@someSven.
The users have to be informed if their system is insecure and how they could update old software. Then, please inform us! I've been using Puppy 412 every day without any harm ever since the original release. No problems. No worries!
Is Flash best for viewing multimedia with 1.2 GHz cpu?
> You are making a massive mistake by thinking that slightly older software renders ones system insecure.
You can't judge that, cause your lack of basic security knowledge. It makes no sense to discuss this with you any further. You have to explain why known security problems in software, with existing exploits are no problem at all to the ingenious Puppy system.
> Then, please inform us!
Read. Think. Write. I think my English is not so bad, my sentences about that are clear and I had to repeat it often enough.
> I've been using Puppy 412 every day without any harm ever since the original release.
We are using this nuclear reactor without any knowledge how it works, without any repairs, we didn't read anything about it, and we are proud to be so much cleverer than all those guys who are always scared about things which could go wrong. And we have such balls, yea BALLS.
Bye. If Jonny needs help I will answer, I'll try to ignore anyone else.
pretty much sums it up..I remove them altogether at a system level.... a router firewall does the rest.If you don't use Internet Explorer or that other crap outlook, you have already dismissed 95% of the so-called security issues
again 10 years not caring where i browse either and I love html mail.....actually the approach was based on quite an in depth study of the causes of computer security breaches...real ones rather than hypothetical.
No flash... was testing a system and most of the time there was no flash plugin... it was rather pleasant .. I normally use flashblock but of course it has to respond to the page code so the site thinks it there. Without the plugin a pile of TV video sites simply give me the mp4/flv as a download. A bit like you tube does if it thinks you are on android.
So flashless browsing...worth a try (you tube downloaders will still work)..you can always disable in the addons dialog rather than actually remove it.
Also if flash was to be abused it would be via those annoying adverts rather than the main content. My reason for blocking those is simply to avoid 100% cpu on pages but you never know.
Be in charge of the machine not subject to it...
mike
Such an attitude from a new poster. Maybe you should re-think your approach to how you engage with other posters on this forum. After quite a few years of browsing and using the forum I can honestly say that I have found almost all users very helpful, friendly and respectful towards other posters. Even the posters that really know their stuff (and know much more than you and me) will go out of their way to help you without having some sort of superiority complex. Something you could learn.someSven wrote:
> You are making a massive mistake by thinking that slightly older software renders ones system insecure.
You can't judge that, cause your lack of basic security knowledge. It makes no sense to discuss this with you any further. You have to explain why known security problems in software, with existing exploits are no problem at all to the ingenious Puppy system.
> Then, please inform us!
Read. Think. Write. I think my English is not so bad, my sentences about that are clear and I had to repeat it often enough.
> I've been using Puppy 412 every day without any harm ever since the original release.
We are using this nuclear reactor without any knowledge how it works, without any repairs, we didn't read anything about it, and we are proud to be so much cleverer than all those guys who are always scared about things which could go wrong. And we have such balls, yea BALLS.
Bye. If Jonny needs help I will answer, I'll try to ignore anyone else.
You deserve worse answers than you got from me, and I needed to hold myself back not to use problematic terms on you. I just helped someone to install the newest flash. You argued against informing users about how to do this, and against informing users against security risks at all. Not installing security updates are an security risk, it's not relevant what you believe about that. You also ignored my arguments and repeated misleading arguments again and again. I have every right to be angry about such actions.Such an attitude from a new poster. Maybe you should re-think your approach to how you engage with other posters on this forum.
I even accepted that users would use old versions of software, but I insist on their right to be informed about using software without security updates for problems with existing exploits available in the net.
The 'nothing happend yet'-mentality has been addressed correctly in my last posting.
Looks like the original poster has left.
Internet security is littered with paranoia and general miss-information fueled by organisations that profit from such chaos...keeping people in panic and ignorance pays big bucks.... its worth finding out some real facts....
mike
No its the worst possible medium.... one big reason is that flash uses RBG video output and video players normally use YUV and similar which is more efficient and can use card acceleration. For flash the system has to perform a software conversion which is slow... the only acceleration is using the 3d subsystem to speed up data transfers but that does not help whatsoever with the format conversion and display bottlenecks....it just makes full screen no worse than windowed....and on linux ONLY for certain video cards too. Throw in the inefficient handling of the flash api on linux browsers and its a cpu hogging behemoth. Flash was meant for 2d vector graphic animations NOT video playback...a very poor choice of software.Is Flash best for viewing multimedia with 1.2 GHz cpu?
Internet security is littered with paranoia and general miss-information fueled by organisations that profit from such chaos...keeping people in panic and ignorance pays big bucks.... its worth finding out some real facts....
mike
Don't turn around my words. I proposed another flash player because of the user's old machine specifications. Of course you can run the latest software if your machine can handle it. Don't know what you are trying to say with "using problematic terms on you'. You are a problem with your crappy attitude.someSven wrote:You deserve worse answers than you got from me, and I needed to hold myself back not to use problematic terms on you. I just helped someone to install the newest flash. You argued against informing users about how to do this, and against informing users against security risks at all. Not installing security updates are an security risk, it's not relevant what you believe about that. You also ignored my arguments and repeated misleading arguments again and again. I have every right to be angry about such actions.Such an attitude from a new poster. Maybe you should re-think your approach to how you engage with other posters on this forum.
I even accepted that users would use old versions of software, but I insist on their right to be informed about using software without security updates for problems with existing exploits available in the net.
The 'nothing happend yet'-mentality has been addressed correctly in my last posting.
And I wrote he may try the newest version, trying gnash, or not use flash at all if it's not running well on his machine, he may also follow your idea but this is not secure.I proposed another flash player because of the user's old machine specifications. Of course you can run the latest software if your machine can handle it.
I wrote users should be informed about how to update (or turn Flash off), while you tried to tell him installing security updates is all some kind of paranoia and one can use old software without any risk.
Using words for which I would have been banned.Don't know what you are trying to say with "using problematic terms on you'.
Your attitude is the only problem here. Your were criticising and joking about people which are not following your reckless behavior on security, ignoring completely that security updates are not there just for fun and having updated software is one of the most important and most basic security measures.You are a problem with your crappy attitude.
btw: There has been a new update, also for Linux.
Always wants the last say, hey? Let me guess, you have had problems with this crappy attitude of yours when using other forums and elsewhere in life too. As you can see, I have been here on this forum since 2011, let's see how long you last and if you can become a valuable contributor in future.someSven wrote:And I wrote he may try the newest version, trying gnash, or not use flash at all if it's not running well on his machine, he may also follow your idea but this is not secure.I proposed another flash player because of the user's old machine specifications. Of course you can run the latest software if your machine can handle it.
I wrote users should be informed about how to update (or turn Flash off), while you tried to tell him installing security updates is all some kind of paranoia and one can use old software without any risk.
Using words for which I would have been banned.Don't know what you are trying to say with "using problematic terms on you'.
Your attitude is the only problem here. Your were criticising and joking about people which are not following your reckless behavior on security, ignoring completely that security updates are not there just for fun and having updated software is one of the most important and most basic security measures.You are a problem with your crappy attitude.
btw: There has been a new update, also for Linux.
sorry but on windows removing Internet explorer, outlook express, msn messenger (??!!) and windows media player 7+ is by far the biggest improvement to security you can make....by several magnitudes over ANY 'security update' from such as flash. Throw in a router firewall as samba and rpc on windows are left wide open and tada...years of virus free windows without ANY 3rd party security software.having updated software is one of the most important and most basic security measures.
I/we are telling you this for your benefit.... there are good sound technical reasons this works... the info is out there...start with 'active x' . Oh by the way I never had a problem through windows updates but its potentially just as unsafe so I remove it too. I am not mud slinging just trying to advise.
Of course us linux slobs don't have any of these softwares or mechanisms so life is inherently much much safer.... anything else is just fluffing the pillows.
mike
Well seems you did not like what you heard and prefer to believe that the internet is a dangerous place and everything is really insecure. The reality does not quite fit this picture as otherwise why would anyone bother with say linux or firefox if the situation is that hopeless... just stick to windows and internet explorer as in some ways that is simpler.
mike
mike