2 ms·
> Microsoft made it much harder to do bad stuff, and wrote software to look for bad stuff. Before MS there was no bad stuff on the commodore 64. It just didn't
by 6510 6y ago
> Microsoft made it much harder to do bad stuff, and wrote software to look for bad stuff.
Before MS there was no bad stuff on the commodore 64. It just didn't exist. Loading things from tapes, disks or the internet doesn't matter. You switch it off and on again then load the next thing. I see no reason why this cant scale. You would have problems if you allow unchecked io and remote code execution and you would have to deal with that but even then a simple reset would clean it up. There is no need to give strangers the keys to your home and offer them a place to hide where you cant find them.
> Virus scanners and content moderation are essentially the same thing - they look for people abusing the system
The problem is that it is not your page. This forces you to live up to someone else's standards (if not forein laws) It is like the PC architecture where the computer is not yours.
Facebook is really what web standards should have offered. I would probably have been against it myself but in hindsight it is what people really wanted.
>...content moderation is a Sisyphean task, where we can certainly reduce the problem, but almost by definition cannot solve it.
I don't know, perhaps we can. Should we want to?
> I wonder how differently newsfeeds and sharing will work in 5 years
Ill still be using RSS and Atom.
- contextfree 6y agoDon't you have a potential malware problem as soon as sharing data between apps (i.e., having a hard disk with a persistent file system which multiple apps can access, even if serially/one at a time) becomes commonplace? Hard disks with persistent filesystems seem awfully useful. as a nitpick, C64 wasn't really "before MS" - it booted to a BASIC which was derived from Microsoft BASIC!
- 6510 6y agoI'm oversimplifying. Basically, I switch on the c64, insert a floppy, load a program and get exactly that. The floppies are physically separated. Without physical access the application can't write to its own floppy[0] Say you physically contain each app by giving it its own processor and its own memory/storage. If it wants access to anything else it needs specific permission managed by something baked onto a chip. A complex detailed permission system. You don't just get to read keyboard input but if you do you don't just get to read it when the application is not focused. If an application is registered to work with a file type it can have access to those but only in defined locations and only that file type, reading and writing separately. If it wants access to anything outside its scope of permission the user not the developer can pick what permission is to be granted and for how long. Add 2 mechanical switches that make it physically impossible to write to and/or read a drive. It seems annoying and bureaucratic but it would allow us to download and run any code from the internet which would be truly exciting. Right now I cant even plug in an usb device and when I do there is no way of knowing what happens to it. It seems absurd. [0] - https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stephen-Cobb-4/publication/285927161/figure/fig19/AS:421650417098756@1477540701571/Write-protection-on-floppy-disks.png https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stephen-Cobb-4/publicat...