From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <9front-bounces@9front.inri.net> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: from 9front.inri.net (9front.inri.net [168.235.81.73]) by inbox.vuxu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CDEA24DA8 for ; Tue, 7 May 2024 23:41:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from wopr.sciops.net ([216.126.196.60]) by 9front; Tue May 7 17:36:30 -0400 2024 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sciops.net; s=20210706; t=1715117752; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=pAH0MUXoeft2NCJES8A5XGo23b6qqWIkDFDn6nqYXDY=; b=CylEL8j3JjsPtiv8MR3x73KULQtSYyKKLyfgzIWSw31o1qR+S4McOt8t8DS+UO8oN/58Vr HGK2ttMRRqUaACYmAxA86nX1Xkgeq5EsKuPexWY4YpRX+doxtdjwWzhO4WheJawHp8T85y eLUxq38L5LlTPTZVNsUhZ6mpC6Fj6do= Received: from localhost (wopr.sciops.net [local]) by wopr.sciops.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPA id f44d9d2f for <9front@9front.org>; Tue, 7 May 2024 14:35:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 14:35:52 -0700 From: Kurt H Maier To: 9front@9front.org Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: 9front@9front.org References: <4azdxd3t3x3whti6dlyfn75pl4wzodvs3gzsbu5t7xcnqmnuuc@kxfwuan7u5mw> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-ID: <9front.9front.org> List-Help: X-Glyph: ➈ X-Bullshit: immutable managed injection callback storage enhancement Subject: Re: [9front] Enabling a service Reply-To: 9front@9front.org Precedence: bulk On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 02:11:50PM -0700, Shawn Rutledge wrote: > When a newbie starts with one machine and then wants to try starting > up network services shortly afterwards, it should be more directly > possible, IMO Strong disagree. The last thing we need is seventy thousand poorly-configured 9front machines running half-assed network services. > Unless you are actually in a lab environment with shared machines, > nobody expects a diskless terminal anymore; Also not sure this is a valid assumption. About half the plan 9 users I know use diskless terminals. Basically there's more to setting up a plan 9 network than switching a machine to accept remote cpu connections. If someone isn't willing to learn how all the pieces work, I do not think they would benefit from additional footguns. If you don't want a distributed operating system, and you don't want to learn how plan 9 works, there are a lot of other choices for operating systems out there, and using one of those to set up a dimly-understood imminent botnet drone would have far less annoying consequences for this mailing list. People can do whatever they want with their computers, but I don't think there's a specific onus on 9front to make bad ideas easier to execute. khm