• hydroptic@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    26 days ago

    Exactly. Neckbeards love to pretend open source magically has no security vulnerabilities, and that the ability to inspect the source means you’ll never install anything nefarious.

    I expect all of them to have read the source for every single package they’ve ever installed. Oh and the Linux source too, of course

    • steersman2484@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      26 days ago

      Yes, opensource doesn’t magically fix all vulnerabilities. But it is for sure way better then closed source, where you don’t have a way of auditing the code

    • Bezier@suppo.fi
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      25 days ago

      I have never seen anyone make that claim.

      Lots of arguments saying it’s an improvement, but never that it magically fixes everything.

    • jbk@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      25 days ago

      Neckbeards love to pretend open source magically has no security vulnerabilities

      Who does? Feels like you’re just talking about inexperienced “btw i use arch” kinda skiddies

    • Autonomous User@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      25 days ago

      Another classic lie. ‘Open source’ misses the point of libre software. Anti-libre software [malware] bans us [everyone else] from removing malicious source code.