Ubuntu Desktop 23.10 ISOs Recalled Due To Malicious User Translations

[RavFX]

Thanks god it is only translations not malicious code that is triggered when the IP is from a certain country.

Yep, that's why my trust into OSS is inferior to proprietary software.
I don't dare installing anything python, nodejs and rust outside a trashable VM.
And since the Ukraine war, I also stay away from bleeding edge distribution.

[logical]

I use Ubuntu but I think this is hilarious.

Let me be clear, not because I support any message that was included but because it beautifully illustrates the shortcomings of open source as a software development platform.

If you want quality control you can't depend on the public at large, proper QC is achieved through rigorous, tight control, and thorough testing, not on relying on Joe Blow to contribute anything that will end up in the final product.

"rigorous, tight control"? LOL That leaves out the vast amount of commercial software that I have used in my 35+ career.

[JanC]

Canonical likely has learned a lesson that they are going to need to start paying for translation services going forward, either by hiring their own staff, or more likely paying companies who specialize in translation (i.e. a LSP (Language Service Provider)) in order to avoid future issues.

You mean the same companies that download subtitles from illegal community subtitle translation sites and sell them to TV stations & streaming services as if they translated them themselves? And then get caught one time because they forgot to remove the site’s advertising at the start and/or end of the subtitles and it gets broadcast on TV like that?

Unfortunately there are no ways to be certain that something like this can’t happen…

[TemplarGR]

Religious people will often see outsiders as self-righteous because religious people have little moral intelligence of their own, but obviously get their morals handed down by their religion. A religion, that portrays self-righteousness as immoral, obviously controls its followers by limiting their ability to think and judge for themselves. It is an inherent problem of religion and it intentionally prohibits autonomous thinking. It creates hordes of people with few morals of their own (which can then be discarded or replaced more easily for any cause, such as crusades and terrorism). So do not try to defend accusations of the West being self-righteous. There is nothing wrong with thinking for yourself. They are just being stupid.

Self-righteousness has nothing to do with thinking for yourself, this is absurd. You are confusing the two.

Self-righteousness cannot be moral for the simple reason that every person may decide vastly different things as "moral" for himself. For example you may believe there is nothing immoral about r@ping children. This does not make it right or moral, just because you think it is. Morality is decided by the society as a whole, not by a single person. With common agreed principles, which is what religion does.... On the contrary, when one defies religion and societal rules and decides for himself what is moral or not, AKA "self righteous", he is simply an evil and selfish, egocentric person pretending not to be.

You can be a religious person, and still think for yourself. For example just because i adopted the view that adultery is a sin based on Christianity, doesn't mean i am a stupid person who can't think for himself.

[rrveex]

With a definition that broad you can claim that warning labels and technical documentation on how something is meant to be used "pr0paganda!1" because they try and influence and persuade how you use something. Even when its for something like not touching the catalytic converter with your bare hands when the engine's just been running (which run at about 400C).

"Don't touch the engine, it might be hot!" isn't persuading. It is a warning and a fact. They don't make labels like "if you touch the engine it could feel like Endless Burning and Suffering in the fiery pitch pits of EVIL SATAN!!!" (because they don't really care if you burn yourself, they just want to prevent you from suing them).

few people have the ability to self-reflect

Yes. Since you can't solve this, are you suggesting, they should be persuaded to believe what somebody else considers "good"? Who gets to decide?

flat earth theory and ancient aliens all believe they're very clever independent thinkers when its really just repeating what they've heard on the History Channel, talk radio, youtube and forum posts.

Sure. What's your point? Not all people believe the same things? People believe weird things sometimes? Should we punish them for believing in aliens? Inquisition anybody?

you take issue with calling these civilians "innocent" and think that they weren't innocent

No I don't. Can you tell that *all* the civilian killed by Hamas were innocent? What if one of the civilians was the prime minister, is he innocent? I can't tell, I'm sure many people disagree on this.

That they somehow deserved to be slain by Hamas militants.

This is evil. Why would you accuse me of believing that idiocy?

No... What you try to push as "freedom of thought" is really just antisemitism trying to hide under the cover of it. More fundamentally, like most "freedom of thought" complaining about mainstream media is about how the media doesn't confirm their biases. The same people always turn to sources like Russia Today, Info Wars and Breitbart who do confirm their biases in their "reporting" while clapping at them seals.

WTF has Russia today or tomorrow or whenever have to do with our amiable talk about Palestine and Israel?

Now, the use of the word "antisemitism" nowadays is another fallacy caused by propaganda. People are accused of it when they say "I don't agree with the politics of the state Israel". And I didn't even say that, even less something bad about Jews (which would, indeed, be antisemitic; and idiotic).

Yet you throw "antisemitic" at me because you disagree with my opinion about "freedom of thought". This is again something established by the media/propaganda - somebody who is accused of antisemitism can't defend themselves, they lose all rational credibility. The accusers don't even have to prove the accusation. "Repeat after me: everybody who doesn't agree to everything the state Israel does is antisemitic! Everyone who doesn't agree with what the USA does is against freedom and democracy! Everybody who doesn't believe Soviet Russia is the best shall go to jail!" and so on.

And, indeed, "antisemitic" doesn't have anything to do with *thought*, but with action (hostility, discrimination). People should be allowed to *think* whatever they like. Of course, they can't be allowed to *do* whatever they want.

[TemplarGR]

Hamas is shit, Israel is on the same level.
With their genocide they create hundreds of new potential Hamas militants for decades. THEY WILL NOT DISMANTLE HAMAS, they are enabling.
Israel have the right to exist, but no country has the right to do what Nazi Germany did (oh the irony!).
You are terribly ignorant, I've been lucky in my life to have an opportunity to a little taste of what's going on there thanks to an Israeli ngo and its volunteer that help me get into the occupied territories (it's hard to visit, they're not allowed out nor have visitors)

You don't understand because either you don't know the full story of the region, or you do not want to understand.

Israel wanted to have a peaceful solution and live in harmony with Arabs. It was Arabs who decided they didn't want Israel to exist, and kept attacking them, for decades and decades. After a while, a nation has to protect itself, even if that requires to take strict measures to ensure the security of its people.

Let me ask you a simple question: If your nation was surrounded by hostile nations with far more people than yours, with a hostile religion that demanded them to annihilate your nation, and those hostile nations not only denied your right to exist but declined many peaceful UN resolutions and invaded multiple times your nation, what would you have your nation do to protect itself?

There are no "Palestinians", they do not exist as a separate nation, they are simply Arabs who conquered the region from the Byzantine Empire and later the Crusade states and moved there. Jews are far older than Arabs in Palestine. And prior to the 20th century, it was part of the Ottoman Empire, so it was a turkish region.... So what gives Arab the right to deny Israelis to live in their ancestral home? Israelis have no other place to live, no other country shares their religion or ethnic group. There are lots of surrounding arab/muslim countries Palestinian Arabs could move to, and many of those countries have lots of money due to oil, like Qatar (who finances Hamas)... So why don't they move to other muslim states?

I will tell you why, because they want to conquer the world for Islam, especially the "Holy Land" as they see it as a religious war and necessity. Of course muslims will pretend it is not about that, but that is because they want to throw smoke to the eyes of Westerners about their true intentions. And of course the West needs arab oil as well, so they pretend they go along with them.

I don't know about your nationality, but i am Greek, and as a Greek person who lives in a land that suffered under centuries of muslim occupation, i know fully well those people. Even today turks and muslims threaten to invade us, EVEN TODAY. ISIS posted maps of their intended conquests and Greece was among them because "it was once muslim and needs to be reconquered". So don't tell me BS about NAZIs, jihadists are far worse and you are enabling them.

Nazi Germany oppressed people who didn't threaten them, just for being different. Jews in Nazi Germany didn't attack Germans, or didn't threaten to cancel their country or slaughter their people. Nazi Germany killed minorities just because they were different. Israel is under constant threat and aggression. You cannot really compare the two. So no, Israel is not like Nazi Germany.

[andre30correia]

this things happen, this days is not possible to control everything, to many things to check in such big things like a OS. I dont understand why some people continue to do this, i think this people dont have a life, kids or family, a "normal" person dont have time for such thing

[MorrisS.]

Iran will fix it with few atomic bombs.

Do you like Iranian regime?

[sophisticles]

While i admit that some of the takes on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict are interesting, and I don't agree with some of what has been said i think we are missing a much larger problem.

In my last job i worked for a company that was predominantly Muslim and got to know and understand their religious beliefs very well. Many years ago i worked for a company that employed predominantly Jewish employees, of various Jewish sects and consequently got to learn their religious beliefs very well.

I have come to the conclusion that it is not possible for there ever to be peace between the Palestinians and the Israelis because their underlying religious beliefs put them at odds with one another.

The Jews believe that the Messiah will come one day, and one of their prophesies of when it will happen is when the Third Temple is built. Interestingly for Christians, the building of the Third Temple is also a prerequisite for when Jesus will come again.

The problem arises because the Third Temple must occupy the same location as the first 2 Temples, but around 705 AD the Muslims built the Al-Aqsa Mosque, which houses the Dome of the Rock. Islamic tradition holds that The Prophet Mohamed received the Quran from the Angel Gabriel at this location and it is also the location that Muslims believe The Prophet Mohamed was taken to Heaven by the Angel Gabriel.

On top of that, over the centuries, Jews have come to believe that modern day Palestinians are not the same people that are spoken of in the Bible and Muslims are taught that modern day Jews are not the same people that descended from Adam.

It's important to remember that Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all Abrahamic religions and that each believes that they descended down through Abraham but they also believe that the other did not.

This leads to the modern day conflict because each believes they have a valid claim to what is modern day Israel. Jews believe that God promised to them thousands of years ago, Muslims claim it because that is where The Prophet Mohamed is said to have ascended to Heaven and you have a mess on your hands.

Add to that the fact that there are people, Christians and Jews, that are eager to see the 3rd Temple built so that Christ will arrive and I have seen members of the Israeli government in interviews advocate for the bulldozing of the Al-Aqsa Mosque so the Temple can be built and we are lucky that we haven't all been destroyed yet.

I think the only possible solution to this is for Israel to say to the Palestinians that they can have Gaza as an independent Palestinian state under the Israeli umbrella, kind of how Puerto Rico is under the U.S. Let the Palestinians have their own governor, elections, establish free trade with them and allow them to visit the Al-Aqsa Mosque as they choose.

i don't think any other solution exists, it's only a matter of time before a nuke is introduced into this conflict and once it does, the global consequences will be earth shattering.

[Nth_man]

[...] For example you may believe there is nothing immoral about r@ping children. [...]

For providing examples: there are many more cases of people who think that there is nothing immoral about brothers marrying, fathers and daughters marrying, sons and mothers marrying, etc. :-(