From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

Check out the following Veritasium video about GNU/Linux
which features the great Dr. Richard M. Stallman:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoag03mSuXQ>

Ostensibly, its about the XV backdoor but it includes
a lot of background material.

Stallman is fantastic!

Note how the authors refer to GNU/Linux as "world’s most
important operating system."
--
No Gentoo? Man, you sick. Sick in the head.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

In comp.os.linux.misc Distro Lackey <dl@lackey.com> wrote:

Check out the following Veritasium video about GNU/Linux
which features the great Dr. Richard M. Stallman:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoag03mSuXQ>

Ostensibly, its about the XV backdoor but it includes
a lot of background material.

I'm not watching the video, but from the YouTube thumbnail I gather
this means the XZ Utils backdoor, not a backdoor in the XV image
viewer.
--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 13 Apr 2026 08:17:31 +1000, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:

I'm not watching the video,

What will you do then?

but from the YouTube thumbnail I gather
this means the XZ Utils backdoor, not a backdoor in the XV image
viewer.

Whoa! If you actually can associate an ancient program with
a simple "typo" then you must be older than the hills.

Maybe your nurse will not allow you to view the video?

--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-04-12, Distro Lackey wrote:

On 13 Apr 2026 08:17:31 +1000, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:

I'm not watching the video,

What will you do then?

I'll hazard a guess Kev will... not watch the video?

Might be a somewhat frequent choice with Youtube, even where it works.

but from the YouTube thumbnail I gather
this means the XZ Utils backdoor, not a backdoor in the XV image
viewer.

Whoa! If you actually can associate an ancient program with
a simple "typo" then you must be older than the hills.

Maybe your nurse will not allow you to view the video?

This coming from somebody mentioning GNU and Linux in the subject
("GNU/Linux Video Featuring Stallman"):

- «The GNU Project [...] is a free software, mass collaboration project
announced by Richard Stallman on September 27, 1983.» [1]

- «On 17 September 1991, Torvalds prepared version 0.01 of Linux and put
on the "ftp.funet.fi"[...]» «On 5 October 1991, Torvalds announced the
first "official" version of Linux, version 0.02.» [2]

- «xv is Copyright 1989, 1994 by John Bradley» [3]

[1] https://enwp.org/GNU_project
[2] https://enwp.org/Linux_kernel
[3] https://xv.trilon.com/dist/docs/xvdocs.pdf


So xv is *newer* than GNU and only one-two years older than
Linux. What's your point here, you didn't even bother checking how old
the programs were before using age as an insult?
--
Nuno Silva
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Mon, 13 Apr 2026 08:59:53 +0100
Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:

I'll hazard a guess Kev will... not watch the video?

Might be a somewhat frequent choice with Youtube, even where it works.

Frankly, I cannot *stand* the recent (here meaning, um, the 2010s) mania
for the video-essay format; I've yet to see an example of the form that
took less time or offered more information than reading a written one.
I'd hoped that after the Great Pivot-To-Video Scam was revealed people
would've stopped bothering, but apparently that was too much to hope
for in this clownshow timeline I seem to have gotten trapped in.

Plus, whatever else you want to say about him, I cannot fathom wanting
to *listen* to Stallman. He's probably better at speaking than he is at singing, but the man was *not* blessed with a golden throat :/

--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

In comp.os.linux.misc John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 13 Apr 2026 08:59:53 +0100
Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:

I'll hazard a guess Kev will... not watch the video?

Might be a somewhat frequent choice with Youtube, even where it works.

Frankly, I cannot *stand* the recent (here meaning, um, the 2010s) mania
for the video-essay format; I've yet to see an example of the form that
took less time or offered more information than reading a written one.
I'd hoped that after the Great Pivot-To-Video Scam was revealed people would've stopped bothering, but apparently that was too much to hope
for in this clownshow timeline I seem to have gotten trapped in.

What you are witnessing is that there is a huge majority of "the
general public" that /do/ seem to much prefer passively watching video
to actually reading anything. This is the same group that, twenty plus
years ago, someone would have been complaining that they passively sit
in front of the TV all day watching whatever happens to be broadcasting
at the moment. The difference now is they watch yt/tiktok/etc. videos
online instead of sitting in front of a TV, and an algorithm optimized
to keep them watching decides what they watch instead of a broadcast
station program manager (or cable tv channel equivalent) deciding
what's on the schedule for them to watch.

For this demographic, the very act of "reading" feels hard to them, and
they actively try to avoid it at all costs.


As far as your "offered more" angle, the few instances where I've found
a video format to offer more is for instances where some visual imagary
is useful to convey the message (i.e., how to disassemble an X without breaking it). And even then, proper use of photos within a text will
convey the same information more quickly than waiting through a video
to get to the spot where such information is (often accidentally)
included. But such proper use of embedded images again requires
forthought on the part of the author of the written item, and an
ability to read what they write from the view point of someone not as
expert at "the topic" as they to recognize when such imagery is useful,
and a lot of writers also lack that skill as well.


--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc



On 4/13/26 09:22, Rich wrote:

In comp.os.linux.misc John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 13 Apr 2026 08:59:53 +0100
Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:

I'll hazard a guess Kev will... not watch the video?

Might be a somewhat frequent choice with Youtube, even where it works.

Frankly, I cannot *stand* the recent (here meaning, um, the 2010s) mania
for the video-essay format; I've yet to see an example of the form that
took less time or offered more information than reading a written one.
I'd hoped that after the Great Pivot-To-Video Scam was revealed people
would've stopped bothering, but apparently that was too much to hope
for in this clownshow timeline I seem to have gotten trapped in.

What you are witnessing is that there is a huge majority of "the
general public" that /do/ seem to much prefer passively watching video
to actually reading anything. This is the same group that, twenty plus
years ago, someone would have been complaining that they passively sit
in front of the TV all day watching whatever happens to be broadcasting
at the moment. The difference now is they watch yt/tiktok/etc. videos online instead of sitting in front of a TV, and an algorithm optimized
to keep them watching decides what they watch instead of a broadcast
station program manager (or cable tv channel equivalent) deciding
what's on the schedule for them to watch.

For this demographic, the very act of "reading" feels hard to them, and
they actively try to avoid it at all costs.

As far as your "offered more" angle, the few instances where I've found
a video format to offer more is for instances where some visual imagary
is useful to convey the message (i.e., how to disassemble an X without breaking it). And even then, proper use of photos within a text will
convey the same information more quickly than waiting through a video
to get to the spot where such information is (often accidentally)
included. But such proper use of embedded images again requires
forthought on the part of the author of the written item, and an
ability to read what they write from the view point of someone not as
expert at "the topic" as they to recognize when such imagery is useful,
and a lot of writers also lack that skill as well.

These folks are functionally illiterate. They know how to read but are unable to connect that with reality so they need pictures IMO.

bliss

--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Mon, 13 Apr 2026 08:59:53 +0100, Nuno Silva wrote:

On 2026-04-12, Distro Lackey wrote:

On 13 Apr 2026 08:17:31 +1000, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:

I'm not watching the video,

What will you do then?

I'll hazard a guess Kev will... not watch the video?

Might be a somewhat frequent choice with Youtube, even where it works.

In the amount of time that was required to report his resistance he
could have witnessed the entire video. Obviously, he believed that
the world would be very interested in his refusal. Of course, this
was a laughable attempt.

My reason for providing the link is that Veritasium has 20.6 MILLION subscribers and this particular video, although only 1 month old,
has already garnered 25,002 comments.

For Veritasium to invest in a production involving GNU/Linux thereby
becomes a rather significant event that all GNU/Linux aficionados
should recognize.

Admittedly, the video is garbage. A sophisticated attack like the
XZ backdoor cannot be expounded in such a video intended for a general audience. But the introduction is very interesting in that it has
Dr. Stallman, in his own words, describe the history of GNU and
consequently of GNU/Linux. For this reason alone the video is worth
a few minutes of anyone's time.

But here is a much better description:

<http://research.swtch.com/xz-timeline>

Would anyone now care to report their refusal to peruse this material?

but from the YouTube thumbnail I gather
this means the XZ Utils backdoor, not a backdoor in the XV image
viewer.

Whoa! If you actually can associate an ancient program with
a simple "typo" then you must be older than the hills.

Maybe your nurse will not allow you to view the video?

This coming from somebody mentioning GNU and Linux in the subject
("GNU/Linux Video Featuring Stallman"):

- «The GNU Project [...] is a free software, mass collaboration project
announced by Richard Stallman on September 27, 1983.» [1]

- «On 17 September 1991, Torvalds prepared version 0.01 of Linux and put
on the "ftp.funet.fi"[...]» «On 5 October 1991, Torvalds announced the
first "official" version of Linux, version 0.02.» [2]

- «xv is Copyright 1989, 1994 by John Bradley» [3]

[1] https://enwp.org/GNU_project
[2] https://enwp.org/Linux_kernel
[3] https://xv.trilon.com/dist/docs/xvdocs.pdf

So xv is *newer* than GNU and only one-two years older than
Linux. What's your point here, you didn't even bother checking how old
the programs were before using age as an insult?

--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

In comp.os.linux.misc Distro Lackey <dl@lackey.com> wrote:

On Mon, 13 Apr 2026 08:59:53 +0100, Nuno Silva wrote:

On 2026-04-12, Distro Lackey wrote:

On 13 Apr 2026 08:17:31 +1000, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:

I'm not watching the video,

What will you do then?

I'll hazard a guess Kev will... not watch the video?

Might be a somewhat frequent choice with Youtube, even where it works.

In the amount of time that was required to report his resistance he
could have witnessed the entire video.

53 minutes? How slow do you think I type?

Obviously, he believed that the world would be very interested
in his refusal.

First I followed the link in Dillo which just got me the title,
which didn't mention XZ Utils. Then I downloaded the description,
which didn't mention XZ Utils. Then I downloaded the preview
image, which at first looked useless too until I noticed the
penguin's eyes were artfully styled as "X Z". I thought I'd save
others the trouble.

People who are happy to load YouTube in a browser with Javascript
support and don't have a bandwidth-limited internet connection
won't care. Nor do I care about a rehash of the XZ Utils backdoor
or some random clip of Stallman. If someone was talking about a
vulnerability in XV I would be interested though, and might have
tried to find a textual account of the event elsewhere.

My reason for providing the link is that Veritasium has 20.6 MILLION subscribers and this particular video, although only 1 month old,
has already garnered 25,002 comments.

I don't take that in its favour. The absolute rubbish that appeals
to the masses on YouTube depresses me greatly. I just stick to a
handful of channels (not about software, that's better documented
in text) that are updated a few times a year, and download new
videos from those in batches when I have access to a free and
reliable internet connection.
--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

[This is a multipart message not in MIME format. If you want to see the video/mpeg part, cat /dev/zero. The text/plain part follows:]

On 2026-04-13, Bobbie Sellers wrote:

On 4/13/26 09:22, Rich wrote:

In comp.os.linux.misc John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 13 Apr 2026 08:59:53 +0100
Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:

I'll hazard a guess Kev will... not watch the video?

Might be a somewhat frequent choice with Youtube, even where it works.

Frankly, I cannot *stand* the recent (here meaning, um, the 2010s) mania >>> for the video-essay format; I've yet to see an example of the form that
took less time or offered more information than reading a written one.
I'd hoped that after the Great Pivot-To-Video Scam was revealed people
would've stopped bothering, but apparently that was too much to hope
for in this clownshow timeline I seem to have gotten trapped in.

What you are witnessing is that there is a huge majority of "the
general public" that /do/ seem to much prefer passively watching video
to actually reading anything. This is the same group that, twenty plus
years ago, someone would have been complaining that they passively sit
in front of the TV all day watching whatever happens to be broadcasting
at the moment. The difference now is they watch yt/tiktok/etc. videos
online instead of sitting in front of a TV, and an algorithm optimized
to keep them watching decides what they watch instead of a broadcast
station program manager (or cable tv channel equivalent) deciding
what's on the schedule for them to watch.

For this demographic, the very act of "reading" feels hard to them, and
they actively try to avoid it at all costs.


As far as your "offered more" angle, the few instances where I've found
a video format to offer more is for instances where some visual imagary
is useful to convey the message (i.e., how to disassemble an X without
breaking it). And even then, proper use of photos within a text will
convey the same information more quickly than waiting through a video
to get to the spot where such information is (often accidentally)
included. But such proper use of embedded images again requires
forthought on the part of the author of the written item, and an
ability to read what they write from the view point of someone not as
expert at "the topic" as they to recognize when such imagery is useful,
and a lot of writers also lack that skill as well.

These folks are functionally illiterate. They know how to read but are unable to connect that with reality so they need pictures IMO.

And then there are all of us who can read and write and a subset thereof
who *prefers* to do it that way.

It boils down to the "but IRC doesn't have images/videos/..." (no matter
that you can just enter URLs and if you really feel so inclined have a
client inline the pointed content automatically) - which often misses
the point that it's a reason why some of its users do prefer IRC over
other media (besides IRC being lean and decentralized).

Youtube could not be the absolute mess it is nowadays (and it has become
a mess, with heavy advertising and also less browser compatibility and
possibly also "dark patterns"), there'd still remain the question of it
being video+audio, as opposed to text or text with inline images or "rich text". And that's for those to whom it doesn't pose an accessibility
problem. And for those who have sufficiently capable hardware (IIRC some
newer codecs introduced for further squeezing lossy compression are more demanding processing-wise).
--
Nuno Silva
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

Le 13-04-2026, Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> a écrit :

In comp.os.linux.misc Distro Lackey <dl@lackey.com> wrote:

do you think

He. Doesn't. Think.
--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2