undefined

points

[-]

Freedom to get a stroke from an incomplete toy OS?

Snark aside, desktop Linux userspace (or gnu Linux, call it how you want) is nowhere near production ready. And even for the more general point, giving out root willy-nilly is not more freedom. It's more like letting your child play on the 5th floor of a half-constructed building that's about to be exploded. Your kid can enjoy their time just as much in the safe forest trail.

by d3Xt3r7 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Not everything needs to be "production ready". And giving out root willy-nilly is freedom. It's my device, I should get to decide how I want to use it and not have artificial restrictions put on my be by someone else. If I want to rm -rf /, I should be able to do just that.

by gf0002 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

You can, but maybe don't make it an easy to accidentally invoke default.

Like even `rm` added a flag to not do that without explicitly asking.

Also, there are plenty of immutable OSs now among Linux distros, are they also limiting your freedom?

by Cider99867 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

How can you be free when you're not private or secure?

Grapheneos is fully open source and comes with 0 Google services.

>so called "security"

Grapheneos is widely recognized as one of the most secure operating systems.

by d3Xt3r7 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

[flagged]

by Cider99865 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

You can't have privacy without security.

by d3Xt3r5 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

That is a vague, meaningless statement. What sort of privacy are we taking about? What sort of security? What's the target? What's the attack vector? What's the environment? What's your threat model?

Without all of those details, your statement is meaningless.