Conversation

Replying to and
You're simply continuing to make disingenuous arguments. I never said anything of the kind. I'm well aware of the serious systemic security issues of the Linux kernel, which go way beyond an unsafe language and very lax code review. I really don't need you to explain it to me.
1
1
Replying to and
Clutching pearls? What? I'm simply explaining that to many people, the findings of the study are far from obvious. It was obvious to me, and clearly to you, but it isn't to many people. Scientific studies demonstrating something some people think is obvious aren't useless.
2
1
They could have found a way to do this kind of study in an ethical way, and I don't think it would be useless. Some projects have stricter code review, safer languages / architectures, etc. Some don't take public patches (SQLite). It's not universally the same situation at all.
1
Replying to and
The scale of the Linux kernel is an architectural choice and is an approach promoted by the people in charge of the development process as superior to the alternative of dividing it up into isolated components. They don't even want out-of-tree code to exist at all. Their choice.
2