I'm currently looking for a 13'' computer (or a small 14''), I'd love to support Framework as they are exactly what I'm looking to support... But, they still don't ship to my country and I don't want to spend so much for a laptop (and I don't need very modern features on a personal machine).

This means I'll end up buying a used ThinkPad to serve my needs for the next 4/5 years. Though, If they did ship to my country I would be spamming my employee everyday to buy them.

"Ghost Of Perdition" enters the room ..

Now that's the funniest utopian phrase

You tell me.

The main (aka more famous) distributions are far from being a mess and the fact that they trash each other, (if they really do aside from one person or another) means nothing to a transition to Linux. You're creating FUD for someone who wants to make the transition by creating an artificial problem based on who knows what.

I'm almost expecting you to tell me you've tried Linux in the 90's or 2000's and how messy it was ...

That's not Linux, it's just you making excuses.

Haha no drugs in that article at least. I can't find it but I think it was either for diabetes or asthma

It depends on your needs. I have minis that cost <100$ and have others that cost 500$. My cheapest mini has currently 3TB of backups of my personal things, so it serves my needs very cheaply. I don't need a GPU so it keeps the costs down.

I read somewhere that someone was using anonymous currencies to buy life saving medicine from "non traditional" markets because they were much much cheaper. Let me see if I find the article

This is per capita for sure

They are power and space efficient, and usually very quiet. That's fascinating enough.

Typical hackers

Screw that, go check the original definition of hacker. Those who do bad business with computers are "black hats" not "typical hackers"

What I mean is better licenses that make sure you get paid if companies profit from it, and harsher penalties for those that get caught infringing the license

That's why Foss will always be better, and we need to support these developers. They also need to protect their software better from capitalist ghouls that will profit from it for free

And the apple fanboys appear. Let's blame the consumer for what is a design flaw ...

It was a bit tongue in cheek I know. I have a very similar setup, but why being judgemental with such a simple thing? It seems like a waste of time and energy. You need those to tweak the setup instead.

You're so kewl

You keep coming up with insults or inflamatory comments instead of answering the points, when I'm just trying to have a discussion of ideas. I don't understand why I am being unhinged when I even agreed with you partially.

I'm not a Rust programmer, I just play occasionally with it on pet projects. The languages I'm most experienced in are C++ and then C, I have no "horse in the race" of Rust, and I don't see c/c++ going away anytime soon, I just see what the language improves on them

You are not very consistent, first you imply that not "being a shitty programmer" is the fix for security issues in C. And then you say that any programmer can and will make mistakes...

Again you refuse to see my argument: yes I agree that viewing Rust, or any other language, as being a panaceia is wrong and following the hype. But Rust is provably better than C w.r.t to memory safety issues because it, provably, finds memory issues during compile time. I'm not discussing other types of security issues.

Yes C needs all that "freedom" with memory due to its low level use cases, but Rust is proving that it can also cover those cases (with the unsafe keyword) and cover the opposite cases where you want more strict memory usage and safety, so much so that you see now operating systems and firmware being developed in it. I won't argue and compare performance as I don't know enough.

You could argue that Rust by providing the "unsafe", keyword can and will have memory issues, but IMO the fact that you need to enclose unsafe operations in a scope allows for more focused reviewing and auditing

Ahah, I'm pretty sure many of the programmers on Linux et al, that worked on code with CVEs are still better programmers than you will ever be. The fact is that a lot of projects are just complex and they are hard to reason about on languages like C.

But I guess you know that. Keep trolling.

You're just partially correct.

With Rust you get compile time guarantees that your code doesn't have a specific class of vulnerabilities. Can you do that with C?