• tiramichu@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      One take is that ‘normal’ users get ‘scared’ by extensions and do strange things like break their file by renaming the extension away or think they can literally convert a file between types by changing the extension.

      And so they hide it away.

      But it’s bad logic because breaking things by trying to do weird stuff is how any of us who are technically literate became that way in the first place; by fucking around and finding out.

      • Axolotl@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        The problem is that if you hide it away, you make users more stupid which then it creates the problem you try to solve

      • Axolotl@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Android doesn’t

        That’s the “File” app which is the default file manager on all android phones (except a few brands that have their own thing but the app File is still there usually)

      • atopi@piefed.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Is telling if you are opening a virus trying to disguise itself as another file type not significant for the majority of users?

  • potoooooooo 🥔@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    13 hours ago

    I’ll never forget downloading Max Payne. A single .exe. “This can’t possibly work…an entire game!?”

    Son of a biiiiitch. And I paid nothing!? Napster changed my life, for real.

  • warbond@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 day ago

    They would put a bunch of spaces between the mp3 and the .exe so the other information columns would hide it

    • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Back circa 2000 I was a Visual Basic developer. In my corporate apps I would always put in easter eggs that would randomly throw up message boxes saying stuff like “No matter where you go, there you are.” This always pissed off the c-suite types and they would demand that the source be found and eliminated, but none of the other developers ever found it. All I did was convert the message string to a series of CHR(n) commands, and for the MsgBox command I just put like a thousand spaces in front of it in a small, rarely-used file. A search for the text of the message would return nothing, and a manual inspection of the file wouldn’t reveal anything unless you happened to notice the horizontal scroll bar this produced at the bottom. One of the applications I wrote is still in use at this company (and still occasionally throwing up these easter eggs) and it was basically a front end wrapping a mainframe program dating to the 1970s, which means that thing is still running.

      • Thebeardedsinglemalt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Something mildly similar is how spam emails made it through our filters. In the email it’d advertise dick pills but when copying the email to notepad it looked like gibberish. I made the suggestion to highlight the email text and change the font-color and size to something uniform. Turns out they would insert 3 random characters in between each letter, and those 3 characters would be font size 1 and white while the letters of the actual message were 12 and Black.

    • Scrollone@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      It could have also been a proper .SCR (screensaver) file.

      Because, fun fact: screensaver files on Windows are just renamed exes.

      • Axolotl@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        What- why?? There is some reason? I don’t understans why it’s a proper executable, it’s such a security risk

  • Katana314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 days ago

    It was tricky to get used to the Linux mentality of not really having a dedicated double-clickable “executable type”. But it makes sense - if you want to run code, that should be a planned action by an app that is dedicated to the task of setting up new code. (Package manager, IDE)

    • FishFace@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 day ago

      I mean you can just execute anything from the primary Linux interface - the commandline. It seems equivalent.

      • Katana314@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        Well, casey beat me to it. By default anything you’ve grabbed from the internet or a flash drive won’t have execute permissions on it, so it’s intentionally more obtuse to run than Windows’ simple “Are you sure you want to run this unknown publisher” dialog.

  • khepri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    I absolutely did not use that exact excuse when I was a teenage foreign exchange student and ruined the family’s computer. Nope, no siree.