A Solution To A Seemingly Ongoing Meaningless Debate

[0.Dark.Thought]

I've just finished reading the whole White/Black hat post which very quickly turned into a "My knowledge of systems is more than yours, making it uncrackable to your knowledge" debate.

I'm only a noob but please tell me if I'm right:

There is no such thing as an "Uncrackable" running system or source code and trying to debate about how Windows is not nearly as customizable as Linux, But is better in security against cracks and exploits is useless.

Why should obvious Geniuses argue among themselves about which systems are more vulnerable?

When we could be working to fix them together.

Now I run on Windows because I dont have the money to get my own system (I'm only 14), but I would prefer Linux because I don't like Mac or PC and that's only because it is the epidomy of what hackers work to build: Useful Freeware.

But once again I'm only a noob But tell me if I'm right.

[canine]

I've just finished reading the whole White/Black hat post which very quickly turned into a "My knowledge of systems is more than yours, making it uncrackable to your knowledge" debate.

I'm only a noob but please tell me if I'm right:

There is no such thing as an "Uncrackable" running system or source code and trying to debate about how Windows is not nearly as customizable as Linux, But is better in security against cracks and exploits is useless.

Why should obvious Geniuses argue among themselves about which systems are more vulnerable?

When we could be working to fix them together.

Now I run on Windows because I dont have the money to get my own system (I'm only 14), but I would prefer Linux because I don't like Mac or PC and that's only because it is the epidomy of what hackers work to build: Useful Freeware.

But once again I'm only a noob But tell me if I'm right.

Freeware is bad. Freeware is software that is given out for free, but not including the source code. Freeware is almost always riddled with spyware and shit like that. I wouldn't suggest using freeware.

Free software, however, is software where the source code is included, where you have the right to modify the program and give out your modifications. And, a key point here is the fact that you have to give others the same rights if you distribute your modified programs.

Example: The BSD networking stack. Writing a networking stack in an operating system is exceedingly difficult. The BSD one is one that is ridiculously good. Just excellent code. Damn fine code. The source code to the BSD operating system is free for all to use. But they don't insist that others do the same. The networking stack in Microsoft Windows was taken from the BSD operating system. But according to the BSD license, Microsoft isn't required to release their code.

And yes, you're right. That's what hackers do: Write good code and give it out so others may improve it.

I can work alone for 20 hours on a mediocre program. Or, I can work 10 hours with a bunch of other people and produce a kickass program.

The reason I argue about which system is best, is because I don't want people to run shitty operating systems. I take my art very seriously. People are making billions off of stupid people who can't tell the difference between good code and bad code. They have computers riddled with viruses and get their bank accounts stolen and then they wonder why. It's infuriating to see the technically superior choice lose to another with better marketing.

[0.Dark.Thought]

I've just finished reading the whole White/Black hat post which very quickly turned into a "My knowledge of systems is more than yours, making it uncrackable to your knowledge" debate.

I'm only a noob but please tell me if I'm right:

There is no such thing as an "Uncrackable" running system or source code and trying to debate about how Windows is not nearly as customizable as Linux, But is better in security against cracks and exploits is useless.

Why should obvious Geniuses argue among themselves about which systems are more vulnerable?

When we could be working to fix them together.

Now I run on Windows because I dont have the money to get my own system (I'm only 14), but I would prefer Linux because I don't like Mac or PC and that's only because it is the epidomy of what hackers work to build: Useful Freeware.

But once again I'm only a noob But tell me if I'm right.

Freeware is bad. Freeware is software that is given out for free, but not including the source code. Freeware is almost always riddled with spyware and shit like that. I wouldn't suggest using freeware.

Free software, however, is software where the source code is included, where you have the right to modify the program and give out your modifications. And, a key point here is the fact that you have to give others the same rights if you distribute your modified programs.

Example: The BSD networking stack. Writing a networking stack in an operating system is exceedingly difficult. The BSD one is one that is ridiculously good. Just excellent code. Damn fine code. The source code to the BSD operating system is free for all to use. But they don't insist that others do the same. The networking stack in Microsoft Windows was taken from the BSD operating system. But according to the BSD license, Microsoft isn't required to release their code.

And yes, you're right. That's what hackers do: Write good code and give it out so others may improve it.

I can work alone for 20 hours on a mediocre program. Or, I can work 10 hours with a bunch of other people and produce a kickass program.

The reason I argue about which system is best, is because I don't want people to run shitty operating systems. I take my art very seriously. People are making billions off of stupid people who can't tell the difference between good code and bad code. They have computers riddled with viruses and get their bank accounts stolen and then they wonder why. It's infuriating to see the technically superior choice lose to another with better marketing.

Hmm, I'll have to think about that. I do agree that there are markets that rely sheerly on ignorance but can't you retrieve the source code like you do with a website? I see also why argueing about a superior system would be somewhat beneficial so let me just ask this, no arguement intended,

What system do you run ?
Where can I Get It?
Is it Free?
Is It Customizable?(e.g. can i modify security tools, preferences or wallpapers?)
Can It Still be Used, not only as a Hacking tool, but as a leisure system too?(e.g. can it run flash player for youtube, run flash drives, or download music?)

This question is directed towards canine but anyone else is welcome to answer. (by that I mean please answer, knowledge is power.)

[Grand_Master]

Freeware is great!

Sure, there could be spyware and stuff included. But still, if you use some common sense, there's alot of great freewares out there.
Always be cautionus on the net, but don't be "afraid" for using freeware.

Lots of anti-virus/spyware programs isfreeware, but not open source. That's to prevent crackers for making virus that bypasses the sequrity, by reading the source, I suppose.
That's one thing that can justify closed source.

This does not mean that I dislike open source.

[canine]

Freeware is great!

Sure, there could be spyware and stuff included. But still, if you use some common sense, there's alot of great freewares out there.
Always be cautionus on the net, but don't be "afraid" for using freeware.

Lots of anti-virus/spyware programs isfreeware, but not open source. That's to prevent crackers for making virus that bypasses the sequrity, by reading the source, I suppose.
That's one thing that can justify closed source.

This does not mean that I dislike open source.

Closed source is terrible for security. Reading the source makes it easy to fix the problem, and with more people wanting to help than hinder, software improves faster when the source is open.

And there is very little good freeware, by virtue of the fact that most closed source is crap due to the inherent crappiness of closed source.

[canine]

Hmm, I'll have to think about that. I do agree that there are markets that rely sheerly on ignorance but can't you retrieve the source code like you do with a website? I see also why argueing about a superior system would be somewhat beneficial so let me just ask this, no arguement intended,

What system do you run ?
Where can I Get It?
Is it Free?
Is It Customizable?(e.g. can i modify security tools, preferences or wallpapers?)
Can It Still be Used, not only as a Hacking tool, but as a leisure system too?(e.g. can it run flash player for youtube, run flash drives, or download music?)

This question is directed towards canine but anyone else is welcome to answer. (by that I mean please answer, knowledge is power.)

I run GNU/Linux, but any Unix-like system that is free software, that is, you have the right to view the source, change it, and redistribute it, is good.

There are many GNU/Linux distributions, due to the fact that you are allowed to distribute copies of it yourself. People customize it for any thing they wish. They have gotten it to run on nearly anything with a processor, including but not limited to things like the DS, Playstation 3 and other things. I run Fedora, but I hear Ubuntu is nice for people new to it.

Some other unix-like operating systems exist, notably BSD. BSD is known for its stability, but unfortunately also its learning curve. GNU/Linux would probably be a better choice, but BSD is also good.

These operating systems are the epitome of customizability. You can, with enough knowledge, change/modify any part of the system. The most obvious example is that you can swap out the default graphical desktop for another.

Adobe does produce a flash plugin for firefox on GNU/Linux, and you have a wide range of replacement applications. OpenOffice.org is an excellent office suite that reads/writes most common file formats, including the doc format that MS Word has used for the past ten years. Just recently they changed up their software, but most people use the old doc format. Microsoft Windows and most unix-like operating systems have fundamental differences, from the fileformat of their executables, to the library system, to their programming api. So, an exe on windows will not run on any other operating system, with a few exceptions. However, things like firefox and OpenOffice.org produce OS X and GNU/Linux versions, so this really isn't much of a problem.


tl; dr: GNU/Linux is customizable, free, and just generally awesome. Fedora or Ubuntu are both good ones.

[0.Dark.Thought]

Hmm, I'll have to think about that. I do agree that there are markets that rely sheerly on ignorance but can't you retrieve the source code like you do with a website? I see also why argueing about a superior system would be somewhat beneficial so let me just ask this, no arguement intended,

What system do you run ?
Where can I Get It?
Is it Free?
Is It Customizable?(e.g. can i modify security tools, preferences or wallpapers?)
Can It Still be Used, not only as a Hacking tool, but as a leisure system too?(e.g. can it run flash player for youtube, run flash drives, or download music?)

This question is directed towards canine but anyone else is welcome to answer. (by that I mean please answer, knowledge is power.)

I run GNU/Linux, but any Unix-like system that is free software, that is, you have the right to view the source, change it, and redistribute it, is good.

There are many GNU/Linux distributions, due to the fact that you are allowed to distribute copies of it yourself. People customize it for any thing they wish. They have gotten it to run on nearly anything with a processor, including but not limited to things like the DS, Playstation 3 and other things. I run Fedora, but I hear Ubuntu is nice for people new to it.

Some other unix-like operating systems exist, notably BSD. BSD is known for its stability, but unfortunately also its learning curve. GNU/Linux would probably be a better choice, but BSD is also good.

These operating systems are the epitome of customizability. You can, with enough knowledge, change/modify any part of the system. The most obvious example is that you can swap out the default graphical desktop for another.

Adobe does produce a flash plugin for firefox on GNU/Linux, and you have a wide range of replacement applications. OpenOffice.org is an excellent office suite that reads/writes most common file formats, including the doc format that MS Word has used for the past ten years. Just recently they changed up their software, but most people use the old doc format. Microsoft Windows and most unix-like operating systems have fundamental differences, from the fileformat of their executables, to the library system, to their programming api. So, an exe on windows will not run on any other operating system, with a few exceptions. However, things like firefox and OpenOffice.org produce OS X and GNU/Linux versions, so this really isn't much of a problem.


tl; dr: GNU/Linux is customizable, free, and just generally awesome. Fedora or Ubuntu are both good ones.

Thanks alot. One more question, can I buy a PC and then install GNU/LINUX on it just off the web?

[canine]

Thanks alot. One more question, can I buy a PC and then install GNU/LINUX on it just off the web?

Yeah.

You'd usually download the install cds and burn them to cds.

[WhiteKnight]

Or you can just download the ISO and put it in a virtual machine.

[canine]

Or you can just download the ISO and put it in a virtual machine.

Sure, but why would you want to cage the penguin?

[WhiteKnight]

Or you can just download the ISO and put it in a virtual machine.

Sure, but why would you want to cage the penguin?

Believe it or not, it crashed more than Vista did from what I experience. And yes there is some blue screen of death.

So it more than good reason to cage a penguin.

[canine]

Believe it or not, it crashed more than Vista did from what I experience. And yes there is some blue screen of death.

So it more than good reason to cage a penguin.

Your experience is out of the ordinary then.

There is no "blue screen of death".

[WhiteKnight]

Believe it or not, it crashed more than Vista did from what I experience. And yes there is some blue screen of death.

So it more than good reason to cage a penguin.

Your experience is out of the ordinary then.

There is no "blue screen of death".

Apparently there is in Fedora 9.

[canine]

Believe it or not, it crashed more than Vista did from what I experience. And yes there is some blue screen of death.

So it more than good reason to cage a penguin.

Your experience is out of the ordinary then.

There is no "blue screen of death".

Apparently there is in Fedora 9.

Oh damn.

I use Fedora 9. I have never seen anything like that.

What happened?

[WhiteKnight]

Your experience is out of the ordinary then.

There is no "blue screen of death".

Apparently there is in Fedora 9.

Oh damn.

I use Fedora 9. I have never seen anything like that.

What happened?

I just install in a second partition of the hard drive and when it load successfully it just crash and then show the desktop then after 2 minutes it crash and show up Blue Screen. No warning or error message...