← Back to context

Comment by zvmaz

18 hours ago

All I see is rudeness, insults, and arrogance sparkled with inklings of technical arguments. Worthless.

17 comments

zvmaz

Reply
iugtmkbdfil834  17 hours ago

But, and this is the important part, is he wrong?

  • matherial  16 hours ago

    Being right is not the most important part. If you're right but don't convince anyone, you've made no difference.

    Theo was right that virtualization is a comparatively shoddy security boundary. At the same time, it's flexible and capable in ways that now define the shape of modern IT.

    Could we have replicated that by other means? If yes, then it's on Theo and other knee-jerk critics that they never proposed a better approach and settled for insulting people. If not, then maybe virtualization was a necessary evil. Or maybe everyone else is an irredeemable idiot, but again - if we reach that conclusion, is the world better off?

    • sdcfgy  16 hours ago

      Maybe if we didn't virtualize everything at machine level we'd have portable software that runs on the original virtualization method: processes.

      Stares at Go as about the only step in that direction...

    • iugtmkbdfil834  11 hours ago

      I did not claim it was most important, but he clearly called out issues that haunt us still, because we did not fix the basic initial issues ( and we are actively making it worse now with AI slop -- we because, while I use llms, I am not arrogant enough to offer my contributions to emulation, virtualization and other foundational stuff ). The point is that he called it and all of us should do some soul searching as to why his words were ignored. Because if he was ignored because 'he was mean about it', the we are kinda screwed long, because anyone with a brain that can comprehend the issue, will likely have little patience for anyone, who can't see it or won't want see to see it for some contrived semi-social reason.

  • zvmaz  17 hours ago

    I don't really know as the argument is mainly about how stupid people are... The technical argument is one paragraph ended with an insult, not much to make an educated and civilized opinion.

    • iugtmkbdfil834  11 hours ago

      << You are absolutely deluded, if not stupid, if you think that a worldwide collection of software engineers who can't write operating systems or applications without security holes, can then turn around and suddenly write virtualization layers without security holes.

      Allow me to start by saying that you are wrong about 'mainly about'. The argument starts with an insult, but insult is minimal and it moves directly into the technical details. But, note that how much you are wrong about the paragraph, because what you want to focus is the insult. You are so wrong about it you effectively invert the proportions of presence of technical data to insult..

  • negura  7 hours ago

    it's not right nor wrong, it's irrelevant. this exploit has nothing to do with the Xen hypervisor which underlies the virtualization in QubesOS