[CS-FSLUG] Interesting Article In FSM

[Christopher Rose]

Don,
I have to agree with you. I recently was given a win98 computer in which the hard drive is virtually corrupted. Nearly 75% of the uninstallers do not work right (if at all). Half of the software (including MS-Office) will not start. This drive constantly wants to boot in "safe-mode", even when shut down properly. Somehow, I think that whoever wrote the proprietary code for the installed software either did not realize what they were doing or had intentionally created some malevolent code just to bog down and otherwise harm the system. As it stands, the drive is practically useless unless I reformat it. However, since it is only a 1.5GB unit, I may not bother. I have thought about install BasicLinux on it, or perhaps something that can liveboot and has an installer if you so choose to do so. Realistically, I may just consider trying Unix on this drive, just for fun.

Pax,
Christopher Rose


----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Parris" <gnumathetes at gmail.com>
To: "ChristianSource List" <christiansource at ofb.biz>
Subject: [CS-FSLUG] Interesting Article In FSM
Date: Mon, 9 May 2005 00:22:06 -0400

> 
> I don't know how many of you subscribe to Free Software Magazine.  The
> paid subscription puts readers about a month ahead of the
> non-subscribers.  Anyway, one of the articles in the May issue
> describes the "Risks of Using Proprietary Software".  It brings up two
> interesting points that don't always get mentioned in discussions of
> FOSS vs. proprietary software.
> 
> (1) There is a danger of running proprietary code.  As an example,
> Pool of Radience II's uninstall script actually damaged system files,
> and even wiped out some users' whole hard drives.  Had the code been
> published, as ingredients in food are, other developers could have
> spotted and reported the problem before too many people got hold of
> the software.  It could even have been fixed earlier.
> 
> (2) Trust is a one-way street.  It's funny how proprietary software
> developers expect us to trust them, while they certainly have no trust
> for us.  This is actually something that has been in the back of my
> mind for a while.  If the BSA, for example, has the ability to
> "detect" an organization running un-licensed software, isn't that
> essentially the same as wire-tapping?  Shouldn't they be required to
> have court approval for that?  Regardless, it's funny how the
> expectation of trust seems to run one way.
> 
> Just some thoughts.  What are yours?
> 
> Don
> --
> DC Parris GNU Evangelist
> http://matheteuo.org/
> gnumathetes at gmail.com
> Free software is like God's love -
> you can share it with anyone anywhere anytime!
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ChristianSource FSLUG mailing list
> Christiansource at ofb.biz
> http://cs.uninetsolutions.com



Linux Counter User: #350477
http://www.counter.li.org


-- 
_______________________________________________
NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once.
http://datingsearch.lycos.com