Important data stays off line.... <---- why i dummy?
Sorry, didn't meant to insult anyone.
No sir you have not
Topic: Is windows for dummies? - page 2. (Read 3254 times)
Important data stays off line.... <---- why i dummy?
Sorry, didn't meant to insult anyone.
No sir you have not
Oh ye gods, not this zombie again :/ Don't really want to beat it to death once more but:
Does microsoft have the worlds geeks at its disposal? Do hackers call up and say 'Hi Billyboy, I've tried some wierd shit and it turns out I can readz ur randomizin'? If not then enumerate that '1000X' bit please.
Does microsoft have the worlds geeks at its disposal? Do hackers call up and say 'Hi Billyboy, I've tried some wierd shit and it turns out I can readz ur randomizin'? If not then enumerate that '1000X' bit please.
I'm talking dollar bills and yes, they have many more paid employees reporting problems to them than the Linux community. As I've already stated, I ditched windows over a decade ago and couldn't be happier. However, many Linux users have a false sense of security. Security is a tremendously difficult problem to get right. The open source model is far better, but you underestimate the billions of dollars worth of businesses that rely on windows and have highly skilled people who can debug and report problems.
Anyway, this will all be moot in a couple more decades as microsoft drives themselves into the ground.
I'd say OS X is for dummies. I work in ICT and constantly have to disinfect peoples Windows computers because they do not know what tools to use or how to use them. People end up locking up there PCs while trying to look for "Free Porn Download" and ignore results like RedTube. Macs do not have this problem generally except for the recent Flashback.
Personally I reckon it is time for Mac to be the target. With the help of the massive flock of iSheep pushing up the number of Macs out there it looks like this may soon come true. iSheep seem to think that Macs are impervious to visuses and till now that has been largely true. There is nothing I love more than telling a Mac user their computer is infected even though they tell me that it is impossible
Personally I reckon it is time for Mac to be the target. With the help of the massive flock of iSheep pushing up the number of Macs out there it looks like this may soon come true. iSheep seem to think that Macs are impervious to visuses and till now that has been largely true. There is nothing I love more than telling a Mac user their computer is infected even though they tell me that it is impossible
The problem here is not system x y or z, is how we use it for doing what.
That being said, osx is still a lot more safe than windows.
I'd say OS X is for dummies. I work in ICT and constantly have to disinfect peoples Windows computers because they do not know what tools to use or how to use them. People end up locking up there PCs while trying to look for "Free Porn Download" and ignore results like RedTube. Macs do not have this problem generally except for the recent Flashback.
Personally I reckon it is time for Mac to be the target. With the help of the massive flock of iSheep pushing up the number of Macs out there it looks like this may soon come true. iSheep seem to think that Macs are impervious to visuses and till now that has been largely true. There is nothing I love more than telling a Mac user their computer is infected even though they tell me that it is impossible
Personally I reckon it is time for Mac to be the target. With the help of the massive flock of iSheep pushing up the number of Macs out there it looks like this may soon come true. iSheep seem to think that Macs are impervious to visuses and till now that has been largely true. There is nothing I love more than telling a Mac user their computer is infected even though they tell me that it is impossible
Important data stays off line.... <---- why i dummy?
Sorry, didn't meant to insult anyone.
No, Windows is not for dummies, but all the dummies are using it.
+1
But honestly - nothing is ever safe. You can protect the data making it MUCH harder to obtain.
Important data stays off line.... <---- why i dummy?
No, Windows is not for dummies, but all the dummies are using it.
+1
But honestly - nothing is ever safe. You can protect the data making it MUCH harder to obtain.
You should realize that whatever is the os you are using its unsafe if you use it for other except your bitcoin wallet.
If you had a big wallet, you shuld use a cheap pc (pandanoards for example) with some *NIX stuff in it and a browser with JavaScript and Java disabled (not talking about flash).
Your hardware should be dedicated, your os too.
BIOS malware is not only on movies.
If you had a big wallet, you shuld use a cheap pc (pandanoards for example) with some *NIX stuff in it and a browser with JavaScript and Java disabled (not talking about flash).
Your hardware should be dedicated, your os too.
BIOS malware is not only on movies.
No, Windows is not for dummies, but all the dummies are using it.
No windows is not for dummies it is for all users (newbies, power users, advance users)
I use windows for all my rigs and my home PC... I have used linux a bit, I don't keep many coins on my PC wallet... couple here and there...
MY PC is in windows7. and my office PC is linux.
I use windows for all my rigs and my home PC... I have used linux a bit, I don't keep many coins on my PC wallet... couple here and there...
windows is safe...
just wandering here, I just konw windows a little.
windows is safe...
Linux is not more secure than Windows, but there are two reasons why it often seems so:
I would still recommend Linux to just about anybody as a main Operating System, however, because it does have some significant advantages in speed, stability and the security through obscurity concept is still valid; what this doesn't mean is that you should assume that because you use Linux, that you're not vulnerable.
The same rules with regards to using obscure websites, installing packages you don't trust etc still apply.
If you're willing to learn, use Arch Linux and not Ubuntu. It's a far simpler setup which means it's more difficult to compromise, there are less old packages with holes in and it is generally more congruent to gaining Linux knowledge.
Ubuntu sugar-coats everything, but the cost of that is reduced understanding on your end of what is happening on your computer. By replacing packages like sysvinit/systemd with the more complicated upstart, and replacing known and tested GUI environments with its beta Unity/Wayland setup, Ubuntu sacrifices the knowledge of a lot of users of other distros and the testing they can offer.
Also, do not go with Mac, it is a far less secure platform than Windows 7.
- A typical Linux user will generally have more computer knowledge than a typical Windows user.
- Linux is less used, so malware developers and hackers spend less time trying to exploit vulnerabilities in it.
I would still recommend Linux to just about anybody as a main Operating System, however, because it does have some significant advantages in speed, stability and the security through obscurity concept is still valid; what this doesn't mean is that you should assume that because you use Linux, that you're not vulnerable.
The same rules with regards to using obscure websites, installing packages you don't trust etc still apply.
If you're willing to learn, use Arch Linux and not Ubuntu. It's a far simpler setup which means it's more difficult to compromise, there are less old packages with holes in and it is generally more congruent to gaining Linux knowledge.
Ubuntu sugar-coats everything, but the cost of that is reduced understanding on your end of what is happening on your computer. By replacing packages like sysvinit/systemd with the more complicated upstart, and replacing known and tested GUI environments with its beta Unity/Wayland setup, Ubuntu sacrifices the knowledge of a lot of users of other distros and the testing they can offer.
Also, do not go with Mac, it is a far less secure platform than Windows 7.
Excellent response.
Linux is not more secure than Windows...
There's someone who doesn't get the open source development model, every furry toothed geek in the world gets to pick holes in the code to polish his ego (as well as every hacker and top level security professional). I'm not saying linux is hack proof and there is plenty of code available with the security of a wet paper bag but the model works far better than closed source for security evaluation.Nothing against windows or mac systems, many find them easier to use and thats what matters for getting things done, but their development model is inherently weaker.
While you are correct that the model is superior, Microsoft has 1000X the resources to throw at the problem. So yeah, Windows is broken more primarily because it is attacked more despite likely having more (or at least equally) secure code.
One thing to be noted, you dont have to have your wallet hosted on the same system as your miner. I have two separate miners (one running Windows, the other running BAMT) and neither have my wallet on it. I have a completely different system that hosts my wallet where I can do all of my transactions.
So, with that said, you can run Linux for your miner, but have say, a separate desktop or laptop that runs and manages your wallet.
So, with that said, you can run Linux for your miner, but have say, a separate desktop or laptop that runs and manages your wallet.
Linux is not more secure than Windows, but there are two reasons why it often seems so:
I would still recommend Linux to just about anybody as a main Operating System, however, because it does have some significant advantages in speed, stability and the security through obscurity concept is still valid; what this doesn't mean is that you should assume that because you use Linux, that you're not vulnerable.
The same rules with regards to using obscure websites, installing packages you don't trust etc still apply.
If you're willing to learn, use Arch Linux and not Ubuntu. It's a far simpler setup which means it's more difficult to compromise, there are less old packages with holes in and it is generally more congruent to gaining Linux knowledge.
Ubuntu sugar-coats everything, but the cost of that is reduced understanding on your end of what is happening on your computer. By replacing packages like sysvinit/systemd with the more complicated upstart, and replacing known and tested GUI environments with its beta Unity/Wayland setup, Ubuntu sacrifices the knowledge of a lot of users of other distros and the testing they can offer.
Also, do not go with Mac, it is a far less secure platform than Windows 7.
- A typical Linux user will generally have more computer knowledge than a typical Windows user.
- Linux is less used, so malware developers and hackers spend less time trying to exploit vulnerabilities in it.
I would still recommend Linux to just about anybody as a main Operating System, however, because it does have some significant advantages in speed, stability and the security through obscurity concept is still valid; what this doesn't mean is that you should assume that because you use Linux, that you're not vulnerable.
The same rules with regards to using obscure websites, installing packages you don't trust etc still apply.
If you're willing to learn, use Arch Linux and not Ubuntu. It's a far simpler setup which means it's more difficult to compromise, there are less old packages with holes in and it is generally more congruent to gaining Linux knowledge.
Ubuntu sugar-coats everything, but the cost of that is reduced understanding on your end of what is happening on your computer. By replacing packages like sysvinit/systemd with the more complicated upstart, and replacing known and tested GUI environments with its beta Unity/Wayland setup, Ubuntu sacrifices the knowledge of a lot of users of other distros and the testing they can offer.
Also, do not go with Mac, it is a far less secure platform than Windows 7.
Go with Linux or Mac
i wouldn't say it's for dummies.
My question should really be is a dummie on windows safe with bitcoin?
Even a system pretty that is pretty badly compromised is probably still going to be safe for you to use if you are using a hosted (shared) EWallet service where a one-time password (OTP) like Google Authenticator (on your mobile) is required.
But overall, it is really a matter of giving attention to security relative to the risk.
If you carry $200 in your back pocket in a bar, you probably will be fine with $200 worth of bitcoins on your Bitcoin.org client on a Windows Vista or Win 7 box presuming you run updates, have some decent anti-virus installed, are sane when installing software, and know how to copy your wallet.dat to a thumb drive for backup.
Now if $200 worth is a lot for you, or you want to store $1K or more you might not want to trust that configuration. An offline system (with an air gap to the network) booted from a LiveOS distribution is among the most secure methods for using bitcoin -- but that security comes with the tradeoff in convenience.
Jump to: