4 ms·
Typical economist.com view on the world: "This could have been a problem for the world's wealthy!!!" Not that they would ever agreee to any kind of shared supp
by johnea 3y ago
Typical economist.com view on the world: "This could have been a problem for the world's wealthy!!!"
Not that they would ever agreee to any kind of shared support for the free s/w projects that today's internet depends on, because... Elon needs more.
Also, I would argue, a good reasson not to be an update apostle.
Disable automatic updates, update when you need an updated version of something, or a new vuln directly affects your usage model, not just because an update is available...
- j-wags 3y agohttps://www.economist.com/leaders/2024/04/04/a-chilling-near-miss-shows-how-todays-digital-infrastructure-is-vulnerable https://www.economist.com/leaders/2024/04/04/a-chilling-near... > ... Other fixes are regulatory. America’s cyber strategy, published last year, makes clear that the responsibility for failures should lie not with open-source developers but “the stakeholders most capable of taking action to prevent bad outcomes”. In practice that means governments and tech giants, both of which benefit enormously from free software libraries. Both should expand funding for and co-operation with non-profit institutions, like the Open Source Initiative and the Linux Foundation, which support the open-source ecosystem. The New Responsibility Foundation, a German think-tank, suggests that governments might, for example, allow employees to contribute to open-source software in their spare time and ease laws that criminalise “white hat” or ethical hacking.