Skip to content

Linux

KALI LINUX SUCKS

    KALI LINUX SUCKS DUDE I TRY TO HACK MY FRIENDS INSTA AND FIRST OF ALL THERES NO APP CALLED INSTA HACKER HUGE RED FLAG 🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩 BUT THEN I OPEN THE TERMINAL WHICH IS ONLY MADE FOR HACKERS AND I RUN hack instagrame AND IT SAYS COMMAND NOT FOUND LIKE KALI LINUX IS A HACKING OS AND IT DOESNT EVEN HAVE A HACKING COMMAND WHAT SECOND RED FLAG 🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩 THIRD I THINK TO MYSELF WELL KALI LINUX IS BASED ON WINDOWS SO WHY NOT GAME ON IT SO I INSTALL STEAM AND THE .exe FILE WON'T RUN WHEN I CLICK ON IT LIKE WHAT?? 🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩 I SEARCH IT UP AND TO RUN EXE FILES YOU NEED TO INSTALL WINE SO I DID AND SPENT 20 HOURS SETTING IT UP AND FINALLY IT RAN STEAM SO I SEARCHED UP AMONG US AND GUESS WHAT IT COST $5 ON KALI LINUX WHILE ON MY PHONE IT IS FREE *deep breath* MY FAMILY CAN NO LONGER AFFORD FOOD AND I REFINANCED MY HOUSE AND SOLD MY CAR AND I AM NOW LIVING ON THE STREETS BEGGING FOR A LAPTOP *strained deep breath* THANKS A LOT KALI LINUX FOR MAKING ME GO HOMELESS. CAN'T BELIEVE SUCH A DUMB OS IS BASED ON WINDOWS. 🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩

    I installed Linux

      I installed Linux and the feeling of freedom and privacy hit me so hard that I immediately began committing crimes, knowing that the FBI could never track me. Piracy, sexual assault, trademark infringement, petty larceny, tax fraud, you name it. I also own several fully automatic firearms even though I live in the state of California, but it doesn't matter. Ever since I removed Windows 10 from my computer and replaced it with Arch Linux, and began using a PinePhone as my daily driver phone, police can't even stop me in traffic. Windows may have a lot of video games, but the benefits of Linux should not be understated.

      You’ll find a linux user anywhere

        Just like Windows, iOS, and Mac OS, Linux is an operating system
        You'll find a linux user anywhere you mention Linux.
        
        I'm sure if someone went to the moon and said "windows is pretty cool", then in the next 30 minutes a linux user somewhere in the world would burst a vein in his head and fly to the moon to tell the astronaut how he installed linux in 8th grade and his dad came back and how he solved world hunger by using foss so now no one spies on him and he's completely off the grid.

        No, Richard, it’s ‘Linux’

          No, Richard, it's 'Linux', not 'GNU/Linux'. The most important contributions that the FSF made to Linux were the creation of the GPL and the GCC compiler. Those are fine and inspired products. GCC is a monumental achievement and has earned you, RMS, and the Free Software Foundation countless kudos and much appreciation.
          
          Following are some reasons for you to mull over, including some already answered in your FAQ.
          
          One guy, Linus Torvalds, used GCC to make his operating system (yes, Linux is an OS -- more on this later). He named it 'Linux' with a little help from his friends. Why doesn't he call it GNU/Linux? Because he wrote it, with more help from his friends, not you. You named your stuff, I named my stuff -- including the software I wrote using GCC -- and Linus named his stuff. The proper name is Linux because Linus Torvalds says so. Linus has spoken. Accept his authority. To do otherwise is to become a nag. You don't want to be known as a nag, do you?
          
          (An operating system) != (a distribution). Linux is an operating system. By my definition, an operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a computer. That definition applies whereever you see Linux in use. However, Linux is usually distributed with a collection of utilities and applications to make it easily configurable as a desktop system, a server, a development box, or a graphics workstation, or whatever the user needs. In such a configuration, we have a Linux (based) distribution. Therein lies your strongest argument for the unwieldy title 'GNU/Linux' (when said bundled software is largely from the FSF). Go bug the distribution makers on that one. Take your beef to Red Hat, Mandrake, and Slackware. At least there you have an argument. Linux alone is an operating system that can be used in various applications without any GNU software whatsoever. Embedded applications come to mind as an obvious example.
          
          Next, even if we limit the GNU/Linux title to the GNU-based Linux distributions, we run into another obvious problem. XFree86 may well be more important to a particular Linux installation than the sum of all the GNU contributions. More properly, shouldn't the distribution be called XFree86/Linux? Or, at a minimum, XFree86/GNU/Linux? Of course, it would be rather arbitrary to draw the line there when many other fine contributions go unlisted. Yes, I know you've heard this one before. Get used to it. You'll keep hearing it until you can cleanly counter it.
          
          You seem to like the lines-of-code metric. There are many lines of GNU code in a typical Linux distribution. You seem to suggest that (more LOC) == (more important). However, I submit to you that raw LOC numbers do not directly correlate with importance. I would suggest that clock cycles spent on code is a better metric. For example, if my system spends 90% of its time executing XFree86 code, XFree86 is probably the single most important collection of code on my system. Even if I loaded ten times as many lines of useless bloatware on my system and I never excuted that bloatware, it certainly isn't more important code than XFree86. Obviously, this metric isn't perfect either, but LOC really, really sucks. Please refrain from using it ever again in supporting any argument.
          
          Last, I'd like to point out that we Linux and GNU users shouldn't be fighting among ourselves over naming other people's software. But what the heck, I'm in a bad mood now. I think I'm feeling sufficiently obnoxious to make the point that GCC is so very famous and, yes, so very useful only because Linux was developed. In a show of proper respect and gratitude, shouldn't you and everyone refer to GCC as 'the Linux compiler'? Or at least, 'Linux GCC'? Seriously, where would your masterpiece be without Linux? Languishing with the HURD?
          
          If there is a moral buried in this rant, maybe it is this:
          
          Be grateful for your abilities and your incredible success and your considerable fame. Continue to use that success and fame for good, not evil. Also, be especially grateful for Linux' huge contribution to that success. You, RMS, the Free Software Foundation, and GNU software have reached their current high profiles largely on the back of Linux. You have changed the world. Now, go forth and don't be a nag.