400
Never-before-seen Linux malware gets installed using 1-day exploits
(arstechnica.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2024
400 points (96.5% liked)
Technology
60062 readers
1383 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
There is nothing it is "chewing" on for an extended period. I know the updates take at most 15 minutes (on an NvME drive, a SATA M.2 or HDD of course will take longer), because I manually update my systems most of the time. I can see it perform the update right in front of me, most of the time in less than 5 minutes. IF I instead leave it on overnight and it updates and restarts automatically, it is ready to go in the morning where I left off.
Never updating your system manually and never leaving it online outside of your set active hours to perform maintenance when you aren't actively using it (like installing updates automatically), then getting angry at the system despite you never giving it any downtime to do so, is a YOU problem. Same for the users that delay the restart for multiple days after the updates are installed, and then get surprised when it finally needs to restart like it's been requesting for 2+ days and being ignored.
Wtf is this crap? How is it MY problem when other OSes do a much better job with the update process? You talk about 15 minutes or leaving updates running overnight as if that's decent. I can do a Linux update within 2 minutes and get my system back up by minute 3. That's the kind of performance I am expecting and I don't even need a super fast NVMe drive to do it.
The fact that you're okay with putting up with Window's comparatively slow update speed and then have to make excuses for it by saying that the USER needs to constantly baby it or waste power by leaving it overnight is honestly hilarious. To be quite frank, you just don't know how updates could be better because you're just used to what Windows has always offered you.
Don't put the blame on users for a problem that Microsoft can definitely solve but never does.