RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> writes:

> On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 17:52:55 -0500, Joel wrote:
>
>> Not really, since you don't need to use IE-based email programs, which
>> are the only viable attack vector (and barely so - I use WLMail).
>
> You're not the average Windows user than. Let me restate this. The
> exploitability of IE, and the fact that it is so deeply embedded in the
> Windows OS, is another good reason for most Windows users to go to
> Linux.

Except it isn't.

The parts you call "embedded" in the OS dont suddenly talk to virus
ridden porn sites like your Windows system used to do when you claim you
spent all day "fighting malware" ,.,. tugging the trouser snake more
like.

There are various alternatives to IE anyway as you know full well, in
addition to its most restrctive security settings.

I recommend google-chrome at the moment - faster than FF. They have done
a great job with the Linux port.

 

Some hoofed horn-beast named Al Smith wrote in
news:bSE4n.61920$PH1.41066@edtnps82:

> Alias wrote:
>> Roland Schweiger wrote:
>>> "Alias"
>>>> Just curious, how are you able to interpret a warning about virus
>>>> attacks as hating Microsoft? This is a leap of logic. Being as you
>>>> per your signature, you hate everybody, you're not one to be
>>>> lecturing anyone on hate, sonny.
>>>
>>> Because
>>>
>>> 1.
>>> Most virus-warnings are complete nonsense and do not affect anyone at
>>> all.
>>>
>>> 2.
>>> A so-called "virus" is not the fault of any OS or browser or platform
>>> or whatsoever.
>>> If i wanted to harm someone, i could write some kind of MalWare for
>>> ANY OPERATING SYSTEM.
>>>
>>> 3.
>>> The recomendation for using other browsers instead of IE "because they
>>> are safer" is simply blunt primitive publicity and we certainly get
>>> the feeling here that you just hate MS products, because they are so
>>> good and so easy to use and integrate. full stop.
>>>
>>>
>> More leaps of logic. This seems to be a flaw that a lot of Windows
>> users have that post to news groups.
>>
>>
>
> I just deactivated Internet Explorer 8 in my new Windows 7 computer.
> Easy to do, and I never use it anyway.

So, if you never use it, why deactivate it?

> This should prevent it from
> starting up on its own,

If you never use it, how do you know it starts up on its own?

> as it likes to do from time to time.

If you never use it, how do you know it likes to do what it it does?

> Everything I've read on the Net

Ah. The opinion of other fucktards weighs more than the the opinion of a
single fucktard. Never mind facts, always punt for the most popular
fucked up opinion. There's safety in large numbers, hey.

London to a bucket of your potato-mashed brains says more people died in
Haiti this week than will ever believe your techno-vodooo bullshit.

--
A test sig

 

Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in
news:4k68l5ts5751kjiu2i4hhrbjuo0si7ak1h@4ax.com:

> thanatoid <waiting@the.exit.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>>> Interesting link. I've always used two spaces after
>>>>> sentences, and now I feel pretty justified.
>>>>
>>>> Nice pun. Get it?
>>>
>>> Heh, not genuinely contextual
>>
>>Very well put. I couldn't have come up with that phrase.
>
>
> I can't take an excessive amount of credit for being so
> spontaneous with it - I enjoy catching myself making
> unintended puns, and it seems to happen remarkably often,
> but that's also led me to, routinely, critically analyze
> their worthiness. This one was indeed good in that I
> accidentally used another sense of a word from the article,
> but I couldn't give myself too much credit due to the fact
> (just to be totally redundant) that I don't use two spaces
> for the purpose of justifying margins.

Hee hee. Great stuff.

Justifying is available in most DTP/WP programs but many people
- me included believe it is harder to read, and depending on the
quality of the program it can sometimes look REALLY bad.

I have found it most useful when making a big sign with only 1-3
words per line. Then it can be made to look really good, with
the right font and judicious use of kerning and character width
sizing.

Cheers.
t.



--
There are only two classifications of disk drives: Broken drives
and those that will break later.
- Chuck Armstrong (This one I think, http://www.cleanreg.com/,
not the ball player. But who knows. I can't remember where I got
the quote. But it's true.)

 

Peter =?UTF-8?B?S8O2aGxtYW5u?= <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de>
wrote in news:hj1dsb$f66$00$1@news.t-online.com:

> Joel wrote:
>
>> Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>
>>>> Or just use a non-IE-based email program under Windows.
>>>> Or use an IE-based one, and not click on unknown links
>>>> in it.
>>>
>>>Translation: Let the user do the security work, while the
>>>shitty IE is the real culprit
>>
>> So, you want the freedom to click on black-market-Viagra
>> links (or something even more stupid) in your email
>> software. Guess you should use Thunderbird (or whatever)
>> under Windows ...
>
> Nope, Oh-Real-Stupid-One, I want the freedom to click on
> links without worrying what malware will be on my computer
> after that

Get OffByOne. Javascript and flash won't work (and therefore
many 'modern' sites won't either, but you can often click on the
"view source" button and see what URL's are embedded, and
use those to get around the stupid site design), but that is
also one of several reasons it is the only 100% secure (AND the
fastest) browser available. Also, no cache to worry about. One
cookies file which can be deleted in a variety of ways.

IE is fine to have on your system but ONLY to be used for
viewing .chm files. Anyone going on the web with it is out of
their mind.

<SNIP>

--
There are only two classifications of disk drives: Broken drives
and those that will break later.
- Chuck Armstrong (This one I think, http://www.cleanreg.com/,
not the ball player. But who knows. I can't remember where I got
the quote. But it's true.)