Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #675436

Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security

From	D <nospam@example.net>
Newsgroups	comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.os.linux.misc
Subject	Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security
Date	2024-10-27 22:32 +0100
Organization	i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID	<7ab4b4d4-1990-98d1-3f6f-0f091024aed9@example.net> (permalink)
References	(9 earlier) <vfhbt5$3d372$2@dont-email.me> <vfhkm0$3i0mb$1@dont-email.me> <lo3dvqFo19fU2@mid.individual.net> <x7aTO.203217$WtV9.131985@fx10.iad> <vfl3nr$bic6$6@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

On Sun, 27 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 26/10/2024 19:01, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> On 2024-10-26, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sat, 26 Oct 2024 02:37:52 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Sat, 26 Oct 2024 01:08:05 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Welcome to the problems of metaphysics
>>>> 
>>>> Next stop: that wonderful fallacy known as “you can’t prove a negative”
>>>> ...
>>> 
>>> About the time Heidegger asked 'Why are there beings at all rather than
>>> nothing?' in 'Introduction to Metaphysics' my head started to hurt. That
>>> was sentence 1, chapter 1. It didn't get better from there on.
>> 
>> This contrasts with your typical math text book, which starts out with
>> a few pages of trivial statements before making the jump to the edge
>> of the universe, cued by that magical phrase "It is obvious that..."
>> 
> My nephew is a Native German speaker with a native German father and 
> stepfather. He studied philosophy at an English university.
>
> I asked him whether he read Kant in  the original German. He said no, he 
> found the English translations *easier to understand*.
>
> There is an apocryphal saying that "All the problems of French philosophy 
> would have been solved if they had written them down in German"
>
> Heidegger is unmitigated shit really. I gave up after a chapter or two. 
> Wittgenstein says that the mark of a true philosopher is that he will have 
> thrown a book written by a famous philsopher into the corner, unfinished, 
> more than once
>
> 'Why are there beings at all rather than nothing?' is simply answered:
>
> 'Because if there weren't no one could ask such an unanswerable question'. 
> Even asking 'why' in the context of the universe is a massively 
> anthropocentric statement. 'Why' applies to human beings, not the world . 
> Taoists say it better.
>
> "The Tao is that which exists through itself" (Tao being the sort of essence 
> of being-ness).
>
> Or Wittgenstein "The world is everything that is the case"
>
> Right on chum, I would never have guessed.
>
> Nietzsche is more tongue in cheek and amusing:
>
> “Everything about woman is a riddle, and everything about woman has one 
> solution: it is called pregnancy. "
>
> But philosophers like Hume, Kant and so on have extreme implication for 
> philosophy of science, as they show conclusively that no theory as such can 
> ever be proven to be true.
>
> This shocking fact moves science from a repository of true facts, to a 
> collection of explanations whose sole justifications are they they are 
> mutually consistent and seem to work.
>
> This is important to understand when you are at the bleeding edge of physics.

Are you an instrumentalist, scientific realist or perhaps a constructive 
empiricist?

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2024-10-25 18:10 +0000
  Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-25 19:36 +0000
  Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-25 22:13 +0000
    Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-10-25 15:39 -0700
      Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-25 23:43 +0000
        Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2024-10-28 03:20 +0000
          Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 09:39 +0000
            Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2024-10-28 13:40 +0000
              Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2024-10-28 11:29 -0400
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2024-10-28 18:10 +0000
              Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 22:31 +0000
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-29 00:03 +0000
            Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-28 21:41 +0100
            Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-28 21:20 +0000
          Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-28 11:09 +0100
          Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-29 01:28 +0000
            Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-29 02:33 +0000
              Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-29 03:08 +0000
              Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-10-29 03:47 +0000
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-29 04:52 +0000
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-29 05:58 +0000
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-10-29 18:35 +0000
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-29 07:19 +0000
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> - 2024-10-29 13:27 +0000
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-29 20:44 +0000
      Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-26 01:08 +0100
        Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-26 02:37 +0000
          Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2024-10-26 04:06 +0000
            Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2024-10-26 08:34 -0400
          Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-26 05:45 +0000
            Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-26 05:51 +0000
              Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-10-26 03:01 -0400
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-26 11:01 +0100
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-26 12:21 +0200
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-10-27 00:28 -0400
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-10-27 00:25 -0400
            Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2024-10-26 05:56 +0000
              Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-26 06:49 +0000
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2024-10-26 08:43 -0400
              Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-26 23:26 +0000
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-27 01:56 +0000
            Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-10-26 18:01 +0000
              Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-26 23:27 +0000
              Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-27 01:44 +0000
              Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-27 10:13 +0000
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-10-27 17:11 +0000
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-27 21:16 +0000
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-27 22:32 +0100
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 09:06 +0000
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-28 11:13 +0100
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-28 21:18 +0000
            As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . "Relf"  <Usenet@Jeff-Relf.Me> - 2024-10-26 13:25 -0700
              Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-10-27 02:06 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-27 02:21 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-10-27 01:35 -0400
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-27 11:00 +0100
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-27 10:28 +0000
                The "big bang" was fueled by "residual eXergy" (potential entropy). "Relf"  <Usenet@Jeff-Relf.Me> - 2024-10-27 04:18 -0700
                Re: The "big bang" was fueled by "residual eXergy" (potential entropy). The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-27 11:32 +0000
                We're in the middle, always. "Relf"  <Usenet@Jeff-Relf.Me> - 2024-10-27 06:23 -0700
                Re: We're in the middle, always. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-27 13:30 +0000
                Who you are, where you are, when you are. "Relf"  <Usenet@Jeff-Relf.Me> - 2024-10-27 07:07 -0700
                Re: Who you are, where you are, when you are. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-27 14:51 +0000
                Re: We're in the middle, always. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-27 17:25 +0000
                Re: The "big bang" was fueled by "residual eXergy" (potential entropy). rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-27 17:22 +0000
                Re: The "big bang" was fueled by "residual eXergy" (potential entropy). Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-27 21:21 +0000
                Re: The "big bang" was fueled by "residual eXergy" (potential entropy). Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-27 21:19 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-27 22:34 +0100
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-10-28 00:48 -0400
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 09:32 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-28 11:10 +0100
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-10-28 17:35 -0400
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 22:37 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-29 02:27 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-29 11:32 +0100
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-29 16:19 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-29 20:53 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-30 01:16 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 09:12 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-28 11:22 +0100
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 10:32 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-28 21:47 +0100
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-28 21:31 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-10-28 16:22 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-27 10:25 +0000
              Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-27 10:25 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-27 17:28 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-10-28 00:37 -0400
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 09:41 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-10-28 19:12 -0400
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-29 07:17 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-10-28 12:47 -0400
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-10-28 13:15 -0400
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-10-28 13:33 -0400
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-10-28 13:55 -0400
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-29 00:24 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-29 00:23 +0000
                Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-27 20:54 +0000
                Whether it's enough or not depends on what kind of a being you might be. "Relf"  <Usenet@Jeff-Relf.Me> - 2024-10-29 06:56 -0700
            Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2024-10-27 20:46 -0500
              Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-10-27 22:28 -0400
              Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 09:33 +0000
              Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-10-28 09:48 -0400
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-10-28 12:32 -0400
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-28 21:33 +0000
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-29 01:45 +0000
                Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-10-28 21:52 -0400

csiph-web