http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/706950

``I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating monkeys, in 
that they make such a big deal about concentrating on security to the 
point where they pretty much admit that nothing else matters to them.''
-- 
   Due to extreme spam originating from Google Groups, and their inattention 
      to spammers, I and many others block all articles originating 
       from Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by 
         more readers you will need to find a different means of 
                       posting on Usenet.
                   http://improve-usenet.org/

In article <9NCdnQzJdpPEHOPVnZ2dnUVZ_tninZ2d@giganews.com>,
	Ignoramus30183 <ignoramus30183@NOSPAM.30183.invalid> writes:
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/706950
> 
> ``I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating monkeys, in 

Sigh.

<plonk!>

-- 
Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas
-----
Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is the probable
reason so few engage in it.  -- Henry Ford

* Ignoramus30183 peremptorily fired off this memo:

> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/706950
>
> ``I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating monkeys, in 
> that they make such a big deal about concentrating on security to the 
> point where they pretty much admit that nothing else matters to them.''

Good old Linus.  He's an asshole of the good kind.

-- 
Q:	How many Zen masters does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A:	None.  The Universe spins the bulb, and the Zen master stays out
	of the way.

* Robert Melson peremptorily fired off this memo:

> In article <9NCdnQzJdpPEHOPVnZ2dnUVZ_tninZ2d@giganews.com>,
> 	Ignoramus30183 <ignoramus30183@NOSPAM.30183.invalid> writes:
>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/706950
>> 
>> ``I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating monkeys, in 
>
> Sigh.
>
> <plonk!>

Here's Linus' post:

   Btw, and you may not like this, since you are so focused on security,
   one reason I refuse to bother with the whole security circus is that
   I think it glorifies - and thus encourages - the wrong behavior.

   It makes "heroes" out of security people, as if the people who don't
   just fix normal bugs aren't as important.

   In fact, all the boring normal bugs are _way_ more important, just
   because there's a lot more of them. I don't think some spectacular
   security hole should be glorified or cared about as being any more
   "special" than a random spectacular crash due to bad locking.

   Security people are often the black-and-white kind of people that I
   can't stand. I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating
   monkeys, in that they make such a big deal about concentrating on
   security to the point where they pretty much admit that nothing else
   matters to them.

   To me, security is important. But it's no less important than
   everything *else* that is also important!

By the way, I've recently installed the 2.6.25.10 kernel, and it
boots to the login screen noticeably more quickly.

-- 
We ARE as gods and might as well get good at it.
		-- Whole Earth Catalog

On Jul 16, 5:37=A0pm, Linonut <lino...@bollsouth.nut> wrote:

> =A0 =A0To me, security is important. But it's no less important than
> =A0 =A0everything *else* that is also important!

Linus doesn't know how to prioritize. Typical of a socialist.

>
> --
> We ARE as gods and might as well get good at it.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 -- Whole Earth Catalog

Hubris.  Inconsistent with your 1% market share.  You should be
humble, not arrogant, but as a psychological defense mechanism I
understand your motivation to be arrogant about Linux.

RL

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

____/ Linonut on Thursday 17 July 2008 00:35 : \____

> * Ignoramus30183 peremptorily fired off this memo:
> 
>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/706950
>>
>> ``I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating monkeys, in
>> that they make such a big deal about concentrating on security to the
>> point where they pretty much admit that nothing else matters to them.''
> 
> Good old Linus.  He's an asshole of the good kind.

Another asshole might be that who crossposts to BSD groups for flaming.

Linus mailed me the other day. He's rarely rude, but when he *is*, then people
have it highlighted. It's the same with politicians.

- -- 
                ~~ Best of wishes

Roy S. Schestowitz      |    Useless fact: Florida is bigger than England
http://Schestowitz.com  |  Open Prospects   |     PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 143 total,   2 running, 141 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
      http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkh+9/0ACgkQU4xAY3RXLo6WAACfYZ1qQgGlvxZfqLwUfsZikpjE
TAYAnAvvmarbBpnSANlUwG6X6wJD2AUM
=EJjC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

"raylopez99" <raylopez99@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:809a3d3d-ce6c-4603-bb90-a9bc1736c287@34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 16, 5:37 pm, Linonut <lino...@bollsouth.nut> wrote:

> To me, security is important. But it's no less important than
> everything *else* that is also important!

Linus doesn't know how to prioritize. Typical of a socialist.

>
> --
> We ARE as gods and might as well get good at it.
> -- Whole Earth Catalog

Hubris.  Inconsistent with your 1% market share.  You should be
humble, not arrogant, but as a psychological defense mechanism I
understand your motivation to be arrogant about Linux.

RL

================================

Reading Lopez on 'masturbating monkeys', I think
I see what his problem is that leads to the long
thread,'For the SEVENTH time....'

It's himself: *Lopez*.

And maybe he's not getting quite the response he
seems to want, because the answer to it is
simply *all over* cyberspace.

Titeotwawki -- mha   [cola 2008 Jly 17]

"Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@schestowitz.com> wrote in message 
news:5201181.l9i6Cc2SPx@schestowitz.com...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> ____/ Linonut on Thursday 17 July 2008 00:35 : \____
>
>> * Ignoramus30183 peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>
>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/706950
>>>
>>> ``I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating monkeys, in
>>> that they make such a big deal about concentrating on security to the
>>> point where they pretty much admit that nothing else matters to them.''
>>
>> Good old Linus.  He's an asshole of the good kind.
>
> Another asshole might be that who crossposts to BSD groups for flaming.
>


> Linus mailed me the other day.


Sure he did Roy... sure he did.  Did he email you to tell you that you need 
to cut his lawn before the weekend this week because he's having people 
over on Saturday? Since you're an unemployed student I bet cutting lawns is 
a nice source of "pizza money" for you.





** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

Roy Schestowitz wrote:

> Linus mailed me the other day.

You obsequious twerp.  Hopefully he told you to shut up and quit lying and
spamming.  I'm quite sure he thinks cola "advocates" such as you and Homer
and 7 are an embarrassment to Linux and to him personally.



> He's rarely rude, but when he *is*,
> then people have it highlighted.

How would you know anything about him?

You're a hanger-on and name-dropper, Spamowitz.

Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@schestowitz.com> writes:

> ____/ Linonut on Thursday 17 July 2008 00:35 : \____
>
>> * Ignoramus30183 peremptorily fired off this memo:
>> 
>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/706950
>>>
>>> ``I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating monkeys, in
>>> that they make such a big deal about concentrating on security to the
>>> point where they pretty much admit that nothing else matters to them.''
>> 
>> Good old Linus.  He's an asshole of the good kind.
>
> Another asshole might be that who crossposts to BSD groups for flaming.
>
> Linus mailed me the other day. He's rarely rude, but when he *is*, then people
> have it highlighted. It's the same with politicians.

I bet he highlighted it so brightly your fat head almost melted.

 newsgroups snipped: alt.os.openbsd,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc

* Martha Adams peremptorily fired off this memo:

> "raylopez99" <raylopez99@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
> news:809a3d3d-ce6c-4603-bb90-a9bc1736c287@34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> Linus doesn't know how to prioritize. Typical of a socialist.
>
> Hubris.  Inconsistent with your 1% market share.  You should be
> humble, not arrogant, but as a psychological defense mechanism I
> understand your motivation to be arrogant about Linux.
>
> RL
>
> ================================
>
> Reading Lopez on 'masturbating monkeys', I think I see what his
> problem is that leads to the long thread,'For the SEVENTH time....'
>
> It's himself: *Lopez*.
>
> And maybe he's not getting quite the response he seems to want,
> because the answer to it is simply *all over* cyberspace.
>
> Titeotwawki -- mha   [cola 2008 Jly 17]

Lopez is a tiresome repetitive whiner.  He wants to act like a jerk so
that the regulars here will (justifiably) treat him badly, and the
result is an archive of the "inhuman treatment" and "unhelpful-to-noobs
attitude" meted out by "Linux zealots".

He's a masochist.  He wants sadism.

-- 
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
	[Who guards the Guardians?]

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 09:17:41 -0400, DFS wrote:

> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> 
>> Linus mailed me the other day.
> 
> You obsequious twerp.  Hopefully he told you to shut up and quit lying and
> spamming.  I'm quite sure he thinks cola "advocates" such as you and Homer
> and 7 are an embarrassment to Linux and to him personally.
> 
> 
> 
>> He's rarely rude, but when he *is*,
>> then people have it highlighted.
> 
> How would you know anything about him?
> 
> You're a hanger-on and name-dropper, Spamowitz.

Haaaaa!

I almost spit my cafe out when I read that one.

Schestowitz totally and completely over estimates his importance to the
Linux movement.

-- 
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 15:57:56 +0200, Hadron wrote:


>> Linus mailed me the other day. He's rarely rude, but when he *is*, then people
>> have it highlighted. It's the same with politicians.
> 
> I bet he highlighted it so brightly your fat head almost melted.

Linux probably asked Schestowitz to never, ever ever mention his name in a
post again because he, Linus, does not wish to be associated with a loon
such as Roy Schestowitz.

I know if I were Linus, that's what I would do.

Roy Schestowitz is the Pat Robertson of the Linux community.
He scares away more potential converts than he converts to the Linux
religion.


-- 
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

On 2008-07-16, Ignoramus30183 <ignoramus30183@NOSPAM.30183.invalid> wrote:

> ``I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating monkeys...."

Actually, OBSD is ok, it's that herd of cretins the continue to respond to
no-ray-of-lope troll that are the m/m's.

nb

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 08:08:41 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:

> "Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@schestowitz.com> wrote in message 
> news:5201181.l9i6Cc2SPx@schestowitz.com...
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> ____/ Linonut on Thursday 17 July 2008 00:35 : \____
>>
>>> * Ignoramus30183 peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>>
>>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/706950
>>>>
>>>> ``I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating monkeys, in
>>>> that they make such a big deal about concentrating on security to the
>>>> point where they pretty much admit that nothing else matters to them.''
>>>
>>> Good old Linus.  He's an asshole of the good kind.
>>
>> Another asshole might be that who crossposts to BSD groups for flaming.
>>
> 
> 
>> Linus mailed me the other day.
> 
> 
> Sure he did Roy... sure he did.  Did he email you to tell you that you need 
> to cut his lawn before the weekend this week because he's having people 
> over on Saturday? Since you're an unemployed student I bet cutting lawns is 
> a nice source of "pizza money" for you.
> 

Roy Schestowitz would find a way to screw it up.

He can't even manage to keep his Linux based server from getting hacked and
spewing trojans all over the net.

I wouldn't trust Roy Schestowitz to put batteries in a flashlight.

As for BSD and the OpenBSD crowd, they are good people who work hard to
produce a quality product.

They are not fanatics like the Linux zealots.
 

-- 
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

"Linonut" <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote in message
news:Zrwfk.2382$bN2.1544@bignews9.bellsouth.net...
> * Robert Melson peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
> > In article <9NCdnQzJdpPEHOPVnZ2dnUVZ_tninZ2d@giganews.com>,
> > Ignoramus30183 <ignoramus30183@NOSPAM.30183.invalid> writes:
> >> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/706950
> >>
> >> ``I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating monkeys, in
> >
> > Sigh.
> >
> > <plonk!>
>
> Here's Linus' post:
>
>    Btw, and you may not like this, since you are so focused on security,
>    one reason I refuse to bother with the whole security circus is that
>    I think it glorifies - and thus encourages - the wrong behavior.
>
>    It makes "heroes" out of security people, as if the people who don't
>    just fix normal bugs aren't as important.
>
>    In fact, all the boring normal bugs are _way_ more important, just
>    because there's a lot more of them. I don't think some spectacular
>    security hole should be glorified or cared about as being any more
>    "special" than a random spectacular crash due to bad locking.
>

Well, sooner or later Linus's credit card number is going to be stolen
out of some server that he bought something online from, due to a
security hole, or his medical records are going to be stolen due to
crackers getting access through a security hole, or some such, then
he might change his tune.

His attitude is typical of someone who is building a server for his
own amusement.  It is not typical for someone who is building a
server that's use will incur a -large- amount of liability for whatever
organization is using it.

This is why people still buy IBM's products for these kinds of applications.
Not because IBM is any better, it's not.  It is because if someone
has a security break in on an IBM system IBM goes ballistic until
they have assured themselves that the security break is NOT due
to a hole in their products, but instead due to some admin's configuration
error.  Which is about all you can reasonably ask from a vendor.

Linus's comments are the exact reason why he is NOT managing the
most popular Linux distributions used for business applications.  It
is also why virtually all the operational decisions dealing with the Linux
standard have been delegated to other people, and he only gets asked
to make political decisions regarding competing technical arguments
within Linux.

There's nothing really wrong with such a position and the Linux
movement -could- do a -lot- worse for a figurehead.  Like, for example,
RMS.

Ted

On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 11:03:12 -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:

> "Linonut" <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote in message
> news:Zrwfk.2382$bN2.1544@bignews9.bellsouth.net...
>> * Robert Melson peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>
>>> In article <9NCdnQzJdpPEHOPVnZ2dnUVZ_tninZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>> Ignoramus30183 <ignoramus30183@NOSPAM.30183.invalid> writes:
>>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/706950
>>>>
>>>> ``I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating monkeys, in
>>>
>>> Sigh.
>>>
>>> <plonk!>
>>
>> Here's Linus' post:
>>
>>    Btw, and you may not like this, since you are so focused on security,
>>    one reason I refuse to bother with the whole security circus is that
>>    I think it glorifies - and thus encourages - the wrong behavior.
>>
>>    It makes "heroes" out of security people, as if the people who don't
>>    just fix normal bugs aren't as important.
>>
>>    In fact, all the boring normal bugs are _way_ more important, just
>>    because there's a lot more of them. I don't think some spectacular
>>    security hole should be glorified or cared about as being any more
>>    "special" than a random spectacular crash due to bad locking.
>>
> 
> Well, sooner or later Linus's credit card number is going to be stolen
> out of some server that he bought something online from, due to a
> security hole, or his medical records are going to be stolen due to
> crackers getting access through a security hole, or some such, then
> he might change his tune.

I agree with what you are saying Ted but I think it depends upon what the
system is being used for.
Personally, I feel that a tight security model should be the foundation of
any operating system.
BSD of course is designed that way as is Linux.
Windows is not.

Windows tried to be everything to everybody, IOW backward compatibility
with DOS Win3.x and so forth and has made some serious comprimises along
the way.
From the outside it looks like Linux is doing the same somewhat.
IOW eye candy appears to be the focus right now so something is ultimately
going to suffer.

 
> His attitude is typical of someone who is building a server for his
> own amusement.  It is not typical for someone who is building a
> server that's use will incur a -large- amount of liability for whatever
> organization is using it.

Reading the message I got the impression he was talking about a quasi
desktop/server, much like what you are saying Ted.
 
> This is why people still buy IBM's products for these kinds of applications.
> Not because IBM is any better, it's not.  It is because if someone
> has a security break in on an IBM system IBM goes ballistic until
> they have assured themselves that the security break is NOT due
> to a hole in their products, but instead due to some admin's configuration
> error.  Which is about all you can reasonably ask from a vendor.

Same for Cisco, Netapp, Nortel and a number of others.

> Linus's comments are the exact reason why he is NOT managing the
> most popular Linux distributions used for business applications.  It
> is also why virtually all the operational decisions dealing with the Linux
> standard have been delegated to other people, and he only gets asked
> to make political decisions regarding competing technical arguments
> within Linux.

I can't really say.
 
> There's nothing really wrong with such a position and the Linux
> movement -could- do a -lot- worse for a figurehead.  Like, for example,
> RMS.

OMG.
What a loony toon RMS is.

I think it boils down to Linux trying to be Windows, or better, in
regards to everything such as eye candy, desktop, hardware support, wine
etc.
Something has to give and focus has to be limited.

BSD seems much more conservative, however the hardware support for cutting
edge devices seems lacking at least last time I looked.
The focus, security, is top notch however and maybe that's the trade off
that the BSD community is making.



> Ted


-- 
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

* Ted Mittelstaedt peremptorily fired off this memo:

> Linus's comments are the exact reason why he is NOT managing the
> most popular Linux distributions used for business applications.

Wrong.  The reason he isn't "managing the most popular Linux
distributions used for business applications"?

He doesn't want to.

> It is also why virtually all the operational decisions dealing with
> the Linux standard have been delegated to other people, and he only
> gets asked to make political decisions regarding competing technical
> arguments within Linux.

I must admit this is a line of trolling FUD I have not encountered
before.

> There's nothing really wrong with such a position and the Linux
> movement -could- do a -lot- worse for a figurehead.  Like, for example,
> RMS.

What's wrong with RMS?  Like Linus, he has his quirks.  But, also like
Linus, by pushing his ideals /hard/, he has had a /great/ and /positive/
impact on the world of software.

The world of computing owes a great debt to both.

-- 
Bride, n.:
	A woman with a fine prospect of happiness behind her.
		-- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"

Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:

> What a loony toon RMS is.

<IRONY comment="because non-native speakers may not realize how funny I am">

How *dare* you?!?!  Don't you know that Stallman /invented/ Linux?

</IRONY>


Yes, he's a loony who thinks that fascism == freedom.  Whoo-hoo.

Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com>:
 
> Linus's comments are the exact reason why he is NOT managing the
> most popular Linux distributions used for business applications.  

And this was told by ... ?  Or is this comment just as much FUD as the FUD
you're whining about?

> It is also why virtually all the operational decisions dealing with the
> Linux standard have been delegated to other people, and he only gets asked
> to make political decisions regarding competing technical arguments
> within Linux.

If the transition to git was not an "operational" decision, what was it
then?  Perhaps a "minor administrative" one?

By the way, Morton only accepts those patches, that Linus has explicitly
agreed on at the LKML.  Things, that he does not agree to, won't be
accepted in the mm-tree and thus will never be merged with the official
kernel tree.

-- 
Freedom is always the freedom of dissenters.
                                      (Rosa Luxemburg)

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> "Linonut" <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote in message
> news:Zrwfk.2382$bN2.1544@bignews9.bellsouth.net...
>> * Robert Melson peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>
>>> In article <9NCdnQzJdpPEHOPVnZ2dnUVZ_tninZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>> Ignoramus30183 <ignoramus30183@NOSPAM.30183.invalid> writes:
>>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/706950
>>>>
>>>> ``I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating monkeys, in
>>> Sigh.
>>>
>>> <plonk!>
>> Here's Linus' post:
>>
>>    Btw, and you may not like this, since you are so focused on security,
>>    one reason I refuse to bother with the whole security circus is that
>>    I think it glorifies - and thus encourages - the wrong behavior.
>>
>>    It makes "heroes" out of security people, as if the people who don't
>>    just fix normal bugs aren't as important.
>>
>>    In fact, all the boring normal bugs are _way_ more important, just
>>    because there's a lot more of them. I don't think some spectacular
>>    security hole should be glorified or cared about as being any more
>>    "special" than a random spectacular crash due to bad locking.
>>
> 
> Well, sooner or later Linus's credit card number is going to be stolen
> out of some server that he bought something online from, due to a
> security hole, or his medical records are going to be stolen due to
> crackers getting access through a security hole, or some such, then
> he might change his tune.
> 
> His attitude is typical of someone who is building a server for his
> own amusement.  It is not typical for someone who is building a
> server that's use will incur a -large- amount of liability for whatever
> organization is using it.
> 
> This is why people still buy IBM's products for these kinds of applications.
> Not because IBM is any better, it's not.  It is because if someone
> has a security break in on an IBM system IBM goes ballistic until
> they have assured themselves that the security break is NOT due
> to a hole in their products, but instead due to some admin's configuration
> error.  Which is about all you can reasonably ask from a vendor.
> 
> Linus's comments are the exact reason why he is NOT managing the
> most popular Linux distributions used for business applications.  It
> is also why virtually all the operational decisions dealing with the Linux
> standard have been delegated to other people, and he only gets asked
> to make political decisions regarding competing technical arguments
> within Linux.
> 
> There's nothing really wrong with such a position and the Linux
> movement -could- do a -lot- worse for a figurehead.  Like, for example,
> RMS.
> 
> Ted
> 
> 

+1

On 2008-07-20, Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com> wrote:
>>    security hole should be glorified or cared about as being any more
>>    "special" than a random spectacular crash due to bad locking.
>>
>
> Well, sooner or later Linus's credit card number is going to be stolen
> out of some server that he bought something online from, due to a
> security hole, or his medical records are going to be stolen due to
> crackers getting access through a security hole, or some such, then
> he might change his tune.

The problem is that you can make such an extreme worst case scenario out of
everything:

- The heart-lung machine that stops because of a kernel panic.
- the same heart lung machine that was configured due to a GUI bug.

make a nice story out of it, lots of noise, end of world scenario etc etc..

I somewhat agree with Linus general statement that obsessing and
glorifying that specific area (security) is not the way to go.

But IMHO that is not OpenBSD's fault, and they are doing the more useful
(and ungrateful) work in that area. It should be more targeted against the
"security research" which has become a selffurfulling industry.

"Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> wrote in message 
news:newscache$prgb4k$xha1$1@news.ipinc.net...
>
> "Linonut" <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote in message
> news:Zrwfk.2382$bN2.1544@bignews9.bellsouth.net...
>> * Robert Melson peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>
>> > In article <9NCdnQzJdpPEHOPVnZ2dnUVZ_tninZ2d@giganews.com>,
>> > Ignoramus30183 <ignoramus30183@NOSPAM.30183.invalid> writes:
>> >> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/706950
>> >>
>> >> ``I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating monkeys, in
>> >
>> > Sigh.
>> >
>> > <plonk!>
>>
>> Here's Linus' post:
>>
>>    Btw, and you may not like this, since you are so focused on security,
>>    one reason I refuse to bother with the whole security circus is that
>>    I think it glorifies - and thus encourages - the wrong behavior.
>>
>>    It makes "heroes" out of security people, as if the people who don't
>>    just fix normal bugs aren't as important.
>>
>>    In fact, all the boring normal bugs are _way_ more important, just
>>    because there's a lot more of them. I don't think some spectacular
>>    security hole should be glorified or cared about as being any more
>>    "special" than a random spectacular crash due to bad locking.
>>
>
> Well, sooner or later Linus's credit card number is going to be stolen
> out of some server that he bought something online from, due to a
> security hole, or his medical records are going to be stolen due to
> crackers getting access through a security hole, or some such, then
> he might change his tune.
>
> His attitude is typical of someone who is building a server for his
> own amusement.  It is not typical for someone who is building a
> server that's use will incur a -large- amount of liability for whatever
> organization is using it.

I don't remember serious liability or consequences for *any* computer 
security breach *ever*. Do you?

<snip> 

* FanJet peremptorily fired off this memo:

>> His attitude is typical of someone who is building a server for his
>> own amusement.  It is not typical for someone who is building a
>> server that's use will incur a -large- amount of liability for whatever
>> organization is using it.
>
> I don't remember serious liability or consequences for *any* computer 
> security breach *ever*. Do you?

I had some money deducted from my credit card due to a Ukrane-based
breach in NT servers.  That was a few years ago.  I kind of suspected
I'd made no purchases from "Inet Moscow".

-- 
MATH AND ALCOHOL DON'T MIX!
	Please, don't drink and derive.
 
	Mathematicians Against Drunk Deriving