It’s Dr. Evil!! Where’s Mini-me?

sb

Thank you for answering for me re: Linux. I do not have personal professional knowledge in the area of software, but very close second hand knowledge via my husband (it is his profession) and your explanation closely parallels his thinking.

It is a pity about Linux because UNIX based systems are more reliable than Windows.

Spoken like a true believer:

“Linux is, at this point, just as easy to use as Windows or the Mac. I set my septuagenarian mother up with Linux because she had had so much trouble with viruses on Windows and she hasn’t looked back since.”

The key word is you set up Grandma’s computer. Therefore, it’s not as easy as windows because she needs you to set it up.

The fact that she had virus before just means that she did have protection she required. I have a windows based system with both hard and soft firewalls, which I keep up to date, and I don’t have a virus problem. There is another factor here. Virus writers go after windows because that’s where boxes are. MAC and LINUS based machines aren’t where the fun is.

If you talk to the pros at the FBI and NSA they will tell you that any operating has vulnerabilities you are living with a false sense of security if you thing you are immune because you have linux box. One more thing, because Linux is open source you really don’t know what’s there. A sophisticated code writer could insert a module that looks, feels and smells right, is extremely useful and also has a trap door that nobody knows about. Again, itís just a matter of market share not level of invulnerability.

The Microsoft monopoly…

“What is holding Linux back then? One major factor is Microsoft’s monopoly power. Microsoft uses its monopoly to threaten any company like Dell that tries to give consumers a choice by offering fully functional Linux machines at a discount.”

I believe you are repeating obsolete charges here. This part of the antitrust held up in court. Microsoft cannot threaten to not sell windows to somebody offering a discount to a Linux box.

Here is what is holding Linux back. It is the lack of support for the general user. Because Linux takes a freewheeling approach to an operating system there is no support for non-expert. Support and configuration maintenance drives cost. Any Linux variant designed for grandmother is not going to be free. It will cost a lot of money. Face it, the Linux ethic is what prevents it’s widespread use, not Microsoft practices.

Linux is a superior product that is difficult to use

Linux is a superior product, but I must beg to differ with the latter point.

Linux is, at this point, just as easy to use as Windows or the Mac. I set my septuagenarian mother up with Linux because she had had so much trouble with viruses on Windows and she hasn’t looked back since. All my children have been playing on Linux for years and haven’t even known the difference. If old ladies and clueless little kids can handle it, it’s probably pretty easy to use. In fact, there are stories of employees who have had Linux swapped in for Windows over the weekend and haven’t even known the difference; they just thought it was a Windows upgrade.

What is holding Linux back then? One major factor is Microsoft’s monopoly power. Microsoft uses its monopoly to threaten any company like Dell that tries to give consumers a choice by offering fully functional Linux machines at a discount. Dell can’t survive if Microsoft won’t sell them Windows, so they cave. If people were given a fair choice, straight up, from the manufacturer of having the exact same computer with Windows or Linux, with the Windows one costing several hundred dollars more, then the “Windows tax” would be obvious and people wouldn’t pay it.

Then there is the issue of applications. Lots and lots of applications have been and are continuing to be written as Windows only. Even though all of the main applications now have complete equivalents on Linux, it’s the odd special-interest app which may throw you for a loop. Even though clever programmers have made many of the Windows binaries work under Linux straight out of the box, there’s still a compelling argument to use Windows if you’re dependent on some of these unusual applications.

It’s a chicken-and-egg problem because niche-market developers aren’t going to develop for Linux until there’s a large enough market.

Then there’s Microsoft’s monopoly control of its binary formats. Other programs can’t interact with the Microsoft files because Microsoft has made it impossible to read them. And its patents on such, once again using the power of the state to destroy any possibility of competition, because now it is illegal to read them.

And let’s not forget the human foibles of fear and laziness. Computers are scary and they break all the time and no one fully understands what’s going on underneath the hood so people tend to stick with what they (think) they know. Further, if you have a computer it almost surely came with Windows so why mess with putting something else on when you already have something that (mostly) works?

And now, back on topic, it’s the same thing with the MSM. People are lazy and would like to just look at the local newspaper and believe it, listen to the local CBS affiliate radio station and believe it. And people are fearful, some of them, of all those digital brownshirts like our gracious host who are out to warp their minds at the touch of a browser.

I a suspect a little sarcasm here so I will give two responses.

Assume non-Sarcastic. During the Clinton Administration a certain policy directive was under consideration, which Richard Clarke thought he was an expert. Well, there were specific directions from the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for C3I, several Defense Agencies and the State Department to make sure Clarke was not in the loop because he was a screw up. Ok…Does that show he was considered a Horse’s Ass in the previous administration?

Now for the dripping with sarcasm response. A lot of people think Intelligence is magic information that makes sure you get it right all the time. Most American’s believe what they see in the movies. The CIA and NSA can marshal a massive array of devices and know what is going on everywhere and all the time. That simple isn’t true. For the most part Intelligence is informed speculation. It is the realm of vaguely right versus precisely wrong.

Another thing most people misunderstand about “Secrets” is that they are often the least important component of Intelligence analysis. Most problems can, and are, understood through open sources not secrets. Secrets are only important are in time urgent situations like warning of attack, battle damage assessment or in support of some immediate diplomatic effort. Anybody with half a brain can use open sources to gain as good an understanding of a situation without recourse to secret intelligence.

Secrets are often classified as such not because of the information but because of the sources and methods required to get them early. I read the terrorist threat summaries almost every day and most of the time it takes less then a week for the information to appear in the newspaper. Sources and methods drive release dates. The reason the Enigma secrets were not revealed until the 60’s is because numerous South American countries still used Enigma type machines for diplomatic and military communications. From an intelligence value standpoint we could have started revealing that we broke the Japanese and Germans codes on September 1, 1945. We were protecting methods not secrets.

So there are two answers to your Horse’s Ass question. Yes, as in all endeavors there are Horse’s Asses out there. But there is always a “but” …Since intelligence in generally incomplete and imperfect you will seldom be precisely right and so-called surprises will occur from time to time. Until we harness the Norns to foretell the future I can guarantee that we will be surprised somewhere in the future.

Well said.

“It has happened many times in history that new systems will come along and, instead of obliterating the old, will surround and encapsulate them and work in symbiosis with them but otherwise pretty much leave them alone (think mitochondria)”

- Neal Stephenson

The point is that our government consists of 3 carefully balanced branches. The Press is acting as another branch without any kind of check. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

It can police itself, but only with the help of the web as a post-processor and bullshit detector.

Without some kind of check, it will come to serve only itself (just like any other institution).

Interestingly, if any of you bother to listen to people like Hannity you will notice that they mention blogs stories and blog analyses more and more often those days. Letís not be desperate here: little people started having real impact on big events.

And all the comparisons to operating system wars go only that far. There are other reasons than big money and power of evil Microsoft that prevent Linux from being more widely adapted: Linux is a superior product that is difficult to use while Windows is merely adequate, but reasonably idiot friendly. Guess which one most of the consumers will chose. The good news here that there we do not live in the times of Standard Oil when monopolies lasted decades and the innovation cycle is rather short. There will be a new corporation that will successfully compete will Microsoft. Similarly, the MSM monopoly will be challenged and blogoshere will play a critical part in that. But it will not happen overnight. Remember, the crumbling of the real Evil Empire took a decade.

But there is nothing that prevents bloggers from developing/hiring the capability to get their own information. Freelance information gatherers exist already – finding good ones may take some trial-and-error, but if enough bloggers and blog readers really want more information about [whatever], money can be made to flow to the investigation of that story.

There is every reason to believe that blogs can do this more effectively and efficiently than standard media outlets currently do.

This is because:

1) Expert analysis is available virtually around the clock. This allows new information to be painted into the overall picture efficiently and in real-time, allowing information gathering to be focused on the currently most relevant information.

2) Coverage is demand-driven. Stories covered are stories in which people actually are interested.

You could even consider those who pay for the investigation to be owners of the story – it could be sold to the big media (of course, then the motivation is profit, not desire for information itself, but the paradigm is a big tent). Would there be resistance? Sure, at first, but if the interest is widespread some media outlet will jump ship, and the wall will start to crumble.