...
Touche.
sweet sweet Jodienda :)
Who is "JODIENDA" ? Is it a female version of trisquel?
I'm ""'"jodiendo the REGISTER male NICKNAME ON TRISQUEL FORUMS.
BUT TO USE THE WORD jODIENDA OR LOOKING FOR SOMEONE NICKNAMED
"""JODIENDA""" in trisquel login forums it is a different matter.
for those interest, here is a
On Tue, 2018-01-23 at 18:53 +0100, onp...@riseup.net wrote:
> > Lard is poison.
>
> I know this is off-topic, but I would dispute that. Do some research on the
> history of the lipid hypothesis, which is what you're referring to; there's
> really not any evidence behind the idea. It's more
I don't understand.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Jodienda hahaha!
>I know this is off-topic
And what exactly would make you think that?
You are both on Jodienda's list, I hope you're happy now. :)
> Lard is poison.
I know this is off-topic, but I would dispute that. Do some research on the
history of the lipid hypothesis, which is what you're referring to; there's
really not any evidence behind the idea. It's more likely excess sugar
consumption and, to a lesser extent, other excess
> Lard is poison.
Eating ideas is much worse.
> You should not install proprietary microcode on your machine, but
already-existing microcode that cannot be removed is acceptable for now.
You have been accepting that lard "for now" in the last 22 years.
> This is why we have collective
> 1. When you go to a restaurant, do you consider every dish for which you are
> not given the recipe + the right to modify and redistribute it a "maybe
> poison"?
I do. Lard is poison.
> 3. Do you ever sit in a modern car, bus, train, ship, airplane without being
> given the full
> Visiting a restaurant (or eating processed
> food) is more like SaaSS than proprietary software. Proprietary software is
> like if they give you a recipe, but in a form that you can't read; you have
> to insert the recipe into some sort of complicated machine that makes the
> food for
Maybe I should have said it is 50/50 without any other factors to avoid yet
another nitpicking.
> Can't you see for yourself that it is 50/50
> - it can be or not, so it is as much "maybe
> malware" as "maybe goodware".
As the article Magic Banana shared states, %60 of paid closed source software
(85%-95% of freeware) contains malware. And this is quite sensible - it
should be so.
If
> I suspect that you are instead using the word "argument" to mean "an angry
quarrel or disagreement"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y
No. I just think that insight is much more important than arguments. An
insight is a flash which happens when arguments stop and one looks at the
> The questions were a reply to Magic Banana who wasn't.
Fair enough, I was mistaken on this point, then. I apologize.
> So to you a conversation is worthy only if it is an argument?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/argument
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/argue
These are
Good summary. I have been thinking the same as I also observe what is
happening. Although I didn't agree with some of your previous post I
intentionally didn't reply in order to avoid all that cycle. For similar
reason I don't want to engage into argumentation. That's why I prefer to
focus
Could you all please stop arguing? My head hurds. My limited capacity cranium
itches. That's not good. I'm extremely annoyed. Any of you who adds any new
comment in this thread will see me personally appearing (tense, naked and
furious) in their room with a hard copy of Comodo
> heyjoe cannot properly study any specific problem. Even less fight against
them. He ends up only complaining that the world is a terrible place. Worse,
he apparently blames the four freedom for not being a perfect solution to all
"the terrible things going on in the world" and therefore
Arguments can be extremely useful tools for strengthening each other's
understanding. They can become unproductive when the parties involved are more
interested in avoiding concessions than advancing, but there is nothing wrong
with arguments themselves. Both you and onpon4 have been arguing,
> No, they were put to someone who was joking and specifically told you so.
No. It was SuperTramp83 who was joking. The questions were a reply to Magic
Banana who wasn't.
> Look, if you aren't willing to argue the point, then this conversation is
worthless.
So to you a conversation is
> But that is certainly not a reason to "remove the 'ethics' and 'freedom'".
"that" is not a reason because your "that" is not what I explained.
On various occasions I notice that you like to take my words out of context
and gently push their meaning into a completely different one, then
> The questions weren't even put to you specifically
No, they were put to someone who was joking and specifically told you so.
That's why I didn't feel the need to refute every single thing you said. Just
those two because they stood out to me.
Look, if you aren't willing to argue the
> but I also guess you do have thousands of users who pay enough attention
and care enough as to use the tools ('member when we used tcpdump for
firecox?)
I don't know what this guess is based on. The fact is: only one user checked
it and he is not an expert whatsoever. This proves that
The question is trust and freedom.
Trusting one thing and not trusting another is a double standard. Someone
said "freedom is these 4 things" and people conform to trust "a community"
and to hate "a company" because the person has said "this is ethical".
It may sound outrageous but to me
>I doubt that.
And that's good.
>But do you really have 1000 programmers to check that program
I guess you don't but I also guess you do have thousands of users who pay
enough attention and care enough as to use the tools ('member when we used
tcpdump for firecox?) they have at hand to
Collectively - how does this actually work?
Say: 10 million lines of code for a program
10 programmers 1M lines each
100 programmers 100k lines each
1000 programmers 10k lines each (that looks feasible)
But do you really have 1000 programmers to check that program all of which
are:
-
>They all proprietary design and have computers full of proprietary hardware
and software, so according to your conclusion - 'maybe malware'.
Well, your reasoning is not very sound here. I don't know about Bannanna but
I am talking about a computer I have direct control upon. It is very
> Proprietary software is like if they give you a recipe, but in a form that
you can't read;
It's not the first time you bring forward this argument. Do note that freedom
1 is rarely, and for clear reasons of lack of knowledge, time and limited
human capacity, exercised individually but
> Why do you even bother responding if you're not going to actually refute my
reasoning?
I am not interested in fighting with you, regardless if you consider that the
only valid reason for providing a response. I am getting tired of all this.
It is impossible to discuss anything
I gave you a detailed explanation as to why it's different, and your only
response is a variant of "no it's not"? Why do you even bother responding if
you're not going to actually refute my reasoning?
> In any case - you didn't even look at the essence of the questions which is
the whole
Relax, people are trying to warn you that's all. They may somewhat be annoyed
with you for asking here, but its for our own good.
Proprietary software is malware extremely often. Like 90% of the time at
least. By malware, I also mean spyware and security risk.
Yes I would agree it is better to assume proprietary software is at the very
least spyware but at the worst its malware.
One way or another its bad.
I don't know where to start so I will stop.
Just to be clear and correct:
I NEVER said on this forum "I need help to install Comodo for Linux"; instead
I only wrote "The only antivirus for Linux computers I know is Comodo
Antivirus for Linux".
Do you notice the difference?
So please be honest with what you say about others and don't
> Again: should/could != is. Still you sit in that vehicle and ride, you turn
> on that radio (proprietary chips inside) and listen to music (copyrighted
> non-copyleft material).
Yes, and before libreboot existed RMS must have used a proprietary BIOS. If
instead he had refused to touch a
You answer makes no sense. It sounds like you oppose but you actually confirm
what was said in the original question. You cannot copy the dish, you can
only consume it. It is proprietary and you don't mind. Yet you mind the same
thing in another area. That's all.
> It should be free software.
Again: should/could != is. Still you sit in that vehicle and ride, you turn
on that radio (proprietary chips inside) and listen to music (copyrighted
non-copyleft material). You trust that airplane with all its complex systems
to take you from here to there
> That's not quite the same thing.
It is exactly the same thing. You are given something without insight into
the process (the source code).
> Proprietary software is like if they give you a recipe, but in a form that
you can't read;
No. It is a finished product. Just like a TV or a
> 1. When you go to a restaurant, do you consider every dish for which you
are not given the recipe + the right to modify and redistribute it a "maybe
poison"?
That's not quite the same thing. When you're given food at a restaurant,
you're not given a recipe that you're not allowed to
You seem to always explain everything with the FSF bible of freedoms. Let me
ask you some questions:
1. When you go to a restaurant, do you consider every dish for which you are
not given the recipe + the right to modify and redistribute it a "maybe
poison"?
2. Do you ever consume "maybe
rkhunter, especially in its newer versions is indeed much better
>Proprietary software is not always malware but it is very often malware
Yes. And you should assume it is always malware.
https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/proprietary.en.html
>He is right in correcting you, because you infringed on forum rules.
I was also clearly joking. I made a startup recently, it's called 'I sell you
some sense of humor'. If the OP is interested he can throw me a mail.
>SuperTramp83 exaggerates a little.
No, I was **obviously** joking
>Without freedom 1, you can never be sure a proprietary program is not
malware.
this!
>that escalated quickly
Right? :)
I tried this and it flagged the "suckit" rootkit as a false positive as per
https://askubuntu.com/questions/597432/do-i-have-a-rootkit-suckit-detected-in-sbin-init-chkutmp-errors/
Thanks for the suggestion though as it led me to rkhunter :)
bobstechsite, what I wrote to new in town is directed to you too.
Do not write about installing, using non libre software on this forum.
Do not encourage the use of non libre software.
I ask you to either write you redraw what you wrote about installing
the piece of non libre software. Or delete
suptertramp, when you correct people you are right in doing so.
If you correct new members, would you consider a more explanatory approach?
If a new member is infringing forum rules it likely could be due to a
blunder. Not being accustomed with this forum, a new member may
get defensive if he is
> If you read carefully my first message, I wrote "The only antivirus for
Linux computers I know is
> Comodo Antivirus for Linux".
That is not how it works on this forum.
On this forum you do not ask questions about how to install or use non libre
software.
You cannot write anything which
That program is most likely proprietary software, and I urge you not to
accept its license or become subject to it, and I will not aid you in
doing this harm to your personal autonomy.
Anti-virus is not the big security software you'd want on a GNU+Linux
system, anyway.
What you want is a
Yep, I don't think that was needed. I think proprietary software is evil
don't get me wrong, but this goes a bit too far as for what it actually is.
Firetools + gufw + noscript in your web browser
That's my thoughts... but yeah clamtk is better than clamav merely because
it is a gui.
Proprietary software is not always malware but it is very often malware. So
often that it's a bit scary.
Microsoft example #1
Google example #2
Apple example #3
adobe flash example #4
intel example #5
the list goes very long, but yeah... you are kind of right at least about it
not
You could just use ClamAV like many suggested.
Please lets maintain the manners inside this forum.
> "devil, hell, Satan, a nightmare, it's the worst thing that may happen to
your computer or smartphone, we are the best around"
that escalated quickly
I sense great things. People call me and say I have the best senses.
SuperTramp83,
I never met a person so dogmatic like you in the
computer/software/Internet field; "every proprietor software is malware,
devil, hell, Satan, a nightmare, it's the worst thing that may happen to your
computer or smartphone, we are the best around".
If you read
Not only you installed proprietary malware but you also enlarged your attack
surface.
* every proprietary software is malware. Prove me wrong. PROTIP: you can't
** In order to work an antivirus needs full access to your machine, it needs
root privileges and it is constantly and actively
I suppose you noticed my sense of humor, don't you?
> I am new in the forum and New in town.
Fantastic!
Hello onpon4,
thank you very much for your really appreciated advice and
suggestions.
On Trisquel 7 operating system I'll use ClamAV/ClamTK rather than Comodo for
Linux antivirus.
That's a proprietary program. I suggest you don't use it.
If you want an antivirus program, that's ClamAV. Look for "ClamTK"; it's in
the repo and acts as a graphical frontend for ClamAV. But I should note that
antivirus on GNU/Linux is not for your own protection; it's for the
protection
Hello bobstechsite,
thank you very much for your advice, comments and the
attached link; I really appreciate it.
Until last year on my notebook I had the Ubuntu 16 operating system and I
used the Comodo Antivirus for Linux.
Early this year I moved from Ubuntu 16 to
1. Both
2. Either. Just make sure it's the "Ubuntu" version and matches your OS
3. AVG and Sophos support GNU/Linux as well I think
If you want to stay "fully-free" (and you should, because you're using
Trisquel!) you're better off with ClamTk. You can install it through the
"Add/Remove
Hello to all Trisquel Community,
I am new in the forum and New in town.
The only antivirus for Linux computers I know is Comodo Antivirus for Linux
as of the link below:
https://www.comodo.com/home/internet-security/antivirus-for-linux.php?track=8251
I have a
65 matches
Mail list logo
