5 ms·

Sometimes those things are necessary for completely normal, non-nefarious use cases. Instead of giving you the option, you're not allowed to do it at all in the

Sometimes those things are necessary for completely normal, non-nefarious use cases. Instead of giving you the option, you're not allowed to do it at all in the name of Safety® I'm really not a fan of software being this presumptuous. The root of most of my gripes with things like Windows and macOS (not to mention most of the things gnome/freedesktop puts out) are entirely because of this mindset. I am not interested in infecting Linux with this baby-proofing as well. Security maximalists, especially when removing or refusing to implement useful functionality as a result of that stance, should be reminded that the first pillar of security is availability.

Hizonner 4y ago
Wanting to run programs without them being able to screw around with one another is a use case... and it's more a more common, fundamental one than wanting to run remote video conferencing or whatever. More to the point, you can always add the ability to do stuff like that, when you have the time to do it in a way that lets the user decide what should and should not have any given kind of access. On the other hand, if you start out by just letting everything run amok and then try to add controls later, assumptions will get changed underneath existing programs. That pretty much always makes things break in ugly ways... if it's even possible to do it at all, which is not guaranteed if you didn't think hard before you designed the function to begin with.
- michaelmrose 4y ago
  Remote video conferencing is vastly more popular than Linux at this point with work from home, remote doctors appointments, and travel issues. It's now something your 70 year grandmother who doesn't understand computers does.
  - Hizonner 4y ago
    My 70 year old grandmother (who'd only be about 10 years older than I am, which is a bit strange...) ALSO runs other programs all the time, and does not expect them to interfere with one another in confusing or malicious ways.
    - michaelmrose 4y ago
      In 19 years I've never seen an application interfere with another in confusing or malicious ways. I don't want to give up actual functionality to solve imaginary problems.
      - Karunamon 4y ago
        Well, I have, but those were anti-viruses and are commonly understood to be crap outside of enterprise endpoint protection (And usually even then too) :)
noobermin 4y ago
Honestly you have the right perspective, but you can leave out calling on the "first pillar" of security, what I want people to realize is that security isn't the most important thing at all, it's just a competing concern amongst a number of others, one of those being actually useful for what you need.

Hizonner 4y ago

Wanting to run programs without them being able to screw around with one another is a use case... and it's more a more common, fundamental one than wanting to run remote video conferencing or whatever. More to the point, you can always add the ability to do stuff like that, when you have the time to do it in a way that lets the user decide what should and should not have any given kind of access. On the other hand, if you start out by just letting everything run amok and then try to add controls later, assumptions will get changed underneath existing programs. That pretty much always makes things break in ugly ways... if it's even possible to do it at all, which is not guaranteed if you didn't think hard before you designed the function to begin with.

michaelmrose 4y ago
Remote video conferencing is vastly more popular than Linux at this point with work from home, remote doctors appointments, and travel issues. It's now something your 70 year grandmother who doesn't understand computers does.
- Hizonner 4y ago
  My 70 year old grandmother (who'd only be about 10 years older than I am, which is a bit strange...) ALSO runs other programs all the time, and does not expect them to interfere with one another in confusing or malicious ways.
  - michaelmrose 4y ago
    In 19 years I've never seen an application interfere with another in confusing or malicious ways. I don't want to give up actual functionality to solve imaginary problems.
    - Karunamon 4y ago
      Well, I have, but those were anti-viruses and are commonly understood to be crap outside of enterprise endpoint protection (And usually even then too) :)

noobermin 4y ago

Honestly you have the right perspective, but you can leave out calling on the "first pillar" of security, what I want people to realize is that security isn't the most important thing at all, it's just a competing concern amongst a number of others, one of those being actually useful for what you need.