Publishing new version

2 files changed, 3 insertions, 3 deletions

diff --git a/gemfeed/2021-08-01-on-being-pedantic-about-open-source.html b/gemfeed/2021-08-01-on-being-pedantic-about-open-source.html
index cf089ac1..8f800679 100644
--- a/gemfeed/2021-08-01-on-being-pedantic-about-open-source.html
+++ b/gemfeed/2021-08-01-on-being-pedantic-about-open-source.html
@@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ p.quote:after {
 <p>Clunkiness can be charmful, though. And it can also encourage you to contribute code to make it better. There is a lot of such code in personal GitHub and GitLab repositories. The quality of such small open-source projects varies drastically. Many hobbyist programmers see programming as an art and put tons of effort into their projects. Others upload broken crap, which is dangerous to use. So have a look at the code before you use it!</p>
 <h2>The security aspect</h2>
 <p>One of the main conceptions about open-source software is that it is more secure than closed-source software because everybody can read and fix the code. Is that actually true? You can only be sure when you audit the code by yourself. If you are like me, you won't have time to audit all the open-source software you use. It's impossible to audit more than 100 million lines of Linux kernel code. Static code analysis tools come in handy here, but they still require humans to look at the results.</p>
-<p>Security bugs in open-source projects are exposed to the public and fixed quickly, while we don't know exactly what happens to security bugs in closed-source ones. Still, hackers and security specialists can find them through reverse engineering and penetration testing. Overall, thinking of security, In my opinion it is still better to prefer open-source software because the more significant the project, the higher the probability that security bugs are found and fixed as more parties are looking into it. Furthermore, provided you have the necessary resources, you could still deduct an audit by yourself. The latter especially happens when companies with its own security and penetration testing departments are evaluating the use of open-source. This is something not every company can effort though.</p>
+<p>Security bugs in open-source projects are exposed to the public and fixed quickly, while we don't know exactly what happens to security bugs in closed-source ones. Still, hackers and security specialists can find them through reverse engineering and penetration testing. Overall, thinking of security, In my opinion it is still better to prefer open-source software because the more significant the project, the higher the probability that security bugs are found and fixed as more parties are looking into it. Furthermore, provided you have the necessary resources, you could still deduct an audit by yourself. The latter especially happens when companies with its own security and penetration testing departments are evaluating the use of open-source. This is something not every company can afford though.</p>
 <h2>Always watch out for open-source alternatives</h2>
 <p>Do you need Microsoft Word? Why don't you just use the Vim text editor or GNU Emacs to write your letters? If that's too nerdy, you can still use open-source alternatives such as AbiWord or LibreOffice. Larger organizations have the tendency to standardize the software their employees have to use. Unfortunately, as Microsoft Word is the de-facto standard text processing program, most companies prefer Word over LibreOffice. Same with Microsoft Excel vs LibreOffice Calc or other spreadsheet alternatives like Gnumeric. I don't know why that is; please E-Mail me, and I will update this blog article. I guess the devil lies in the detail here.</p>
 <p>I only use free and open-source operating systems on my personal Laptops, Desktop PCs and servers (FreeBSD and Linux based ones). Most of the programs and apps I use on them are free and open-source as well, and I am comfortable with it for over twenty years. Exceptions are the BIOSes and some firmwares of my devices. I also use Skype as most of my friends and family are using it. They are, unfortunately, proprietary software still. But I will be looking into Matrix as a Skype alternative when I have time. There are also open BIOS alternatives, but they usually don't work on my devices.</p>
diff --git a/gemfeed/atom.xml b/gemfeed/atom.xml
index f8cbbc24..70b9e553 100644
--- a/gemfeed/atom.xml
+++ b/gemfeed/atom.xml
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
 <feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
-    <updated>2021-08-01T11:09:53+03:00</updated>
+    <updated>2021-08-01T12:12:08+03:00</updated>
     <title>buetow.org feed</title>
     <subtitle>Having fun with computers!</subtitle>
     <link href="https://buetow.org/gemfeed/atom.xml" rel="self" />
@@ -50,7 +50,7 @@
 <p>Clunkiness can be charmful, though. And it can also encourage you to contribute code to make it better. There is a lot of such code in personal GitHub and GitLab repositories. The quality of such small open-source projects varies drastically. Many hobbyist programmers see programming as an art and put tons of effort into their projects. Others upload broken crap, which is dangerous to use. So have a look at the code before you use it!</p>
 <h2>The security aspect</h2>
 <p>One of the main conceptions about open-source software is that it is more secure than closed-source software because everybody can read and fix the code. Is that actually true? You can only be sure when you audit the code by yourself. If you are like me, you won't have time to audit all the open-source software you use. It's impossible to audit more than 100 million lines of Linux kernel code. Static code analysis tools come in handy here, but they still require humans to look at the results.</p>
-<p>Security bugs in open-source projects are exposed to the public and fixed quickly, while we don't know exactly what happens to security bugs in closed-source ones. Still, hackers and security specialists can find them through reverse engineering and penetration testing. Overall, thinking of security, In my opinion it is still better to prefer open-source software because the more significant the project, the higher the probability that security bugs are found and fixed as more parties are looking into it. Furthermore, provided you have the necessary resources, you could still deduct an audit by yourself. The latter especially happens when companies with its own security and penetration testing departments are evaluating the use of open-source. This is something not every company can effort though.</p>
+<p>Security bugs in open-source projects are exposed to the public and fixed quickly, while we don't know exactly what happens to security bugs in closed-source ones. Still, hackers and security specialists can find them through reverse engineering and penetration testing. Overall, thinking of security, In my opinion it is still better to prefer open-source software because the more significant the project, the higher the probability that security bugs are found and fixed as more parties are looking into it. Furthermore, provided you have the necessary resources, you could still deduct an audit by yourself. The latter especially happens when companies with its own security and penetration testing departments are evaluating the use of open-source. This is something not every company can afford though.</p>
 <h2>Always watch out for open-source alternatives</h2>
 <p>Do you need Microsoft Word? Why don't you just use the Vim text editor or GNU Emacs to write your letters? If that's too nerdy, you can still use open-source alternatives such as AbiWord or LibreOffice. Larger organizations have the tendency to standardize the software their employees have to use. Unfortunately, as Microsoft Word is the de-facto standard text processing program, most companies prefer Word over LibreOffice. Same with Microsoft Excel vs LibreOffice Calc or other spreadsheet alternatives like Gnumeric. I don't know why that is; please E-Mail me, and I will update this blog article. I guess the devil lies in the detail here.</p>
 <p>I only use free and open-source operating systems on my personal Laptops, Desktop PCs and servers (FreeBSD and Linux based ones). Most of the programs and apps I use on them are free and open-source as well, and I am comfortable with it for over twenty years. Exceptions are the BIOSes and some firmwares of my devices. I also use Skype as most of my friends and family are using it. They are, unfortunately, proprietary software still. But I will be looking into Matrix as a Skype alternative when I have time. There are also open BIOS alternatives, but they usually don't work on my devices.</p>