On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 13:25:31 +0000 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton lkcl@lkcl.net wrote:
On Fri, 07 Dec 2018 08:19:50 -0500 Stefan Monnier monnier@iro.umontreal.ca wrote:
Yet, almost every message on this list seems to carry with it the implication -- if not express statement -- that if a given application can't be openly audited on a remarkably low level by a random layperson at a random time and place -- ... -- it must therefore be evil and untrustworthy.
There are actually 3 arguments to favor this view point: 1. You learn by experience. Picture young children. They break things to learn how they work. No introspection means severely limited understanding. 2. If schools and libraries would *actually* teach programming, as opposed to MS-word Macros which enslave the person to a product (yes, here in the US), then there would be less people who would be incompetent when it comes to CS. The source being readily accessible lends itself to this goal. 3. "Many eyes make all bugs shallow." -- Linus Torvalds (Never said they were all geniuses or something.)
If a president refuses to show his tax records, I consider it as evidence that I can't trust him/her.
Same goes for software.
and yet... people still vote for them... :)
And buy the software. "Who is the more foolish, the fool or the fool who [buys stuff from] [votes for] him?" -- Obi-wan Kenobi (Star Wars) purposefully misquoted.
David