4 ms·

Starting a post with "I know this is voluntary work, pitch in or shut up and all that ..." doesn't make the quote you're attacking untrue. For what I'm paying

• dineshp2 11y ago
  Accepting poor security practices from the Linux mint developers cannot be justified just because you are not paying anything. Open source projects need to be held to the very highest security standards. How these security breaches are handled today set a precedent for how such security breaches are handled in the future. So it's a good idea to learn and improve from such security breaches and set a positive precedent.
• smt88 11y ago
  If Mint advertised, "Free to download, but also free of good security practices", then I could buy this argument. The problem is that Mint allows users to trust it. It would be better if they didn't work on the distro at all if they're not going to take security seriously. People on HN become furious about antivirus programs and routers and whatever else that are discovered to be laughably insecure. An OS is no less of security product than A/V or a router. In fact, it's the first line of defense for an end user.
• DonHopkins 11y ago
  Poor security is more expensive than money.
  • RaleyField 11y ago
    And unless you are using your computer only for media consumption it's also unethical because you are only delegating that insecurity onto your customers/users.