Dirty Talk

I did chmod -R 666 / when I started playing with Linux in 1999. It did not end well.

Sudo didn't really exist back then, you ran things as root like real men. /s

Sorry, that's a huge turn off. Filesystem perms exist for a reason and should be respected

Back in my early days of Linux I ran this exact command, I forget why, but for some reason my WiFi stopped working immediately after and then SELinux started yelling at me for some reason. I tried to fix SELinux and most certainly commited an innumerable amount of cardinal sins.

I had to reinstall whatever distro I was running at the time

Most Linux filesystems, being case sensitive, won't find the SUDO command.

If you shout at your shell, it refuses to listen
Glad I'm not the only one that thinks like this.
CHMOD command does not exist either. It's just the meme's font that is in all caps.

Does anyone else pronounce it "schmod"?

Nope. Sorry lol.
I pronounce it spelling out only C H, but spelling them in my native language, so it sounds like "chee akka mod" and of course the same goes for "chee akka own"

Taking the term open sourced to a whole new level!

Everybody has permissions!

It's still not really open-source until you open up all the ports now don't you think?

Obligatory DO NOT RUN THIS ON YOUR COMPUTER (or anyone else's).

You'd think with fully open permissions, everything would work better, but many programs, including important low level things, interpret it as a sign of system damage and will refuse to operate instead.

If you do run it, you'd better have a backup or something like Timeshift to bail you out, and even if you do have that, it's not worth trying it just to see what will happen.

It's not quite as bad as deleting everything because you can boot from external media and back up non-system files after the fact, but the system will almost certainly not work properly and need to be repaired.

You have been warned.

Someone actually ran it on a server at my workplace, trying to fix file permissions on a samba share. Broke SSH and the samba daemon. Thankfully I was able to fix by removing the permissions from the config files the error logs pointed to.

Just saying, I think it was a ChatGPT idea, other people use it every day. I only use it if I'm completely stumped, and only take it as suggestions.
New guy at work ran this to try to fix permissions on his home folder, accidentally ran it on root (both would have been bad)

Several highly paid and experienced Linux admins finally just gave up and deleted the server and built a new one from the backups.
- Which, honestly, is the better way to go. Treat your compute resources like cattle, not pets.
I will make a disclaimer. Thanks.
But how else will I make everything work without issues

If I wanted Windows perms I would have installed Windows

Windows perms are pretty locked down though. Sometimes I can't delete my own files because I need permission from "Administrator" :/

You can actually use Windows-style permissions (ACLs) on Linux via setfacl.
- If only...
  
  Those are POSIX acls, and they suck
  
  We could have had NFSv4 ACL, of which windows ACLs are a subset. In fact, every other unix os did... Except for Linux, they decided it didn't fit well to Linux. And so we are stuck with UGO permissions, and posix ACLs.