Skip to main content

Open source software should be the core of all tech...

It's hard no to see how many people don't realize that going to closed gardens to find some level of protection isn't that good idea, since being on a closed gardens isn't the same same thing as having software with robust security. The same goes to the idea that a software being open source makes it insecure is false, since that anyone can see the source code doesn't mean that they can put malicious code into it without someone else noticing it and removing the code.

As the matter of fact, open source tends to be safer because there are several people combing the code and knows what's suppose to be there. Those people also know what part of the code is supposed to do, so any part of the code that is new to them can be expected to be reviewed to make sure it does as advertised. It becomes harder to put malicious code into it, because of the nature of source code means that if someone misses the code there will be several other that have a chance to see it.

In the source code software there needs to be the trust that the people that are supposed to keep the code safe do, because they are the only one that can see the source code to make sure that there is no malicious code.

Personally, I don't mind having some closed sourced part in the software I use. But, those closed source parts shouldn't be at the core of the software or be at hearth of it so I can't run my computer properly without them. All closed source should be optional, and the user should be able to turn in off at any time if she or he chooses.

The foundations, and the core, of all the software available should relay on open source technologies. User will be truly free only this way, and there is no way around it.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Machenike and Linux Mint: quite a nice combo.

I've been using a Machenike L16A  with Linux Mint  as my daily driver for four months now, and I must admit that I'm impressed with how good the experience has been so far. The Machenike was recommended to me by a close friend about six months ago, since I told him that I was looking for a new laptop. He had bought one a while ago, and said that it was a solid machine. Not only that, Machenike laptops were quite a great value for the money since they are significantly cheaper than comparable laptops from the competitions. And to be honest, when I got my laptop i expected to be so, but not to the extent it has been so far. After four months, my laptop feels really snappy and the performance is just great. And since I upgraded to Linux Mint 22 Wilma, it only has gotten better. One of the areas where I see most improvement, in on the Bluetooth connectivity. It connects more consistently with the three Bluetooth headphone I use, and now I can see how much battery the headphones I...

Machenike L16A: a great value for the money.

I recently got a Machenike L16A to replace the HP laptop I've been using for about 4 years now, and it has been quite a good upgrade. The value for the price has been excellent, it has really felt like an upgrade. Specially going from 8Gb of RAM to 16Gb. I specially notice the better performance when at work, since I use a remote desktop. I simply don't see as much slowdowns on the same use. Most of the time, at work I've the remote desktop app, Firefox , Thunderbird , Spotify , or sometimes Rhythmbox , open at the same time and having 16Gb of RAM gives the performance I need since at time around 6-7Gb are used. I also feel the AMD Ryzen CPU has been quite an upgrade, since it has more cores and threads than the Intel CPU my HP laptop has. That makes for a better user experience. But, where I see the better user experience is on the keyboard, and display side of things. The keyboard keys got stuck often, making the track pad unusable and characters to repeat themselves. ...

Linux Mint going for the long-term support model was the right choice.

Ever since I stared using  Linux Mint  with the long-term support mantra with the version 19 Tara release, I've come to prefer Linux distros  that use development model rather than distros that release updates more often with shorter support windows. Even though I upgrade to the new Linux Mint release as soon it becomes available, knowing that I don't have to rush it and that the testing to make sure nothing is broken with the new release is a bit more intense, gives me feel a bit safer about thing will continue working as I used to and expect them to. Besides, all the apps I use are updated as continuously. As such, I don't need to worry using versions of those apps that fall behind. Not only the that, with updates to Linux Mint come as needed and the point releases keep bring the big releases that weren't included at the original release of the OS. For my needs, Linux Mint cover them all, and it gets better with time. With each release, Linux Mint keeps feeling like ...