... I think we have to assume that all software is not completely
reliable. People are flawed, and the things we make are flawed. The
trick is building resilience into your part of the system and then
coping with the things you cannot control.
But, yeah, we all make bad choices sometimes, and that's difficult to face.
However, I strongly disagree with "only one way to __ it" reasoning.
That inevitably turns out to be incorrect. It's often just an excuse
for laziness. When you get into heavily optimized contexts, that does
limit options, but there's always another way even if it's not the
best way.
Thanks,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
