JCattheATM

> Even if it feels it should be simple, Linux has a way.

As someone who has run DNS and DHCP servers for over 30 years and continues to do so, this just feels like confirmation bias based on your personal anecdotes. If there's an issue, it's likely due to messy over-complicated distros. Alpine is no less solid than OpenBSD.

Don't make the perfect be the enemy of the good. Just because they didn't stop escape via dirtyfrag doesn't make them useless let alone a joke. pledge and unveil are nice, but exactly how effective do you expect them to be against an ssh/sftp server? Maybe you have ssh configured so it can't manipulate user and/or system files, but that isn't typically common usage.

> there are numerous other things that are done for mitigation outside of this.

Sure, and I think they are mostly great, main problem being they just don't go far enough. Where's the namespace level isolation, ACL or MAC support? Is there a way to give a user append only ability for one file, while having write but not delete access to another, and delete to yet another? What's the maximum extent to which OpenBSD could have limited an attacker, had they been vulnerable to regreSSHion?

It really is true. OpenBSD focuses on auditing. In many cases they were not affected because of mitigations, but because they were just using a different stack. OpenBSD wasn't affected by regreSSHion for example, for basically the same reason Alpine wasn't.

OpenBSD didn't invent the concept behind W^X, and if you want to talk of 'copying', which I think is kind of silly personally, then PAX was first.

I'm familiar with the list of OpenBSD innovations, and in turn I would point you to https://https://isopenbsdsecu.re/ for a breakdown of their claims and marketing.

To this date OpenBSD doesn't have anything as simple as a proper ACL, let alone any type of MAC. They claim such systems are too complex, which is of course nonsense.

It's like I said - they focus a lot on preventing an attacker gaining access, but have little available to constrain attackers who DO get access.

> These are the operative words.

These are words that when applied equally to Linux and OpenBSD, has Linux coming out ahead.

> With OpenBSD, you get this out of the box and everything just works.

With OpenBSD, out of the box you get a blank slate that really can't do anything, that you have to configure to do what you want, and currently can't be configured to be as secure as linux can be.

> there is a sense of understanding your system that is refreshing

That's why I used to run Slackware, and then foud Alpine to be the best - much better than Void or Arch IMO. Works well as a very minimal system, and I know everything very well because of it. It's an ideal approach IMO, the best of both worlds.

No, not really. Linux has better options available and is significantly stronger when configured correctly. The OpenBSD approach ls largely based around eliminating bugs in the first place, but isn't as strong at limiting an attacker that successfully exploited a bug they missed or weren't responsible for.

Pretty much any OS would be just as stable if it's just serving DNS/DHCP.

There's a big gap between 'some kids get addicted to porn' and 'lets agegate the internet as completely as possible'

Sounds like the people you describe were outliers with some preexisting conditions, and probably shouldn't be used as any sort of baseline or point of comparison.

There are lots of cola recopies, why is this guy confident he has Coke's?

The type of people that always need to have the last word in discussions abuse tools like this, but thankfully there are not too many of them on HN.

The last one was 8 years ago. It's not a terribly common vuln anymore - not that it ever was.

Sounds like an allergy.

What politics?

Interesting. Not sure I'll try it because I have my setup very refined (although I use awesomewm so it's maybe a little simpler to switch anyway) and I'm long past the age of testing out new distros for fun. Not to familiar with dinit but I've been waiting for s6 to be usable with Alpine for a while now. How do you think it compares?

Do you notice any performance advantages on Chimera?

This seems interesting, but I've been using Alpine as a desktop distro wth ZFS for years now, it has native support and ZBM is available in the community repo. Not sure what advantages Chimera would add.

No, it wouldn't require an exorbitant amount at all.

Taxing the 1% and megacorps a fair share, cracking down on all the tax avoidance schemes would provide more than enough.

> Will require a large increase in taxation.

To billionaires and corps, as should be the case anyway.

> Will likely cause some form of inflation.

Based on what?

> Will not provide enough money for a majority of people to survive on.

Depends on how much is provided - the simple fix is to provide enough.

> Has no significant political support in the US.

This is the biggest hurdle, and it's because so many on the right have been brainwashed by outlets like Fox News. It is indeed a hard thing to overcome. Eventually as the older folks die out, it will come about naturally.

People need more than just rent, and arguably landlords shouldn't be able to profit to the extent they do.

> It is very much so complicated though. The conversations about UBI in the internet has been around since I’ve been online.

Polarizing doesn't mean complicated. There's people against it due to ignorance, greed of both, it's certainly not more complicated than that.

> And since then, there hasn’t been a single large scale test of the system to see if it can be compatible with the current version of capitalism that’s ran in the most of the world.

Because people keep fighting against it, because it's scary scary sOcIaLiSm.

> Even if I support UBI morally

As you should, there are no moral arguments against it.

> there isn’t even local appetite for it, yet alone global one.

I would think the majority of the population struggling to pay for groceries would disagree.

> And you’ll run into quick questions about inflations, every chart from UBI-lite era of COVID, and so on.

No reason to think UBI would cause inflation at all, actually.

In any case, this really is the answer. You're worried about disruption due to AI taking jobs, but the only reason there is a problem is because AI will drastically increase inequality by letting rich people and corps become even richer. You want to solve the issue, you solve the disparity by making them give back their fair share. Like I said, simple.

Well sure, the conflicts were resolved.

It's not complicated. Just tax the corporations and billionaires a fair share and setup UBI.

People would compile it and unofficial community servers would quickly pop up.

> players have always been able to easily doxx one another, know where other players live,

That sounds unlikely.

> Do I really need to pull out all of the exemples of Google support being the absolute worst on Earth?

For paid products, denying or lying about there being any issue as serious as significant data loss for over a year like Bunny did, yes.

> Microsoft arbitrarily banning IPs/AS from its infrastructure with no recourse or acknowledgement of the issue (such as 365 lying about accepted mail traffic through SMTP)?

That sounds closer but still not comparable.

Got an example of them acting the same way as Bunny in the case being discussed??

> That's basically how this whole industry works?

Far from it. Most companies in the same space don't just ignore such significant problems. If they did, they wouldn't survive for very long.

> The math doesn’t math.

It maths fine, it's just that the assumptions being input are wrong.

I don't think the UK does achieve it at all. Cut off all import lines and what would happen?