this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2026
43 points (97.8% liked)
Linux
67525 readers
887 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Nothing will prevent him from wiping your drive if he has physical access to your device.
Sure you can use stuff like Secure Boot with your own custom keys to lock it. Then noone can indeed just boot it.
Doesn't stop that person from removing your drive and plugging it into another pc. Or from just smashing your disk to pieces.
The same goes for stuff like a bios password. With physical access you can wipe that, too. It's just a bit more work (or requires additional tools) than just an USB stick.
In short: Yes, you can stop someone from just booting an USB stick and wipe you drive. But it doesn't matter if he has other ways to do the same. Protection only works as a whole concept, Software won't help you when physical security allows the device to be stolen. And seriously? Who cares if their stolen laptop is wiped, smashed or drowning on the bottom of the ocean. It's gone anyway.
The actual protection for data is a) backups so you don't lose them and b) encryption so nobody can read them.
Yep. Physical access is equivalent to ownership. The only reasonable thing you can do to protect against it is to prevent access. Given enough time and physical access, any system can be compromised. Encryption is the only good prevention from them reading the data, but it isn't foolproof, and backups are the only good way to ensure you can access the data after.
why assume the attacker is a guy?
Because the fictious person stealing your laptop and drilling through your disk to erase it identifies as male. I have a whole backstory worked out if you are interested...
Or because it doesn't matter at all and two letters were simply the shortest.
There can be multiple reasons:
how would you suggest to point this out to someone given what you said? (are you ok with people referring to all teachers as she or her since most teachers are women? seems like that would be annoying for men who teach)
Yes, I am in fact okay with refering to every teacher as he, because that's what grammar in my native language demands ("Lehrer, der - masc."). I will also happily refer to every guard as she, because –again– grammar ("Wache, die - fem.).
Genus != sexus != gender... One is grammar, one is biology, one is identity. Overlaps are purely coincidental. I don't understand why especially English speakers can't get the concept. I mean sure, they dumbed down their grammar so much that they lost the destinction, but even unrelated to language they seem to develop an insane fetish for conflating sexus and gender somehow. For example if you need to add "biological" before "gender" for your expression to make sense, that should be a hint that you are actually talking bout different things.
Fun fact: When English tried to move away from gender specific words and towards generic ones (all being actors, instead of speaking about actors and actresses), other languages did the exact opposite. Because when you language's grammar has all nouns (arbitrarily) gendered, actresses and actors is a step forward from the generic actor (which often is male my grammatical definition). At least that was the theory in both cases. Two languages, two exactly opposite reactions to same fact. Why doesn't it make any sense? Because it's a fucking narrative to keep some culture war bullshit going. Language isn't sexist. The Sexism filtering your words because they reach your brain is.
In my example I've said that would be a prejudice. It is still more common to talk about a teacher as a man unless their pronouns are known, but they don't give a fuck when it happens. I got called by both feminine and masculine pronouns in legal paperwork; it's not a big deal and that comes from someone with a social gender dysphoria.
Name, next referred to only as person. And then feminine suffixes in upcoming legal fluff, because person is always feminine. Or a prosecutor and the rest is instead masculine. It is truly at bottom of a barrel of social problems and would require an eradication of multiple languages as they/them becomes used around B2 level of english and even then it slips, because mother tongue is a mother tongue.
Why assume masculine pronouns inherently refer to a guy? /s
Funnily a lot of people consider "guy" as gender neutral nowadays...
what do you mean?