Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 11th Jul 2013 21:35 UTC
Microsoft Documents released by Snowden show the extent to which Microsoft helped the NSA and other security agencies in the US. "Microsoft helped the NSA to circumvent its encryption to address concerns that the agency would be unable to intercept web chats on the new portal; The agency already had pre-encryption stage access to email on, including Hotmail; The company worked with the FBI this year to allow the NSA easier access via Prism to its cloud storage service SkyDrive, which now has more than 250 million users worldwide; [...] Skype, which was bought by Microsoft in October 2011, worked with intelligence agencies last year to allow Prism to collect video of conversations as well as audio; Material collected through Prism is routinely shared with the FBI and CIA, with one NSA document describing the program as a 'team sport'." Wow. Just wow.
Permalink for comment 567081
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Now we know what happend.
by Kebabbert on Sun 14th Jul 2013 13:44 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Now we know what happend."
Member since:

This post is in two parts, the links are in the second part.

"No one can keep up with those amounts of new code that gets incorportaed in Linux. I showed you proof in the links. For instance, the last link says "we need to review things more". Read it.

A link from 5 years ago where a developer says that they need to review code more before it enters the merge window so as to minimize the breakage that occurs during the merge window does NOT mean that code gets incorporated into Linux without review.

It's proof of absolutely nothing of the sort.

Code that breaks during the merge window is either reviewed and fixed or it doesn't make it into a mainline release at all, so your bullshit about untested code getting into mainline is just that, bullshit.
Thanks for your constructive remarks, you sound pleasant and well mannered, just like Linus Torvalds ("you are full of shit", "OpenBSD developers are m*sturbating monkeys", etc). BTW, Andrew Morton said in an interview that he wished a test tool set for Linux, because "we see so many regressions that we never fix". And, are Linux developers ignoring bug reports? etc. See further down for links.

"But this should not come as a surprise. You know that Linux upgrades breaks software and device drivers. You have experienced it yourself, if you have used Linux for some time.

Your links doesn't show one shred of fact to support your claim of HP spending millions of us dollars to keep up with drivers due to linux changes.

All you've done is link to well known linux hater bassbeast/hairyfeet's unsubstantiated attacks on Linux with nothing to back it up.

I've used Linux as my day-to-day OS for 6 years now, most of that time on a bleeding edge distro (Arch) and I've had to downgrade the kernel twice in those 6 years, once because of a unstable network driver during a large network rewrite, and once when I had just recently switched to Nouveau, where it became unstable against a new kernel upgrade.

That's three problems where I had to downgrade in 6 years, and these where all fixed within one to two weeks and allow me to upgrade with full funcitonality/stability....So if I'd been using a stable distro I wouldn't have been bitten by any of the above.
Jesus. You remind of those people saying "I have been running Windows on my desktop for 6 years, and it has crashed only twice, so you are lying: Windows is stable!"

To those Windows users I say: it is one thing to run Windows at home with no load, and no users and no requirements. But to run a fully loaded windows server with lots of users is a different thing. If you believe that you can extrapolate from your own home experiences to a Enterprise servers, you need to have some work experience in IT. These are different worlds.

There are many stories of sysadmins complaining about Linux breaking drivers, and this is a real problem. As I said: even you have experienced this - which you confessed. And even though I have predicted your problems, you insist it is nothing. You are too funny. Ive told you exactly what problems you had, and you basically say "yes, you are right I had those problems, but these problems are nothing to worry about, you are just lying when you say Linux has these problems". So... I was right all the time. First you confess I am right, and then you say I am wrong. (For those mathematically inclined, this is called a contradiction). ;)

So no, if you actually used Linux for 'some time' you'd know that the whole 'kernel upgrades continously crash drivers' is nonsense coming from people who doesn't even use Linux, just like you...Not even proprietary drivers are a problem in practice, as while they do break between kernel upgrades, the proprietary hardware vendors like NVidia and AMD continously recompile their drivers against the new kernel versions.

Of course no one has ever claimed that every Linux upgrade crash drivers, no one has said that. But it happens from time to time, which even you confess. The problem is that vendors such as HP must spend considerable time and money to recompile their drivers. If you dont understand it is a problem, then you need to get some IT work experience, and not just sit home toying with your PC and play games?

Linux device drivers model is broken:
"Quick, how many OSes OTHER than Linux use Torvald's driver model? NONE. How many use stable ABIs? BSD,Solaris, OSX,iOS,Android,Windows, even OS/2 has a stable driver ABI....I'm a retailer, I have access to more hardware than most and I can tell you the Linux driver model is BROKEN. I can take ANY mainstream distro, download the version from 5 years ago and update to current (thus simulating exactly HALF the lifetime of a Windows OS) and the drivers that worked in the beginning will NOT work at the end."

I'll leave you with this link: if HP, one of the largest OEMs on the entire planet, can't get Linux to work without running their own fork, what chance does the rest of us have?

(Yes, I know, this link is a lie, too. Why bother, you dont have to read it, you have missed all the complaints on Linux device driver model. Even if Linus Torvalds says it is broken, you will not believe him, how could someone make you understand?)

Stop lying, you have shown absolutely zero evidence of any code being accepted without anyone 'knowing what it really does', it's nothing but your own fabrication.
You trying to pose this unsubstantiated quote by some guy named 'Lok' as some proof of 'code getting accepted without anyone knowing what it really does' only shows how desperate you are to downright lie in order to push your agenda.

Jesus. There are numerous links about the bad code quality Linux has. Let me show you some links. How about links from Linus Torvalds himself? Would that do? Probably not. So, what kind of links do you require? Linus Torvalds will not do, maybe God is ok? If you dont trust Linus, do you trust God? Probably not either. I dont know how to make someone with zero work experience understand?

Sure I have showed some links that are a few years old. But those "old" links does not disprove my point. My point is that constantly during all the time Linux has been in development there has always been complaints about how bad the Linux code quality is. I have links from last year, and to links several years old - and every time in between. First, the original Unix creators studied the Linux code and they said it was bad. And now, last year Linus Torvalds talked about the problems. And even today, we all witness the problems that Linux has, for instance the broken device driver model. It has not been better with time. Linus Torvalds can not convince you of the problems, your own experiences of all problems can not convince you that Linux has problems - so how could I convince you? That would be impossible.

You others, can read these links. below. To be continued...

Reply Parent Score: 3