Dotan Cohen wrote: >>> My arguments are against making a dangerous tool accessible to the >>> masses. Assessible in this context meaning "seemingly designed for". >> >> I understand that - but the problem is the dangerous tool IS already >> accessible to the masses. They can set up completely bollixed servers >> with MS tools. So arguing that Ubuntu shouldn't even consider creating a >> better, more secure, solution isn't going to help. >> > > Just because one circle of money-greedy idiots is willing to sacrifice > their customer's security, reputation, and business does not mean that > Ubuntu has to do the same.
That's what we're suggesting - that Ubuntu don't do the same. Really, it's insulting to tell someone with an idea that he can't do it because it can't be done. > The problem is that most business will use the tool to _replace_ > proper IT professionals, not to supplement them. Duh. That's what I've been saying all along. So we desperately need tools that can limit the hazards. -- derek -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
