On Thu, 13 Sep 2018, Tyrell Jentink wrote:
I'm a young'n; I don't remember 4.4BSD or Research UNIX... I also
come to Linux from an IT background, not a Computer Science
background, and maybe I lack a certain historical perspective as a
consequence.
I was recently reading an article that claimed Linux is insecure,
because of it's monolithic kernel codebase:
[.... much snippage ....]
Anyone else playing with any of these "next generation" operating
systems?
I haven't been around as some on this list, but here are my brief
observations. (Well, they were brief -- until I actually starting
writing them.)
1. Follow the work first, technology second.
The most important factor in any technological deployment is the work
it allows us to achieve and, more pointedly, to monetize.
It's true that new technology can open new workflows (read: new
business opportunities), but in general that's a secondary concern for
all but the most disruptive of technologies.
2. Security is a trade-off, not an absolute
Yes, Linux has and will always have insecurities. As long as an OS has
a way to elevate permissions (root account, sudo, etc) and people use
those elevated permissions, insecurity will be an issue. As long as
people are imperfect, security will not be an absolute; it will be an
exercise in seeing how many roadblocks you can erect to keep people
from crime or carelessness.
Again, follow the work not the tech. If someone can achieve clearly
better work (the shorthand for which is often but not always "make
more money") deploying the "more secure" OS, then the technology
becomes interesting. Just remember all the costs involved in deploying
a new platform: porting userspace applications; training
administrators, developers, and users; paying for deep support.
3. People are social creatures
Despite thousands of years devising ethical and educational standards,
people still tend to follow the crowd in most areas of their lives
rather than strike off by themselves toward excellence.
This has upsides: we don't have to investigate every choice we face
from the ground up, which would exhaust even the hardest-striving
among us. And downsides: it's easy to achieve mediocrity and only
slightly less easy to follow the crowd to evil (see: genocide,
rioting, etc).
So even a compelling vision of technical excellence will get you
nowhere without a compelling human story behind it.
4. It's still worth it
Achieving technical excellence may still be worth it to you. I don't
intend the foregoing points to invoke cynicism. Strike out on your
own! Excellence is very difficult, but worthwhile. On rare occasions,
it changes society.
But do so with your eyes open. It's got to be worth it to you, on your
own and without social and financial support. People may follow you,
but they most likely won't. Only you know whether the likelihood of
solitude in your endeavor is an obstacle you're willing to face.
--
Paul Heinlein
[email protected]
45°38' N, 122°6' W
_______________________________________________
PLUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
