The current situation of anti-malware products on Linux is inadequate due to several factors:
- Limited Variety: Compared to Windows, there are fewer users/clients resulting in limited interest for companies to develop products for Linux.
- Complacency: Many believe Linux is inherently secure, leading to a lack of awareness and focus on malware protection. This creates a gap in proactive defense mechanisms.
- Lack of Features: Existing tools often lack advanced features which are common in Windows anti-malware products, making them less effective on Linux.
This is especially bad because the amount of malware on Linux is increasing just as the possible attack surface due to the increasing number of Linux-based servers and IoT devices.
Currently on Linux one of the few existing and actively developed anti-malware solutions is ClamAV.
There is no inherent mechanism that makes your system secure to viruses just because it's Linux.
This is mostly said because, Linux being a small percentage of desktop users, it's not yet common for hackers to target Linux systems because it's not worth the hassle when you can just target a much larger audience on Windows that is on average much less tech literate too.
But as Linux popularity grows, viruses will start popping up on Linux as well, so it's never a bad idea to use ClamAV.
You are already more protected when you use package repositories instead of downloading executables from websites like you do on Windows, and Linux has better file system permissions, but you still need to be careful what you're downloading and running.
It's one thing for a company to train a model with your code and then create a better copy of what you made and sell it for profit (which I think is an unrealistic thing to happen if their codebase is depending on AI slop code), and it's another thing that an AI is providing access to public information (the code) that you previously monetized to help people understand it better. I really don't see how that monetization model would have worked regardless of AI existing, at some point there are going to be enough people out there that understand the code that can build documentation of their own for free. I'm not a lawyer but I don't see how this violates a GPL license either.
The only thing FOSS projects have to be wary of about AI is slop pull requests, but code review still had to be done before LLMs existed anyway.
Also my two cents about the threads regarding Tailwind is that, what FOSS devs wanting to live doing what they do should really hate is not AI making it harder for them to monetize their projects in odd ways, but capitalism requiring them to monetize anything they do for them to be able to live while doing it. FOSS devs should be able to hand out their creations to society without worrying about putting food on the table, their work is no less valuable than that of any engineer working for the big corporations.
Try to think why these supposed "threats" are such a big deal for an alliance of countries so far away from the region to be affected, and you might stumble upon the real reason why they hate China so much.
Spoiler alert, it's because they can no longer take advantage of China like they did when it was under the boot of the British. They hate that it's a sovereign country that works for its own benefit, and that their footholds in the region are unable to reverse the course of history as they'd like.
Hating on the humanities has been a talking point of the right wing for a long time, specifically because the empathy it nurtures leads to solidarity instead of survival of the fittest mentality. They say that these studies are useless to society, while capitalists are the only class that truly sits on top of society and leeches off of it
Maybe there'd be some hope for that to happen if everyone in the EU hadn't been conditioned to be racist as fuck against anyone to the east or south for centuries
I’d say Bazzite but I would warn him (and since he’s a developer already it might not be a big deal) if he’s looking to do any sort of dev work or whatever with Bazzite then prepare to utilize stuff like distrobox, flatpaks, etc to accomplish stuff like that
That's what I figured, I would be very annoyed to have to use images for software I would simply do an apt install for in other distros, so I'll leave out Bazzite from my options definitely
This is usually a good idea, but I think Arch would be a bit too much for him
Still, any Debian derivative would be just as easy for me to help and also for him to find help online, so that's the main reason I'd choose Mint over Bazzite
ujust is not a package manager, the way I understand it from this thread is that it's just a convenience script that internally will use one of the other methods shown in the doc you mentioned (brew or flatpak for example). So it still seems risky to me not to have access to common linux package managers besides brew
Quoted from the Arch wiki:
The current situation of anti-malware products on Linux is inadequate due to several factors: - Limited Variety: Compared to Windows, there are fewer users/clients resulting in limited interest for companies to develop products for Linux. - Complacency: Many believe Linux is inherently secure, leading to a lack of awareness and focus on malware protection. This creates a gap in proactive defense mechanisms. - Lack of Features: Existing tools often lack advanced features which are common in Windows anti-malware products, making them less effective on Linux. This is especially bad because the amount of malware on Linux is increasing just as the possible attack surface due to the increasing number of Linux-based servers and IoT devices. Currently on Linux one of the few existing and actively developed anti-malware solutions is ClamAV.There is no inherent mechanism that makes your system secure to viruses just because it's Linux. This is mostly said because, Linux being a small percentage of desktop users, it's not yet common for hackers to target Linux systems because it's not worth the hassle when you can just target a much larger audience on Windows that is on average much less tech literate too.
But as Linux popularity grows, viruses will start popping up on Linux as well, so it's never a bad idea to use ClamAV. You are already more protected when you use package repositories instead of downloading executables from websites like you do on Windows, and Linux has better file system permissions, but you still need to be careful what you're downloading and running.