this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2026
621 points (98.1% liked)

memes

21878 readers
1689 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads/AI SlopNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 52 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

Why I don't update software:

  • 1% apathy
  • 1% i want it to keep working
  • 98% i don't want to have to fucking reinstall the same fucking nvidia drivers again FOR SOME REASON
[–] nymnympseudonym@piefed.social 28 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Why I do update software:

  1. Don't want to get hacked
[–] voidsignal@lemmy.world 11 points 4 days ago (1 children)

What if I told you with each Windows update, Microslop hacks you a bit more

[–] HuePony@lemmy.ml 11 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] voidsignal@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

I'd say you're right

[–] affenlehrer@feddit.org 4 points 4 days ago

It's a gamble though unless you only do security updates. New features might bring new security issues.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca -1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

If your system is secure, updating it can only make it insecure. If that is your one and only priority, you have to review updates before applying them, and since you have thoroughly investigated your entire stack up to this update and that version also has your real-world testing behind it, you're probably not going to apply most updates until some other priority comes along or you discover a previously unknown vulnerability.

[–] nymnympseudonym@piefed.social 11 points 4 days ago (1 children)

If your system is secure, updating it can only make it insecure

The Internet has been an adversarial environment since at least 1988

Thanks to recent AI advances, new security vulnerabilities are being found at a crazy pace in all layers of the stack, from firmware to GUI.

1zOYXItTY9LRxkE.png

[–] Sidyctism2@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Kinda weird graphic. If year one is 2016, shouldnt year ten be 2025? Because the legend says its 2026.

my bad, 10 should have been 2025

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 6 points 4 days ago

If your system is secure, updating it can only make it insecure.

This "logic" overlooks a number of issues.

Firstly, no system is "secure", only more so or less so given a specific threat model.

Secondly, a system can become less secure without any changes, as exploits are discovered.

[–] Opisek@piefed.blahaj.zone 5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

I mean, yes, if you can guarantee that all your software stack in 100% secure. In reality this is unfeasible on even mathematically impossible to do formally (reducible to the halting problem). So while bugs keep being found in things like the Linux kernel (naturally, nothing is immune to oversight), and they're always going to be, keep your software up to date.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 days ago

If security is the one and only priority, you wouldn't be running a goddamn desktop environment and all that other baggage. You absolutely would be auditing your entire stack. Because security is the one and only priority. I didn't pose the hypothetical, but that's the necessary consequence.

[–] tomalley8342@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

even mathematically impossible to do formally (reducible to the halting problem).

Nah, if the programs are not arbitrary (and I hope they're not, considering that you chose them) then it doesn't reduce to that. But you are right that it is not feasible for most industries and he is right that in some industries it is not only feasible but required.

[–] renzhexiangjiao@piefed.blahaj.zone 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

i recently found out that i was running 5 year old graphics drivers, and the reason i found out was that a newish (less than 5 yo) game kept crashing a few minutes after startup, with no exception. turns out updating your drivers does sometimes matter

[–] Noobnarski@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

Graphics drivers are strange, unlike all other drivers where the driver is written and then the software can use the interface, with graphics drivers the drivers get changed after the software is released to make it work better or at all.

Imagine making sofware that is broken and then just waiting for the drivers to fix it.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 2 points 4 days ago
  • Enshittification