On Fri, 31 May 2002, Miark wrote: > On the other hand, I bet ol' Billy is grinnin' like a chesire cat over > this filth: > > "..the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution outlines how open source might > facilitate efforts to disrupt or sabotage electronic commerce, air > traffic control or even sensitive surveillance systems. > > "Unlike proprietary software, open source software does not make the > underlying code of a software confidential. > > "'Computer systems are the backbone to U.S. national security', says > Fossedal, chairman... 'Before the Pentagon and other federal agencies > make uninformed decision to alter the very foundation of computer > security, they should study the potential consequences carefully.'" > > http://www.businesswire.com/cgi-bin/f_headline.cgi?bw.053002/221502375 > > Tell me Billy isn't greasing their FUD skid. > > Miark >
Miark, I smell what you're steppin, and to a small degree I agree, but on the other hand I also have the feeling that the source "not" being closed source only serves the computing public as to allow the software to be made even more secure. and besides...who is in who's bed? -- Mark a.k.a. daRcmaTTeR ------------------ "If your wife told you NOT to do it there's probably a real good reason!" ------------------------------------------------------------------------- REGISTERED LINUX USER #186492 Penguinized since 1997
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
