I find it interesting how many companies are attempting to use the flexibility of open source technologies to make up for the many shortcomings of Windows. Open source technologies are becoming more attractive for alternative solutions not just because they're generally more secure out of the box, but the ability to combine the many different features that are available provide a level of flexibility in which Windows could only dream. For instance, the use of immutable Linux distros, such as UniconOS, makes it much harder for a valid user or an attacker to damage or compromise the system. In addition to that, in Linux it's possible to combine file systems that can take snapshots (ZFS, Btrfs, etc) with boot loaders that can boot from specific snapshots to easily revert back to a usable system after a botched update (I bet the sysadmins who had to clean up after the Crowdstrike debacle would have appreciated that option!).

Meanwhile, Windows stagnates with no viable options to compete with these technologies. It makes we wonder if Microsoft will ever even attempt to catch up or just continue to slowly cede functionality to Linux and other open source alternatives. I'm not suggesting that Linux will take over any markets, but if I was running a company I would do everything in my power to make my users forget that competition even exists, not let my products stagnate to the point where the market becomes desperate to explore every possible alternative.

I don't expect this product to be particularly popular, but I do find it interesting that Citrix recognizes the problem and is attempting to use open source to resolve it.

I get what they think they are doing. But you can't really achieve security by layering ill-thought-out systems on top of each other.

I'm not disputing that these systems are at least slightly less secure because having two operating systems on a device inherently increases the attack surface. However, I do dispute the term "layered" because my understanding is that the two operating systems are designed to be as independent as possible.

I'm sure that the two systems together don't create any security holes one of them alone wouldn't have had. I'm sure.

I only see two feasible attack vectors:

1. Someone writes a virus that includes a Windows driver for the Linux file system used by UniconOS, writes malware to that partition, and then sabotages Windows to require the user to reboot into Unicon. It's certainly possible, but I believe it would require Administrator in Windows to install the Linux file system driver, and if the attacker has that then they have dozens of more straightforward ways to accomplish their malfeasance.

2. Someone finds a vulnerability in UniconOS that allows breaking immutability of the file system. At that point, they could compromise UniconOS or install a Windows file system driver and attempt to mount the Windows partition and install malware. However, UniconOS is probably going to be used exclusively by enterprise customers, most of whom will have Bitlocker enabled in Windows which would prevent mounting the Windows partition in UniconOS without serious manual efforts. In addition to that, since UniconOS is only meant to be used for emergencies, there likely wouldn't be many opportunities to exploit this.

Again, I do believe that these systems are slightly more vulnerable than your tradition system which has only one OS, but I don't think the level of effort to leverage it will be very attractive to attackers. With that said, this is a fairly unique service but I don't believe it will be compelling enough to sell a lot of units. Most companies would rather focus their efforts and budget on preventing the emergencies from happening in the first place.

What is "right" in this case is subjective. No one in the U.S. government, not even the wannabe dicktater, can compel a private company to rename a body of water within their product because executive orders only apply to the federal departments of the executive branch. And most people in the U.S. don't want it to be renamed. Therefore, if the people don't want it and the president can't enforce it, then there's an argument to be made that the "right" thing to do is completely ignore Trump. However, as someone else already pointed out, Trump can single-handedly remove Google from consideration of all "no-bid quid pro quo" federal contracts for the rest of his administration and Google wouldn't be able to do much about it. So Google has made their decision, but it's far from unanimous about whether or not it was "right".

Why should "Lake Ontario / Lake America" (or the previous "Gulf of Mexico / Gulf of America", where the latter is objectively a descriptive name) be any different?

Because in those cases, it's largely the will of the local peoples rather than retribution from a petulant manchild who lost a trade war that he unilaterally insisted on starting.

I can't stand Donald Trump (just look at all of my other posts on this story), but I don't think we can blame him for the first economic freefall - the effects of a pandemic are going to crush any economy. And he signed the CARES Act which was sponsored by a majority Democratic House. He certainly screwed up handling the health and safety aspects of the pandemic, but I'm not sure the Dems would have been able to ease the economic sting much more than what was already done.

However, the current economic freefall is completely unnecessary and completely Trump's fault. At this point, he seems absolutely determined to obliterate our economy. It's his second biggest initiative, with the first being the construction of vanity projects which serve as monuments to himself.

He doesn't care at all about the midterms because he and Mike Johnson have absolutely no plans to swear in the newly elected Democrats if they lose the majority in the election (which they most certainly will). If we thought things were interesting now, they're about to get far more interesting in a few months.

Also, my personal feeling is that if you don't vote, you don't get to complain.

If we used the popular vote, then I'd be more amenable to this mindset. Personally, I skipped the top of the ticket because I don't live in one of the 43 states that mattered.

Agreed. My biggest problems with Hanlon's Razor is that all it takes to get away with largescale evil is to convince the majority of people you're a colossal idiot. Trump has simultaneously managed to convince the followers of his cult that he's a genius while convincing the rest of the world that he's an idiot.

Trump is genuinely a retard. It is not just that we don't like his societal choices or his morality. He is really that dumb.

While I certainly don't think he's a genius, I think holding the world's largest economy hostage to personally enrich himself and his family in schemes that take a lot of effort to prove requires at least a moderate level of intelligence. And a far greater degree of evil.

Tomorrow's headline: Hugging Face Commits to Buying $13 Billion of Nvidia Hardware

BTW it's an unmaintained and unsecure open source driver that's crashing, which was also abandoned and isn't maintained

I'm confused - is the driver maintained?

It's a lot easier to pass social policies when you see your neighbor's as people like you that you want to help. We don't have that in the United States.

I don't think as many people have that mindset as you think. I see lots of people that look like me fucking over almost every facet of this country and I don't feel any connection with them. The problem is economic inequality - the people at the top are fucking over the people in the middle and the bottom. If people in the middle and bottom are too preoccupied fighting with each other based on inane nonsense, such as "why should I help that person because they don't look like me" then nothing is going to get better.

That situation reminds me a joke. Three guys just split a job and then sat down at a table. As they're seated, the manager comes over and pays them their wage: $100 in one dollar bills. The first guy immediately snatches 97 bills and gets up to walk off before the other guys can react. The second guy saw that and quickly grabbed two of the remaining three bills. The first guy saw the second guy take two bills and proceeded to lean over to the third guy and say "are you just gonna let that guy take that extra dollar?"

The idea that social policies don't work in the U.S. because we have different races and cultures is bullshit propagated by the rich to prevent the masses from voting for policies that can benefit them, because the only way the U.S. could pay for those policies is if we made the rich go back to paying their fair share of taxes. And they've spent decades having the tax laws rewritten and finding loopholes in the remaining laws to ensure that they never have to do that again.

At the end of the day I'll keep voting for fewer taxes

If you want lower taxes in America, you'll need to make a lot more than 70k. Dems won't reduce taxes because they know we can't afford it with our national debt and Republicans will only lower taxes with any significance if you're rich or a corporation.

Europe isn't socialist. They have some social policies. Much of which are under strain as they are increasing their military budgets, now that they can't trust America to keep up the World Police act.

And Mamdani isn't trying to replace capitalism with socialism - he's trying to generate similar policies as the ones you mentioned in Europe.

Ask Germany how that Russia gas is. Seems odd to directly support Russia while they attack Ukraine, but I get it. Germany has no choice but to fund the machine.

And what does a European country buying gas from another country at fair market rates (aka capitalism) have to do with socialism or social policies?

My taxes might go up. I'll still get NOTHING from the government, since you know, I'm fucking rich at 70k a year in San Diego.

Why would your taxes in San Diego go up because New York City is enacting social policies that benefit their citizens on the other side of the country?

Must be nice to live in a country of 10 million that all look the same, talk the same, have the same cultural values and the same religion. You can't remotely compare that to 330 million diverse country that America is. We have every culture, religion and creed here. With all our diversity, we are constantly striving to understand each other.

Just what in the hell does racial, cultural, and religious diversity have to do with an economic system?

Besides, if you are talking about Norway, they are exporting global warming to make their 10 million citizens lives much more peachy.

Does your vehicle not run on putrified dinosaur juice? If it does, where do you get your sense of moral superiority?

I think the HEU is probably safely stored in a bathrom in Mar-a-Lago.