I doubt if anyone on this list will believe that it was actually you who posted it in its current form.
Besides, thanks for passing it along - it is an excellent light reading over a weekend - tickled me to death! -ag -- sent via 100% recycled electrons from my mobile command center. On Aug 10, 2013, at 9:19 AM, Kevin Chadwick <ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > While searching for 'OpenBSD "bad package" CONTENTS' I somehow came > across this and got sucked in when I shouldn't have. > > OpenBSD: Not Free Not Fuctional and Definetly Not Secure | BSD, the > truth > > http://aboutthebsds{dot}wordpress{dot}com > > Well I had a go at educating the author of this thread but I guess > without a response he modified my comments into utter lies and left them > under my name. I guess the old adage that you can help the stupid but > not the willfully ignorant is true. > > I knew he was an arch linux user and so I was expecting comment > deletion in the case of moderator disagreement to the arguments (similar > to the Arch Linux mailing lists where a moderators task being meant to > have nothing to do with taking sides is ignored and is even more > annoying when what you said was proven right by upstream a little > later). Incidentally I expect similar to Lennart's pages as they are > comment free. > > Sorry to be wasting your time or even mentioning this useless blog but > I just wanted to put the record straight and to save time for anyone > who stumbles across it and hope may now also see this in a Google > search where it appears. > > Bear in mind these are counter points to his blog and not things I want > to bring up. > > _____________________________________________________________________ > > I posted > _____________________________________________________________________ > > > It is extremely one sided! > > How about Linux allowing modules like Nvidia and far worse like Sony to > be easily installed under the safe and free flag of their repo. > > I can tell you OpenBSD would not allow this and allow no binary blobs > and with modules disabled by default, unlike FreeBSD and Linux allowing > and even including by default binary blobs that does unknown things > posibly with good intentions but full of exploits. You can take BSD and > do freely whatever evil you want but you cannot abuse the trust users > have in OpenBSD devs by flying your dodgy code in under their flag and > so users radars. > > This is because BSD only precludes plagiarism and so using OpenBSD as a > selling point when it may have been modified. There are many products > using OpenBSD but this cannot be revealed directly. > > Linux try's but can't afford to sue Nvidia giving users a false sense > of security but also well running games (I shall admit as I do give > balance to my thoughts), but now they (Intel/AMD) are going open source > which is extra great for the CAREful OpenBSD. > > And yes this CARE means it cannot go as quick as Linux thankfully as > Torvalds can no longer check before OKaying potentially evil or > insecure code (admitted himself). > _____________________________________________________________________ > > The blog author posted anonymously after 'archlike moderation' > _____________________________________________________________________ > > BSD allows modules like Nvidia and far worse like Sony to be easily > installed under the safe and free flag of their repo. > > I can tell you OpenBSD freely allows this including non-free firmware > and with modules enabled by default, like FreeBSD allowing and even > including by default binary blobs that does unknown things posibly with > good intentions but full of exploits. You can take BSD and do freely > whatever evil you want including abuse the mindless trust users have in > OpenBSD devs by flying dodgy code in under their flag and so users > radars. > > Look at what Richard Stallman said about them. > > BSD encourages plagiarism and so using OpenBSD as a selling point when > it may have been turning into proprietary software. There are many > proprietary products using OpenBSD but this cannot be revealed directly > because the code this now thiers. > > Linux impedes Nvidia from giving users a false sense of security but > also well running games (I shall admit as I do give balance to my > thoughts), but now they (Intel/AMD) are going open source which is > extra great for the CAREful Linux. BSD devs don't care for open source > drivers (Intel/AMD). So they continue to suck proprietary cocks. > > Also, Linux thankfully has Torvalds to check before for any potential > evil code before it is included in the source tree. > > ____________________________________________________________________ > > I posted about his systemd page. > ____________________________________________________________________ > > Bane of BSD, it's hardly even mentioned on the OpenBSD list atleast, > maybe two very short threads stemming from things like Gnome. Even > Redhat devs have said it has very insignificant impact. > > Anything that takes s much time on Linux lists is almost guarnteed to > have flaws. > > I wouldn't fancy OpenBSDs record of two holes in over a decade not > incrementing if they ported systemd but of course they correctly > wouldn't. There's been more holes in PAM than OpenBSD and the Linux > kernel would be at hundreds of hole in less than a decade but of course > a bugs a bug right. Ignorance is bliss and an easy life of course, > hence Windows dominance. > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > The blog author posted anonymously after 'archlike moderation' > ______________________________________________________________________ > > Bane of BSD, it's hardly even mentioned on the OpenBSD list atleast, > maybe two very short threads stemming from things like Gnome. Even > Redhat devs have said it has very insignificant impact. > > Anything that takes s much time on BSD lists is almost guarnteed to > have flaws. > > I never fancy OpenBSDs record of two holes in over a decade not > incrementing because they never ported systemd. There's been more > holes in OpenBSD than PAM and the BSD kernel would be at hundreds of > hole in less than a decade but of course a bugs a bug right. Ignorance > is bliss and an easy life of course, hence Linux dominance. > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > I also posted but have not bothered to check what he did with it, > ______________________________________________________________________ > > PF and Carp are ace with PF used by Apple and Blackberry and is > interrupt driven and won't include any DPI because they know better. > How about OpenBSD prevents GNU kernels from running BSD code like > OpenSSH and watch the exploits insue in their copy like happens with > PAM et al. > > If Linux tried to put ? holes in just their kernel in a heck of a long > time on kernel.org it would be laughable. > > Truth hurts doesn't it and systemd is crap and actually hardly > mentioned on BSD lists. > > Why do you care if KMS isn't GNU, you need to reflect on the pointless > hurt you would cause. KMS helps prevetn exploits via the GPU but Linux > likely doesn't care about that as they still run Xorg as root despite > OpenBSD patches being FREE to be ported. > _______________________________________________________________________ > > -- > _______________________________________________________________________ > > 'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work > together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a > universal interface' > > (Doug McIlroy) > _______________________________________________________________________
