Talk:Tinfoil Hat Linux

Article is too much about learning Linux
Much of the stuff added by me (user:laudaka) is about learning GNU/Linux using Tinfoil Hat Linux which was never what the creator of Tinfoil Hat Linux had in mind. Either part of the stuff about learning Linux has to be removed (would be a shame to my opinion) or stuff has to be added by me (or whoever who care about this hardly used distro) about the security of Tinfoil Hat Linux. They are really paranoid by the way. The documentation is darn interesting. (Hehehe, I can have a Point Of View here because it's a talk page, so calling something darn interesting is no problem :-D.) And sorry for the impartial stuff, I'm very anti-Microsoft and very pro open-source free/libre software. So I've to make an effort to write impartial, which is what I would like to do as much as I can. Paulus/laudaka (add me to your YIM/AIM/ICQ/M$N M contact list if you like!) Laudaka's talk page 10:24, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The "official homepage" is gone, seems like this is more a joke than a serious project. Shoudl probably be deleted. --K. Sperling (talk) 14:04, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Sperling: a Google search on the phrase "tinfoil hat linux" turns up nothing that was written in the last three years. I will register a request for deletion. Ryan Reich 01:04, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Suggestions for improvement
The following is a collection of thoughts on what should be changed if this article is to be useful:


 * In the first paragraph there is a weak attempt at explaining certain security problems that Tinfoil Hat Linux (THL) solves or conveniences it provides. The weakness is due to the fact that it appeals to a preexisting understanding (on the part of the reader) of security or computing issues (such as recovery of data from a hard drive or the benefits of a small memory footprint) without actually explaining or even linking to an explanation of them.  Moreover, I am not convinced that the items listed are a comprehensive list of features.
 * Additionally in the first paragraph, there is what seems to be a summary of some of the calling points of THL copied from the summary at the top of the homepage found at . It is simultaneously too cursory and too chatty: there is much information on the THL site about how it might be used, and the author here presents only a small selection; as he does so, he presents a sort of cookbook-security approach which is inconsistent with the aims of the distro itself.  If this sort of motivation is to be used at all it might be better simply to quote the introductory paragraph from the homepage.
 * The second (and shortest) paragraph is the only one which makes any attempt to describe the mechanisms by which THL achieves its remarkable security. This should be expanded significantly.
 * The third paragraph is largely superfluous: it begins with the author's opinion (which may not be the creator's opinion) and continues with some miscellaneous comments about the quality of the documentation (?) before concluding with a discussion of the ease of creating a boot disk. I wouldn't say any of this data is necessary or useful, and it it were, it should at least not be thrown together in such a way.
 * The fourth paragraph is apparently a concoction of the author; the distro is intended to provide security and not an introduction to Linux. The author himself admits it's not a good introduction to Linux even as he describes how it is!  I think this one can go entirely.  There is no shame in the article being short, so long as it is good.

In short, I think the article should present a tight, organized description of how THL solves security problems in a dramatic (even excessive) way, rather than a hodgepodge of the author's opinion and a smattering of facts gleaned from the website. Also, the reference to the website should now point to the link I have given, since the original is now gone. Ryan Reich 00:11, 6 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I made another pass at it, adding info from the distro's readme file and incorporating many of your suggestions. --agr 19:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)


 * This is very nice; the article is really improved. Ryan Reich 20:48, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Cool
Seems like a really cool Linux distribution, and I love the paranoid security! :D Someone should get in contact with shmoo.

Nice little distro
I just tried it out myself, rather humorous really. I think I'll keep it around. --Lewk_of_S e rthic contrib talk 03:50, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Should Be Kept For Historical Purposes
This article should be kept for historical purposes. There is the possibility that someone will want to know about this distribution, even though it does not appear to be an active distribution. Is there really an incredibly good reason to get rid of this article?

Is this even notable?
Delete it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.99.17.20 (talk) 05:26, 16 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Please voice your opinion at Articles for deletion/Tinfoil Hat Linux (2nd nomination). -- intgr #%@! 19:12, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Deletion status
This article survived one AfD, lost another, and was then restored upon a review that I initiated. The conditions of the review were that I get some sources for the article, which I did, and it is now acceptable under the verifiability standards. If you don't like it, you can take it to AfD again, but you can't claim that it should be blanked because it was once deleted. Ryan Reich (talk) 20:07, 17 December 2008 (UTC)