2026-05-02 13:41 UTC
Replies (2)
-
@mangeurdenuage@shitposter.world 2026-05-02 13:59
@phnt@fluffytail.org @icon_of_computational_sin@mstdn.starnix.network >Fully trustworthy vendor and non-vulnerable software does not exist. That's not the point. The point is transparency that you aren't a piece of scum that leaches out your customers and wish to provide actual problem solving. > The world you are thinking of isn't real, So is the one you describe. >for many things are you stuck with some vendor and or some other vendor and that's it Yes and when did you start to work to counter that bs ? Right now I have work so that a city hall can migrate to GNU/linux and they're stuck because they use a SaaSS that requires hard dependency to windows while it's all in a fucking browser. Short them solution: vm microslop to mitigate. Long term: changing software. Longer term: lobby representatives. >or you can build your own, which usually results in something even worse. Worse than default win11 and passwords being 123456 level ?
-
@icon_of_computational_sin@mstdn.starnix.network 2026-05-02 14:16
@phnt@fluffytail.org yes, it does exist, but that is not the point. The point that Some software is better than the otherMonoculture is among the worst things to have happened in tech. This has been known for a long while, if you look up articles from early to mid 2000s, they argue that Microsoft monoculture is toxic. And yet the nerd herd has managed only to replace one monoculture with another.By the standards of the time described above, most big tech software today would be classified as malware, whether intentionally so or not. I have never claimed that you must run some perfect software (I can claim this tho). But at least try to have some semblance of standards.