Subj : Re: Windows vs Linux
To   : boraxman
From : tenser
Date : Mon Apr 25 2022 14:01:45

On 25 Apr 2022 at 12:34p, boraxman pondered and said...
 
 bo> I think you are just being argumentative for the sake of being
 bo> argumentative.

I think I've been very civil and polite with you.

 bo> Your line of reasoning just doesn't make any sense.

Perhaps not to you.

 bo> Not knowing how my PCI cards are communicating has no impact on me, or
 bo> almost anyone else.

Actually, that's not true.  If, say, the unpatched
ancient version of the Linux kernel running on your
storage device gets hacked and starts exfiltrating
your data by talking directly to your Ethernet
device without your IOMMU being able to intervene
because they're on the same side of a PCI bridge,
that seems like the sort of thing that would have
an impact on you.  This is, of course, even worse
if it happens to, say, your bank.

Similarly, if the ME in your Intel CPU is hackable,
that might have a profound impact on you.

 bo> Your argument is bordering on sophistry.

Again, I think I've remained polite and civil throughout
this conversation.  If you disagree, please feel free
to point something out.

But this is just rude.

 bo> Very,
 bo> very few people buy computers specifically for the purposes of
 bo> controlling how the CPU sends data to a PCI or AGP card, or to have
 bo> control over the firmware in a hard drive.

Just like very few people buy computers to customize their
shell or window manager.  They buy their computers to do some
useful work, because computers are tools.

 bo> We don't experience limitations if now knowing doesn't result is us not
 bo> being able to use it.
 bo> 
 bo> Your freedom comes from being able to use the tool to solve your
 bo> problems.

This is where your argument breaks down.  Freedom comes from
the ability to use _a_ tool to solve some problem, not _the_
one, true tool.

 bo> Computers compute.  The more freedom you have to define your
 bo> computational problems, to implement your solutions, as you need it, the
 bo> freer you are.  The less that the hardware or software limits you, or is
 bo> the embodiment of an external vision constrianing you, the freer you are.

Ergo, if to solve some problem I require software that's only
available for Windows, then Windows is the freest platform for
me.  As you said, most users don't care how their hardware works;
most don't care about the OS, either.

 bo> I've stated that the Free Software people miss the point, so I agree
 bo> there.

Yes, but you also cited them.

 bo> Free software doesn't give me freedom if I cannot practically
 bo> EXPERIENCE it.

Yet you are arguing against making Linux easy to use because
you fear that somehow inexplicably leading to you no longer
being able customize your shell or window manager or something.
Not only does this, bluntly, show a profound lack of general
understanding of how "Linux" works, but it also seems like
you are advocating _against_ the freedom for others to, as
you neatly put it, "practically EXPERIENCE it" because you
fear that leading to someone taking something away from you.

You may find this interesting:
https://vanderburg.org/old_pages/Tcl/war/0003.html

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64)
 * Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

.