▲ 454 ▼ only as in free beer (lemmy.world) submitted 2 years ago by Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com [M] to c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 96 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] CutestFox@lemm.ee 30 points 2 years ago (1 child) No, systemd and GNOME are not part of mainline, and also GNOME and systemd arent obfuscated permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] hddsx@lemmy.ca -15 points 2 years ago (2 children) While its possible to find or build a distro without systemd, most of the big names that you would introduce people to use it: Ubuntu, Debian, Red Hat, Fedora, OpenSUSE Hell, Arch uses it I do get your point about GNOME, and I don’t use a DE anymore so I might be outdated, but Gnome and KDE were the big two back when I used it. I say obfuscates because gnome configuration is now largely binary, whereas gnome2 used to be text files. The same goes for systemd- the logs are now binary files with journalctl instead of text files permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] the_doktor@lemmy.zip 26 points 2 years ago (2 children) Oh no, not binary files that are well-documented and you can know exactly what they're doing! Also, the journalctl files are just text with useful markers embedded in them to be easier to filter and search. Run strings on the journal files and see they're just text with metadata in them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 6 points 2 years ago (2 children) You must compile every single software package from source, but only after you've examined every single line of the code yourself! 1995 called, they said you're doing it wrong, and RMS is going to be very mad at you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] psud@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago 1995 calling would be telling you you need to roll your own kernel to be efficient on your 486 permalink fedilink source parent [–] the_doktor@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) You... do realize that's what Free software is about, right? Gnome, systemd, etc, ARE Free software. They're created by tons of people and tons of other people look over the code so you don't have to. The number of people who cannot understand this boggles my mind. Sure, errors and rare malicious things slip through, but not nearly at the rate of the average garbageware you run on other OSes. Stop spreading misinformation. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Not very keen on sarcasm, are we? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] the_doktor@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 years ago (2 children) Doesn't sound sarcastic. You need to learn how to make something sound more sarcastic online, we can't see your face or hear your vocal inflection, remember. Or, you were just wrong, saw me correct you, and decided "lol, oh, no, I wasn't wrong, just being SARCASTIC!!!!1". Sigh. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] prex@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago I lIkE tHe SpOnGeBoB sArCaStIc CaPs. CamelCaps has met it's match. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago Ok bud. permalink fedilink source parent [–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago I didn’t know that the are text files with markers… If that’s true, I may hate it less. I’ll have to try that permalink fedilink source parent [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 15 points 2 years ago (3 children) I think you are either trolling or you fundamentally don't understand, what you're talking about. Nothing is obfuscated. You can download each and every code file, audit it, and build the binaries from exactly that code. You can even compare the binaries to the ones provided by major distros thanks to reproducible builds. Just because you don't understand code, doesn't mean it's obfuscated. Following that logic, even a loaf of bread is "obfuscated" because you don't understand sour dough. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] flamingarms@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago "...because you don't understand sourdough" Made me spit up my coffee. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -1 points 2 years ago I'm not sure I totally agree with him, what I'm sure is that I don't agree with you, because you clearly haven't read his comment. permalink fedilink source parent [–] hddsx@lemmy.ca -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) That’s not what I’m saying. Yes, it’s open source and you can build the binaries itself. I’m saying that the process is obfuscated or complicated because instead of text log files, you have to use journtalctl to view them. Then again, someone said it may be text files with markers so I have to look into that permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) Are you really sure, you're using "obfuscation" right? Because that implies that someone intentionally makes something harder to read to hide something. That's not the case here. Nothing is hidden, it's all there, the formats are well defined and easy to read. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Nothing is hidden, it's all there Yeah, of course, it's all there in binary. For programs of course that's not a problem, but for data that you may need to look at any time, it is. It's harder to interpret both for humans (significantly) and both for any program that want to make use of it (unless they use the specific library that came up with the format, and by that also pulling in all its libs transitively) Binary data is not much less obfuscated than the system files of windows. It's all there, you can read it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) So literally every program on your machine is obfuscated. Linux kernel? Obfuscated. Wayland? Obfuscated. And even VIM: obfuscated. You're creating problems where there are none. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Did you read my comment in it's entirety? For programs, that is not a problem. This is a problem for data. Why? Because you very rarely need to read the program's "content", and when you do, you'll instead go look at the source code anyways. But for binary data files there is no source code that is the equivalent of the contents in readable form. If you want to read it as a human in your text editor, good luck with making sense of it. If you want to read it with your program it'll have to pull in a tree of dependencies out of questionable necessity, and any of that dependencies could have a severe bug or a security vulnerability that affects your program and it's users. And the only reason you needed to import that lib is to be able to parse this binary format. It's not even a common one like an archive format, but a totally custom made format of systemd. And then there's another problem. You may be able to make sense of the binary data with your bare hands and a text editor, but you better not edit it that way, because you may mess up the delicate offsets, or you may wanted to replace a value (e.g. a string, out some kind of list) with a longer one but you can't because of the former problem. Binary is ok for programs, and you know what, it's also fine for data in transit (network) and of course archives. But for data, whether it's a log file or configuration, or some other that would be totally fine in text format, it's just annoying, limiting, and overcomplicated. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago Again, that's not what obfuscation means. Also, what exactly is the difference between cat and journalctl? You can't read a text file without a program either. Of course, raw text files are more common, but what you're drawing up here is a mixture of old man yells at cloud and tin foil hat territory. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] hddsx@lemmy.ca -15 points 2 years ago (2 children) While its possible to find or build a distro without systemd, most of the big names that you would introduce people to use it: Ubuntu, Debian, Red Hat, Fedora, OpenSUSE Hell, Arch uses it I do get your point about GNOME, and I don’t use a DE anymore so I might be outdated, but Gnome and KDE were the big two back when I used it. I say obfuscates because gnome configuration is now largely binary, whereas gnome2 used to be text files. The same goes for systemd- the logs are now binary files with journalctl instead of text files permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] the_doktor@lemmy.zip 26 points 2 years ago (2 children) Oh no, not binary files that are well-documented and you can know exactly what they're doing! Also, the journalctl files are just text with useful markers embedded in them to be easier to filter and search. Run strings on the journal files and see they're just text with metadata in them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 6 points 2 years ago (2 children) You must compile every single software package from source, but only after you've examined every single line of the code yourself! 1995 called, they said you're doing it wrong, and RMS is going to be very mad at you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] psud@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago 1995 calling would be telling you you need to roll your own kernel to be efficient on your 486 permalink fedilink source parent [–] the_doktor@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) You... do realize that's what Free software is about, right? Gnome, systemd, etc, ARE Free software. They're created by tons of people and tons of other people look over the code so you don't have to. The number of people who cannot understand this boggles my mind. Sure, errors and rare malicious things slip through, but not nearly at the rate of the average garbageware you run on other OSes. Stop spreading misinformation. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Not very keen on sarcasm, are we? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] the_doktor@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 years ago (2 children) Doesn't sound sarcastic. You need to learn how to make something sound more sarcastic online, we can't see your face or hear your vocal inflection, remember. Or, you were just wrong, saw me correct you, and decided "lol, oh, no, I wasn't wrong, just being SARCASTIC!!!!1". Sigh. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] prex@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago I lIkE tHe SpOnGeBoB sArCaStIc CaPs. CamelCaps has met it's match. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago Ok bud. permalink fedilink source parent [–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago I didn’t know that the are text files with markers… If that’s true, I may hate it less. I’ll have to try that permalink fedilink source parent [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 15 points 2 years ago (3 children) I think you are either trolling or you fundamentally don't understand, what you're talking about. Nothing is obfuscated. You can download each and every code file, audit it, and build the binaries from exactly that code. You can even compare the binaries to the ones provided by major distros thanks to reproducible builds. Just because you don't understand code, doesn't mean it's obfuscated. Following that logic, even a loaf of bread is "obfuscated" because you don't understand sour dough. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] flamingarms@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago "...because you don't understand sourdough" Made me spit up my coffee. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -1 points 2 years ago I'm not sure I totally agree with him, what I'm sure is that I don't agree with you, because you clearly haven't read his comment. permalink fedilink source parent [–] hddsx@lemmy.ca -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) That’s not what I’m saying. Yes, it’s open source and you can build the binaries itself. I’m saying that the process is obfuscated or complicated because instead of text log files, you have to use journtalctl to view them. Then again, someone said it may be text files with markers so I have to look into that permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) Are you really sure, you're using "obfuscation" right? Because that implies that someone intentionally makes something harder to read to hide something. That's not the case here. Nothing is hidden, it's all there, the formats are well defined and easy to read. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Nothing is hidden, it's all there Yeah, of course, it's all there in binary. For programs of course that's not a problem, but for data that you may need to look at any time, it is. It's harder to interpret both for humans (significantly) and both for any program that want to make use of it (unless they use the specific library that came up with the format, and by that also pulling in all its libs transitively) Binary data is not much less obfuscated than the system files of windows. It's all there, you can read it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) So literally every program on your machine is obfuscated. Linux kernel? Obfuscated. Wayland? Obfuscated. And even VIM: obfuscated. You're creating problems where there are none. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Did you read my comment in it's entirety? For programs, that is not a problem. This is a problem for data. Why? Because you very rarely need to read the program's "content", and when you do, you'll instead go look at the source code anyways. But for binary data files there is no source code that is the equivalent of the contents in readable form. If you want to read it as a human in your text editor, good luck with making sense of it. If you want to read it with your program it'll have to pull in a tree of dependencies out of questionable necessity, and any of that dependencies could have a severe bug or a security vulnerability that affects your program and it's users. And the only reason you needed to import that lib is to be able to parse this binary format. It's not even a common one like an archive format, but a totally custom made format of systemd. And then there's another problem. You may be able to make sense of the binary data with your bare hands and a text editor, but you better not edit it that way, because you may mess up the delicate offsets, or you may wanted to replace a value (e.g. a string, out some kind of list) with a longer one but you can't because of the former problem. Binary is ok for programs, and you know what, it's also fine for data in transit (network) and of course archives. But for data, whether it's a log file or configuration, or some other that would be totally fine in text format, it's just annoying, limiting, and overcomplicated. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago Again, that's not what obfuscation means. Also, what exactly is the difference between cat and journalctl? You can't read a text file without a program either. Of course, raw text files are more common, but what you're drawing up here is a mixture of old man yells at cloud and tin foil hat territory. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] the_doktor@lemmy.zip 26 points 2 years ago (2 children) Oh no, not binary files that are well-documented and you can know exactly what they're doing! Also, the journalctl files are just text with useful markers embedded in them to be easier to filter and search. Run strings on the journal files and see they're just text with metadata in them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 6 points 2 years ago (2 children) You must compile every single software package from source, but only after you've examined every single line of the code yourself! 1995 called, they said you're doing it wrong, and RMS is going to be very mad at you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] psud@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago 1995 calling would be telling you you need to roll your own kernel to be efficient on your 486 permalink fedilink source parent [–] the_doktor@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) You... do realize that's what Free software is about, right? Gnome, systemd, etc, ARE Free software. They're created by tons of people and tons of other people look over the code so you don't have to. The number of people who cannot understand this boggles my mind. Sure, errors and rare malicious things slip through, but not nearly at the rate of the average garbageware you run on other OSes. Stop spreading misinformation. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Not very keen on sarcasm, are we? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] the_doktor@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 years ago (2 children) Doesn't sound sarcastic. You need to learn how to make something sound more sarcastic online, we can't see your face or hear your vocal inflection, remember. Or, you were just wrong, saw me correct you, and decided "lol, oh, no, I wasn't wrong, just being SARCASTIC!!!!1". Sigh. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] prex@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago I lIkE tHe SpOnGeBoB sArCaStIc CaPs. CamelCaps has met it's match. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago Ok bud. permalink fedilink source parent [–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago I didn’t know that the are text files with markers… If that’s true, I may hate it less. I’ll have to try that permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 6 points 2 years ago (2 children) You must compile every single software package from source, but only after you've examined every single line of the code yourself! 1995 called, they said you're doing it wrong, and RMS is going to be very mad at you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] psud@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago 1995 calling would be telling you you need to roll your own kernel to be efficient on your 486 permalink fedilink source parent [–] the_doktor@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) You... do realize that's what Free software is about, right? Gnome, systemd, etc, ARE Free software. They're created by tons of people and tons of other people look over the code so you don't have to. The number of people who cannot understand this boggles my mind. Sure, errors and rare malicious things slip through, but not nearly at the rate of the average garbageware you run on other OSes. Stop spreading misinformation. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Not very keen on sarcasm, are we? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] the_doktor@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 years ago (2 children) Doesn't sound sarcastic. You need to learn how to make something sound more sarcastic online, we can't see your face or hear your vocal inflection, remember. Or, you were just wrong, saw me correct you, and decided "lol, oh, no, I wasn't wrong, just being SARCASTIC!!!!1". Sigh. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] prex@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago I lIkE tHe SpOnGeBoB sArCaStIc CaPs. CamelCaps has met it's match. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago Ok bud. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] psud@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago 1995 calling would be telling you you need to roll your own kernel to be efficient on your 486 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] the_doktor@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) You... do realize that's what Free software is about, right? Gnome, systemd, etc, ARE Free software. They're created by tons of people and tons of other people look over the code so you don't have to. The number of people who cannot understand this boggles my mind. Sure, errors and rare malicious things slip through, but not nearly at the rate of the average garbageware you run on other OSes. Stop spreading misinformation. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Not very keen on sarcasm, are we? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] the_doktor@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 years ago (2 children) Doesn't sound sarcastic. You need to learn how to make something sound more sarcastic online, we can't see your face or hear your vocal inflection, remember. Or, you were just wrong, saw me correct you, and decided "lol, oh, no, I wasn't wrong, just being SARCASTIC!!!!1". Sigh. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] prex@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago I lIkE tHe SpOnGeBoB sArCaStIc CaPs. CamelCaps has met it's match. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago Ok bud. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Not very keen on sarcasm, are we? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] the_doktor@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 years ago (2 children) Doesn't sound sarcastic. You need to learn how to make something sound more sarcastic online, we can't see your face or hear your vocal inflection, remember. Or, you were just wrong, saw me correct you, and decided "lol, oh, no, I wasn't wrong, just being SARCASTIC!!!!1". Sigh. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] prex@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago I lIkE tHe SpOnGeBoB sArCaStIc CaPs. CamelCaps has met it's match. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago Ok bud. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] the_doktor@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 years ago (2 children) Doesn't sound sarcastic. You need to learn how to make something sound more sarcastic online, we can't see your face or hear your vocal inflection, remember. Or, you were just wrong, saw me correct you, and decided "lol, oh, no, I wasn't wrong, just being SARCASTIC!!!!1". Sigh. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] prex@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago I lIkE tHe SpOnGeBoB sArCaStIc CaPs. CamelCaps has met it's match. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago Ok bud. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] prex@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago I lIkE tHe SpOnGeBoB sArCaStIc CaPs. CamelCaps has met it's match. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago I didn’t know that the are text files with markers… If that’s true, I may hate it less. I’ll have to try that permalink fedilink source parent
[–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 15 points 2 years ago (3 children) I think you are either trolling or you fundamentally don't understand, what you're talking about. Nothing is obfuscated. You can download each and every code file, audit it, and build the binaries from exactly that code. You can even compare the binaries to the ones provided by major distros thanks to reproducible builds. Just because you don't understand code, doesn't mean it's obfuscated. Following that logic, even a loaf of bread is "obfuscated" because you don't understand sour dough. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] flamingarms@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago "...because you don't understand sourdough" Made me spit up my coffee. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -1 points 2 years ago I'm not sure I totally agree with him, what I'm sure is that I don't agree with you, because you clearly haven't read his comment. permalink fedilink source parent [–] hddsx@lemmy.ca -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) That’s not what I’m saying. Yes, it’s open source and you can build the binaries itself. I’m saying that the process is obfuscated or complicated because instead of text log files, you have to use journtalctl to view them. Then again, someone said it may be text files with markers so I have to look into that permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) Are you really sure, you're using "obfuscation" right? Because that implies that someone intentionally makes something harder to read to hide something. That's not the case here. Nothing is hidden, it's all there, the formats are well defined and easy to read. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Nothing is hidden, it's all there Yeah, of course, it's all there in binary. For programs of course that's not a problem, but for data that you may need to look at any time, it is. It's harder to interpret both for humans (significantly) and both for any program that want to make use of it (unless they use the specific library that came up with the format, and by that also pulling in all its libs transitively) Binary data is not much less obfuscated than the system files of windows. It's all there, you can read it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) So literally every program on your machine is obfuscated. Linux kernel? Obfuscated. Wayland? Obfuscated. And even VIM: obfuscated. You're creating problems where there are none. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Did you read my comment in it's entirety? For programs, that is not a problem. This is a problem for data. Why? Because you very rarely need to read the program's "content", and when you do, you'll instead go look at the source code anyways. But for binary data files there is no source code that is the equivalent of the contents in readable form. If you want to read it as a human in your text editor, good luck with making sense of it. If you want to read it with your program it'll have to pull in a tree of dependencies out of questionable necessity, and any of that dependencies could have a severe bug or a security vulnerability that affects your program and it's users. And the only reason you needed to import that lib is to be able to parse this binary format. It's not even a common one like an archive format, but a totally custom made format of systemd. And then there's another problem. You may be able to make sense of the binary data with your bare hands and a text editor, but you better not edit it that way, because you may mess up the delicate offsets, or you may wanted to replace a value (e.g. a string, out some kind of list) with a longer one but you can't because of the former problem. Binary is ok for programs, and you know what, it's also fine for data in transit (network) and of course archives. But for data, whether it's a log file or configuration, or some other that would be totally fine in text format, it's just annoying, limiting, and overcomplicated. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago Again, that's not what obfuscation means. Also, what exactly is the difference between cat and journalctl? You can't read a text file without a program either. Of course, raw text files are more common, but what you're drawing up here is a mixture of old man yells at cloud and tin foil hat territory. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] flamingarms@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago "...because you don't understand sourdough" Made me spit up my coffee. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -1 points 2 years ago I'm not sure I totally agree with him, what I'm sure is that I don't agree with you, because you clearly haven't read his comment. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] hddsx@lemmy.ca -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) That’s not what I’m saying. Yes, it’s open source and you can build the binaries itself. I’m saying that the process is obfuscated or complicated because instead of text log files, you have to use journtalctl to view them. Then again, someone said it may be text files with markers so I have to look into that permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) Are you really sure, you're using "obfuscation" right? Because that implies that someone intentionally makes something harder to read to hide something. That's not the case here. Nothing is hidden, it's all there, the formats are well defined and easy to read. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Nothing is hidden, it's all there Yeah, of course, it's all there in binary. For programs of course that's not a problem, but for data that you may need to look at any time, it is. It's harder to interpret both for humans (significantly) and both for any program that want to make use of it (unless they use the specific library that came up with the format, and by that also pulling in all its libs transitively) Binary data is not much less obfuscated than the system files of windows. It's all there, you can read it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) So literally every program on your machine is obfuscated. Linux kernel? Obfuscated. Wayland? Obfuscated. And even VIM: obfuscated. You're creating problems where there are none. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Did you read my comment in it's entirety? For programs, that is not a problem. This is a problem for data. Why? Because you very rarely need to read the program's "content", and when you do, you'll instead go look at the source code anyways. But for binary data files there is no source code that is the equivalent of the contents in readable form. If you want to read it as a human in your text editor, good luck with making sense of it. If you want to read it with your program it'll have to pull in a tree of dependencies out of questionable necessity, and any of that dependencies could have a severe bug or a security vulnerability that affects your program and it's users. And the only reason you needed to import that lib is to be able to parse this binary format. It's not even a common one like an archive format, but a totally custom made format of systemd. And then there's another problem. You may be able to make sense of the binary data with your bare hands and a text editor, but you better not edit it that way, because you may mess up the delicate offsets, or you may wanted to replace a value (e.g. a string, out some kind of list) with a longer one but you can't because of the former problem. Binary is ok for programs, and you know what, it's also fine for data in transit (network) and of course archives. But for data, whether it's a log file or configuration, or some other that would be totally fine in text format, it's just annoying, limiting, and overcomplicated. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago Again, that's not what obfuscation means. Also, what exactly is the difference between cat and journalctl? You can't read a text file without a program either. Of course, raw text files are more common, but what you're drawing up here is a mixture of old man yells at cloud and tin foil hat territory. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) Are you really sure, you're using "obfuscation" right? Because that implies that someone intentionally makes something harder to read to hide something. That's not the case here. Nothing is hidden, it's all there, the formats are well defined and easy to read. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Nothing is hidden, it's all there Yeah, of course, it's all there in binary. For programs of course that's not a problem, but for data that you may need to look at any time, it is. It's harder to interpret both for humans (significantly) and both for any program that want to make use of it (unless they use the specific library that came up with the format, and by that also pulling in all its libs transitively) Binary data is not much less obfuscated than the system files of windows. It's all there, you can read it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) So literally every program on your machine is obfuscated. Linux kernel? Obfuscated. Wayland? Obfuscated. And even VIM: obfuscated. You're creating problems where there are none. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Did you read my comment in it's entirety? For programs, that is not a problem. This is a problem for data. Why? Because you very rarely need to read the program's "content", and when you do, you'll instead go look at the source code anyways. But for binary data files there is no source code that is the equivalent of the contents in readable form. If you want to read it as a human in your text editor, good luck with making sense of it. If you want to read it with your program it'll have to pull in a tree of dependencies out of questionable necessity, and any of that dependencies could have a severe bug or a security vulnerability that affects your program and it's users. And the only reason you needed to import that lib is to be able to parse this binary format. It's not even a common one like an archive format, but a totally custom made format of systemd. And then there's another problem. You may be able to make sense of the binary data with your bare hands and a text editor, but you better not edit it that way, because you may mess up the delicate offsets, or you may wanted to replace a value (e.g. a string, out some kind of list) with a longer one but you can't because of the former problem. Binary is ok for programs, and you know what, it's also fine for data in transit (network) and of course archives. But for data, whether it's a log file or configuration, or some other that would be totally fine in text format, it's just annoying, limiting, and overcomplicated. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago Again, that's not what obfuscation means. Also, what exactly is the difference between cat and journalctl? You can't read a text file without a program either. Of course, raw text files are more common, but what you're drawing up here is a mixture of old man yells at cloud and tin foil hat territory. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Nothing is hidden, it's all there Yeah, of course, it's all there in binary. For programs of course that's not a problem, but for data that you may need to look at any time, it is. It's harder to interpret both for humans (significantly) and both for any program that want to make use of it (unless they use the specific library that came up with the format, and by that also pulling in all its libs transitively) Binary data is not much less obfuscated than the system files of windows. It's all there, you can read it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) So literally every program on your machine is obfuscated. Linux kernel? Obfuscated. Wayland? Obfuscated. And even VIM: obfuscated. You're creating problems where there are none. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Did you read my comment in it's entirety? For programs, that is not a problem. This is a problem for data. Why? Because you very rarely need to read the program's "content", and when you do, you'll instead go look at the source code anyways. But for binary data files there is no source code that is the equivalent of the contents in readable form. If you want to read it as a human in your text editor, good luck with making sense of it. If you want to read it with your program it'll have to pull in a tree of dependencies out of questionable necessity, and any of that dependencies could have a severe bug or a security vulnerability that affects your program and it's users. And the only reason you needed to import that lib is to be able to parse this binary format. It's not even a common one like an archive format, but a totally custom made format of systemd. And then there's another problem. You may be able to make sense of the binary data with your bare hands and a text editor, but you better not edit it that way, because you may mess up the delicate offsets, or you may wanted to replace a value (e.g. a string, out some kind of list) with a longer one but you can't because of the former problem. Binary is ok for programs, and you know what, it's also fine for data in transit (network) and of course archives. But for data, whether it's a log file or configuration, or some other that would be totally fine in text format, it's just annoying, limiting, and overcomplicated. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago Again, that's not what obfuscation means. Also, what exactly is the difference between cat and journalctl? You can't read a text file without a program either. Of course, raw text files are more common, but what you're drawing up here is a mixture of old man yells at cloud and tin foil hat territory. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) So literally every program on your machine is obfuscated. Linux kernel? Obfuscated. Wayland? Obfuscated. And even VIM: obfuscated. You're creating problems where there are none. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Did you read my comment in it's entirety? For programs, that is not a problem. This is a problem for data. Why? Because you very rarely need to read the program's "content", and when you do, you'll instead go look at the source code anyways. But for binary data files there is no source code that is the equivalent of the contents in readable form. If you want to read it as a human in your text editor, good luck with making sense of it. If you want to read it with your program it'll have to pull in a tree of dependencies out of questionable necessity, and any of that dependencies could have a severe bug or a security vulnerability that affects your program and it's users. And the only reason you needed to import that lib is to be able to parse this binary format. It's not even a common one like an archive format, but a totally custom made format of systemd. And then there's another problem. You may be able to make sense of the binary data with your bare hands and a text editor, but you better not edit it that way, because you may mess up the delicate offsets, or you may wanted to replace a value (e.g. a string, out some kind of list) with a longer one but you can't because of the former problem. Binary is ok for programs, and you know what, it's also fine for data in transit (network) and of course archives. But for data, whether it's a log file or configuration, or some other that would be totally fine in text format, it's just annoying, limiting, and overcomplicated. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago Again, that's not what obfuscation means. Also, what exactly is the difference between cat and journalctl? You can't read a text file without a program either. Of course, raw text files are more common, but what you're drawing up here is a mixture of old man yells at cloud and tin foil hat territory. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Did you read my comment in it's entirety? For programs, that is not a problem. This is a problem for data. Why? Because you very rarely need to read the program's "content", and when you do, you'll instead go look at the source code anyways. But for binary data files there is no source code that is the equivalent of the contents in readable form. If you want to read it as a human in your text editor, good luck with making sense of it. If you want to read it with your program it'll have to pull in a tree of dependencies out of questionable necessity, and any of that dependencies could have a severe bug or a security vulnerability that affects your program and it's users. And the only reason you needed to import that lib is to be able to parse this binary format. It's not even a common one like an archive format, but a totally custom made format of systemd. And then there's another problem. You may be able to make sense of the binary data with your bare hands and a text editor, but you better not edit it that way, because you may mess up the delicate offsets, or you may wanted to replace a value (e.g. a string, out some kind of list) with a longer one but you can't because of the former problem. Binary is ok for programs, and you know what, it's also fine for data in transit (network) and of course archives. But for data, whether it's a log file or configuration, or some other that would be totally fine in text format, it's just annoying, limiting, and overcomplicated. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago Again, that's not what obfuscation means. Also, what exactly is the difference between cat and journalctl? You can't read a text file without a program either. Of course, raw text files are more common, but what you're drawing up here is a mixture of old man yells at cloud and tin foil hat territory. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago Again, that's not what obfuscation means. Also, what exactly is the difference between cat and journalctl? You can't read a text file without a program either. Of course, raw text files are more common, but what you're drawing up here is a mixture of old man yells at cloud and tin foil hat territory. permalink fedilink source parent
