It's safe because it's sudo! Like sudo rm -rf /*

You won’t be able to do certain things. Either .ssh or ~ expects certain exact permissions and pukes if it’s different, IIRC

utter nonsense of the deranged

One of us! One of us!

Hell yeah gotta embrace the pain of using archaic key bindings that you'll forget until the next time you need to edit a file in the terminal, you must suffer like man. Modem and sane terminal editors are for pussies! If it doesn't load in 0.01 ms it's bloated.. Whatever you do don't install anything like micro, just keep suffering!

Its lighter weight than vim

obligatory... (well, you know the rest)

https://xkcd.com/149/

personally, I prefer the good ol double bang (!!), but whatever floats yer boat, and all that.

Inane. Intentionally convoluted, or someone following the absolute worst tutorials without bothering to understand anything about what they're reading.

I have questions:

• Why are your configurations world readable?
• Why are you setting the executable bit on a .conf file?
• Why change the files group alongside the owner when you've just given the owner rxw and you're going to set it back?
• If it was 644 before, why 774?
• Why even change the mode if you're going to change the ownership?
• Why do you want roots vimrc instead of your users
• Why do you hate sudoedit
• Why go out of your way to make this appear more convoluted than it actually is?

Even jokey comments can lead to people copying bad habits if it's not clear they're jokes.

This was a joke right? I was baited by your trolling?

that's way too simple, the linux gods demand more esoteric suffering

How dare you use computers to do stuff the way they were invented for?

Why memorize a different command? I assume sudoedit just looks up the system's EDITOR environment variable and uses that. Is there any other benefit?

All incidents are reported directly to Stallman.

If you're running dolphin as sudo and open like a text file in an editor, does it edit the file with sudo?

Do people really war over nano vs vi?

I get the vi vs emacs war, but are people really willing to die on a hill over nano?

Doesn't have to. You can also do something like

chmod +rw ./filename

Short answer: yes.

One of the tenets of security is that a user or process should have only enough access to do what it needs, and then no more. So your web server, your user account, to your mail server, should have exactly what they need, and usually that's been intricately planned by the distro.

If you subvert it you could be writing files as root that www-data now can't read or write. This kind of error is sometimes obvious and sometimes very subtle.

Especially if you're new to this different access model, tread carefully.

Great news! If you mess it up, many distros are really great at allowing you to compare permissions and reset them. The bad news is that maybe you're not on one of those. But you could be okay.

In addition to corsicanguppy's comment, some — often important — programs actually expect the system to be secured in a particular way and will refuse to function if things don't look right.

Now, you'd be right to expect that closing down permissions too tightly could break a system, but people have actually broken their systems by setting permissions too openly on the wrong things as well.

That said, for general, everyday use, those commands don't need to be used much, and there might even be a way to do what they do from your chosen GUI. Even so, it nice to know they're there and what they do for those rare occasions when they might be needed.