>>107212862
Respond in community notes

since when is killing people the same as software bugs lol

>>107212862
Why are both people on Twitter and developers of open source projects always looking to start useless petty fights about literally nothing with each other? What is it that this seems to be the nature of both of these demographics of people?

>>107212973
>amerimutt zoomers don't know about Therac-25
dios mio

>>107212997
Because Twitter is specifically designed to get people into dumb slap fights to drive up site engagement.

Just don't use this crap. I never had a twitter account and never missed something actually important.

>>107213029
Please repeat back to me what you believe the premise of my question was.

>>107212862
while yes software can be compromised but an incident has happened like this before where the University of Minnesota knowingly published shit code to the kernel
Just have someone look over at the new additions just in case

>>107213063
Your premise is simply wrong.
It has nothing to do with open source devs and their demographics.
It's a general Twitter phenomena you see everywhere with everyone.

>>107213079
Okay, so since you can't answer a simple request, I'm just going to assume you don't know And that's why you didn't answer my question.

>>107212997
>Why...
Because they use xitter

>What is it...
Using xitter

There. Happy?

>inb4..
nta, shut up faggot

>>107213446
>>107213089

>>107213089
I literally did and laid out your premise or at least the relevant part as I understood it out for you in my response.
It's not my fault you're too dumb to read.

>>107213461
>as I understood it
>you're too dumb

>>107212862
Why are food analogies always so retarded

>>107213476
I'm sorry but what else can I call someone crying about not answering a question when it was clearly answered? It's just dumb.

>>107212862
Racoons can not complain. I'm not a vendor and I'm not 'providing' anything.

File: 1763199380163.jpg (92 KB, 975x1720)

92 KB JPG

>>107213505

>>107212862
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fxtnI407djY

>>107213514
Kek you're such a fucking retard.

>>107212862
>i disagree.

>>107213529
Sorry you're so upset

>>107213514
No one fucking knows what your point is even anymore, you sperg.
Speak English.

>>107213547
>>107213545

>>107212862
By agreeing to his point.
Just because you do something for free doesn't mean you're free from responsibilities.

If anything I expect a hobbyist to deliver higher quality than someone doing it for money.
If you have a true passion you;ll do the best job you can.
But yeah, many people only contribute to open source projects to boost their C.V. and don't give a shit if their "contribution" breaks things or even cause security holes.

>>107213545
I'm not even that same anon. You're just so weird. You ask a retarded vague question nobody understand and then get mad at people attempting to answer it instead of clarifying what you mean.
You're a fucking loser even for 4chan standards

>>107213548
Yeah, that doesn't really clarify anything.
I'm sorry you're mad no one understands your sperg babble but if you want people to understand you, you should actually try to explain yourself instead of seething.

>>107212862
They didn't "give", they just allowed you to take. Try a better analogy.

OP is a faggot not providing source
https://xcancel.com/ortegaalfredo/status/1989109845820366855#m

>>107212997
>start useless petty fights about literally nothing with each other?
Funny how this post kicked off a petty fight about literally nothing ITT.
4chan is no better than Xitter.

>>107213567
>I leave poisoned candy outside on Halloween, never give it to any kids just allowed them to take it.
Freedom of code, not freedom from consequences.

>>107212862
"Poorly written lines of code for a video player is not akin to poisoning and killing people and you're being a silly goose for conflating the two."

>>107213608
The difference is, it's anonymous and in a different thread we're all bonding through our shared love of Shantae's pits or something instead of years of drama.

>>107212862
bad code doesn't kill anyone lol

>>107213651
.....That's the same analogy except thinly veiled, why else would you leave candy out on halloween except as an offering to whoever is walking by? Still it's irrelevant since the license states the lack of warranty so you know what you got.
>>107213717
Not in this case sure, but it absolutely can.

>>107212862
Closed source and proprietary software you pay for also has vulnerabilities, so why aren't they going to jail too?

>>107212997
secret ongoing campaign by google to oust the ffmpeg maintainers and co-opt the project with their own corporate interests. wake up

>>107213729
>the license states the lack of warranty so you know what you got.
People don't expect to get hacked and lose all their data just because they installed a video converter.

Writing poor/broken open source software isn't the same as writing dangerously insecure open source software.
Developers have a responsibility to fix security holes even if they created those security holes for free.

If you're not competent enough to make a video converter without preventing random hackers on the internet from execute arbitrary code on every device your code infected you should find a different hobby.

>>107213756
>Closed source and proprietary software you pay for also has vulnerabilities
Difference is most professional software companies fix vulnerabilities and thank the people who reported them.

Not sperg out and shout:
>NO WARRANTY!!!!!!! YOU GOT WHAT YOU DESERVED BY INSTALLING MY FREE GARBAGE LOLOLOLOL!

>>107213969
I didn't track this ffmpeg thing but I'm pretty sure they thanked the people who found and reported it, and then fixed it. The tweets above is someone being mad that there are vulnerabilities at all.

>>107213930
I don't really care what they are and what you think they're meant to do, because you told them you're responsible for the damages caused by you using their shitty software the moment you started using it.

>>107213995
And yes, if you hound people about the issues in the shit they let you use for free they're gonna get fed up with you eventually.

File: ok-and-meme.gif (68 KB, 640x486)

68 KB GIF

>>107212862
>ffmpeg is not food
>software has bugs, food usually doesn't kill people
>ffmpeg bugs doesn't kill people
>ffmpeg license clearly states no warranty and use at your own risk
>the bugs are not intentionally
want me to go on?

>>107213020
You don't serve untested food in the hospital.

>volunteer developers should be hold responsible
except you agreed it's your own responsibility. read the license ffs

>>107213977
See >>107213573

He's mad "security people" get too much credit while developers get too little.
But really he just can't take any critique.

>>107213063
>>107213089
you're a fucking idiot, just kys retard

>>107213930
>People don't expect to get hacked and lose all their data just because they installed a video converter.
And people don't expect to be hacked because microsoft can fuck up truetype fonts...

Writing poor/broken closed source software isn't the same as writing dangerously insecure closed source software. They have a responsibilty to to fix these holes, but will actually forward lists of them to 'approved' agencies for use in the real world whilst at the same time allowing them access to windows updates in order to infect 2/3 of the machines on the planet to deliver a payload to one airgapped machine in iran.

If you're not competent enough to make an operating system without preventing random hackers executing arbitrary code *via fonts* you should really find a different line of business.

>>107214248
>Sir our terms of service explicitly state the mussles might kill you on page 216

>>107214248
>read the license ffs
Be honest: how often do you read the license when you buy something new?

>License: Bla bla bla super fine print: if this electric bicycle catches fire and burns your house down it's not our problem lol should have bought a competitor instead bla bla bla

Licenses don't even work like that in the vast majority of countries.
In most countries judges look at what can be REASONABLY expected from a product not what the legal worms wrote down on a piece of paper to try to blame the user for anything that might happen.
There are various laws that protect the general public and writing "it's free so the law doesn't apply to me" on page 374 of your "loicense" doesn't magically make you immune to the law.

>>107214377
I think bug-free software is a pretty unreasonable expectation.

>>107214377
You can reasonably except if you download some free shit by a hobbyist, that you do it on your own responsibility.

>>107214352
And did Microsoft fix their fonts or did they cry on the internet about how their hard work isn't appreciated enough and how their license clearly states "no guarantees and no responsibilities"?

>>107213930
people lose all their data because their drive died. and that's a device that is sold and specifically designed not to lose data.
hardware fails, software fails, people fail. not their problem desu
>>107214377
>In most countries judges look at what can be REASONABLY expected
which is why not a single judge has held a free software maintainer responsible for a bug

>>107214389
Nobody asks for bug free software.
All they ask is that they listen to the concerns raised by security experts.

>>107214373
See disney trying to weasle out of killing someone in one o them resteraunts thru allergies, 'cause them kid had had signed up for disney+? Was funny to watch 'em backpeddle on that.

>>107214377
>Be honest: how often do you read the license when you buy something new?
Every. Single. Time.
I'll concede I'm "abnormal". And in more ways than that.

>In most countries judges look at what can be REASONABLY expected from a product
Like... Not allowing hostile entities to use your hardware as an assault platform? Explaining all the prosecutions that happened post stuxnet.

>>107213930
Most of these bugs being reported are in obscure codecs that only a few people use. Nobody is downloading random things in these codecs and trying to convert them. Converter websites don't accept these formats. Most of these are non issues.

>>107214400
They fixed it. Eventually. After they was made to. And they definitely cried on the internet about how it's unreasonable to expect them to fix the defects in the software they have already sold you in a reasonable timeframe.

>>107212862
>having bugs in code is now a jailable offense

>>107214400
>did they cry on the internet
no they kept it quiet and profited in the meantime as usual lol

He would be right if it wasn't for the terms of the license that explicitly exempt the authors from exactly that.

>itt: anons talking about a retarded Mexican "security researcher" who believes that by using AI to write all codes, there will be no security flaws
>There are actually defenders
Why are you like this?

>>107212862
Free software isn’t like giving free food, it’s like giving the recipe for the food and letting you examine it, make improvements, and give away your version. It’s still up to you to make sure the recipe will produce actual food and not poison. Free as in freedom, not free beer o algo

>>107214450
>it wasn't for the terms of the license
Licenses don't apply when there wasn't a legal sale.

File: 1759580745292.png (1.98 MB, 1592x1360)

1.98 MB PNG

what is with the obsession with shit being insecure? its ffmpeg who cares if there is some edge use case vulerability that requires my dogs girlfriend to have complete access locally to my computer. you never used to hear about this shit unless something had a major vulnerability

>>107214559
licenses only apply if there wasn't a sale

>>107212862
not responding.
the moment you 'engage' he already has a win.

File: food.jpg (16 KB, 255x197)

16 KB JPG

>>107213486
Imaginary food is too close to imaginary poo.