advertisement

Weblog:   Is Open Source Secure?
Subject:   Biased article from O'reilly
Date:   2004-02-16 06:48:35
From:   musnat
I am sorry but I was hoping that divx editor was wrong. I have seen nothing but an answer which confirms the divx editor's arguments. First of all, the author tries to discredit the other person through accusations, which hint us that the author really got angry in a reasonable argument and just couldn't hold himself.


The divx editor proposes his arguments in a very sensible language, whereas the o'reilly author starts with bashing people and ends with bashing people. Between these two instead of addressing the arguments, he simply talks about other stuff and make bunch of claims.


Too sad people who support open source become too much dogmatic about these issues.

Main Topics Oldest First

Showing messages 1 through 1 of 1.

  • Biased article from O'reilly
    2004-02-16 11:57:12  dave128 [Reply | View]

    From you, I have seen nothing but an answer which shows that you have not read the article. Divx? It's DevX. Discredits through accusations? Any hint of that is only at the end of the article.

    Stone's argument does not rely on accusations. He touts the security of Open Source software through its openness, and questions the safety of any software which relies on security through obscurity.

    He also points out that some of the DevX Editor's arguments are equally applicable to closed-source software.

    It might be a good idea for you to read an article twice before replying.
Showing messages 1 through 1 of 1.