Jens Finkhäuser ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ @jens@social.finkhaeuser.de

@stephaniewalter ... for prevention.

And that can be seen in software security. The best responses to a flaw found tend to disclose things relatively fast, with great transparency. The period of less disclosure tends to be best limited to between discovery and being able to provide a fix.

I mean, there are tons of good practical reasons not to open source something. This just isn't one borne by the evidence.

@stephaniewalter I mean, this guy argues for shutting as much down as possible when there is no threat mentioned.

It reads as if he's advocating for keeping the shutters closed at all times on the off chance that someone shoots an airgun, for which there is no evidence. And if there was, it'd be a disproportionate response.

I get that a lot, not just with code. I've even done that. It's not weird.

It just hinges on fear.

Fear is good for immediate survival, but not so much...

@stephaniewalter ... or install cameras? They wouldn't have helped, there are a lot of hiding places in the area.

Or do you speak to your neighbors and the police?

So, do you take an isolationist position, or one of letting more assumed good parties in in order to solve the problem together?

Security - which is admittedly only one view point here - tends to find better results in the second approach, and take the first only if there is an immediate threat.

Which there isn't.

@stephaniewalter Of course.

Look, I'm not trying to convince you of anything, so feel entirely free to not follow this any longer, ok? I'm doing this more not to be misunderstood than anything else.

A single person can do a lot of harm, it's true. Some weeks ago, someone around here was using an air gun to shoot holes into the neighbor's window. Random vandalism, nothing targeted.

But the question is, if this happened, do you keep all your shutters closed from then on? ...

@stephaniewalter Templates are a bit different, but then they tend not to have security issues (he says, knowing full well that they can).

Security by obscurity is generally a bad approach. But to turn your question around and going back to his rationale: would there actually be anyone trying to find flaws for malicious purposes? If not, what's the risk?

Generally, good people outnumber bad.

That's why I wrote about fear based decision making, and rationale rather than reason.

@ajroach42 @kelbot In fairness, it's largely to do with having had this mutt config for about 20 years now, with occasional updates and tweaks. Why change what works?

And I don't really *want* images in mutt. *Especially* not those fetched from some web server when I read an email.

@ajroach42 Bandcamp. #metalmittwoch . A bunch of other options, but those are not as reliable.

@ajroach42 @kelbot I still use lynx. It's good in mutt for piping HTML emails through, and not having to worry about that rubbish 😁 #OldManRant

@Nikolai_Kingsley House rules!

@thegibson now is good. I like now.

@necrosis es geht um den Online-Speicher.

@dajbelshaw eek, all the best!

@tofuwabohu @WillHelm eigentlich ist ein Inputent einer, der Inpüter gibt.

@stephaniewalter I have no problem with him doing whatever he wants. Even if he just wanted to play around with it, I'd support him doing so.

It's just the rationale that reads painfully.

@Nikolai_Kingsley wwbd, what would Batman do. Or are common abbreviations not allowed? 🤣

@Nikolai_Kingsley ovo, as a prefix