really good job and congrats
have a grammar guru go over your site
to touch up on the English and i'd maybe
not tell everyone your numbers for 'income'
so much, talk about you and your journey to
get where you are at today, nothing wrong stating
income for shareholders etc but you are not on the
stock market and you don't need to 'sell your success'
nobody cares how much money you make or don't make,
especially if they don't have a clue as to who you
are and the why of it. my two cents ;)
you have heard this a million times and know what it means but here it is again: LIFE IS SHORT and it can be shorter than you think it will be. your time is just that, your time. so go do what you want to do, and if it is wrong well you tried it. that's what really harms folks imho, it's not the paycheck but what you would do for free that matters the most. if someone is happy flipping a burger, not only is that honorable work but to the folks that like burgers, they get their food made by someone who loves flipping burgers. it could be you are 'burned out' per say and who knows, maybe working for yourself or getting into a new field or something as mundane as gardening or doing something 'outside' might be just what the doctor ordered.
gonna take a wild guess at this coz yeah it's a good question, but basically my guess is if there's a security problem the community, depending on the OS or distro, probably puts that out in the open, then the community fixes it. say there is a 'driver problem' with xyz chipset, same deal, enough folks bring attention to it through the community someone with too much coffee in them probably starts fixing it then releases it for review etc. if you look at say some of the builds from Arch Linux User Repository or "AUR" feedback on their site often brings attention to the maintainer, but again it all depends on who all is maintaining xyz MAKEPKG where it pulls from say github, who is behind xyz software say at github. my own opinion on this is well just my own, and yeah as they say 'could be wrong' but one scenario that i think has hurt companies configd like microsoft is the simple fact their business model put them in a bad position to not use the biggest resource they actually had: their customers. but remember that company came up in a time where the average joe on the street wasn't a geek, didn't have the world wide web in his/her pocket. today, that's not the case, the kid down the street might find a 'hole' or 'problem' with say linux and report it to whoever runs the distro he or she was goofing with. the other thing is it's almost impossible to ask any one single company, a small group of programmers hired by xyz company to find stuff wrong with software that goes around the world. what i'm getting at is for example the way you may look at, use, or implement your distro even if we both were on the same distro could be completely different than the way i use it. the other problem is again the business model, when you find a problem with linux well no stock prices go down, meaning a 'company' doesn't lose money, if anything it adds value to the release of the software. i'm not a guru and one of the reasons i love linux is because well, i'm not a guru. if i have a problem or fix something till i break it, either google, irc or any number of the forums online, social media, i got a 'tech' usually a message away. all the help i've had over the years with linux, even if i won the lottery no way i'd be able to pay everyone back with all the help they gave to me for free. i'm not anti microsoft or anti proprietary software or even anti make money but yeah at times sometimes the business models need changed for a company so their products can keep up with their customers. windows 98 second edition and windows 2000 plus windows 7 was some good software, lots of talented folks at microsoft.
the more i think about it the more i notice that a lot of 'security' is actually used to verify or 'add value' to the data that gets mined
meaning 'verified' traffic holds more value than non verified traffic so that might explain a reason why security protocols on routers
and other common devices are not as secure as they could be. you could note that this is also a form of 'security against you' meaning
a 'proof' for a court.
i don't know what the answer is to this simply because of all the variables i consider, especially the emergence of drones. how will this
be secured to a degree that few can interfere with package deliveries, the abuse of surveillance and what space around a property is actually
protected. as example you can drive by in a vehicle collect AP information and the average geek can obtain access so it will be with drones.
if you really want to get interesting, think about the things drones can do, such as compromise crime scenes with planted evidence.
datamining or collecting metadata is a big business which may soon require governments world wide to protect and treat their citizen's data in a manner like a utility such as water and electric.
the consequences of large scale data collecting are not yet understood but we have witnessed the real world impacts of cyberwarfare. most citizens world wide do not comprehend the amount of
data they share nor the amount of effort brought forth by the telecommunication industry, silicon valley and government.
with rare exception no individual has increased their security by giving leverage to another individual or entity.
https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/dimwhn/how_to_detect...