WIN 7

[Death]

Alias wrote:

> On 05/15/2010 04:27 PM, Death wrote:
>> Alias wrote:
>>
>>> Death wrote:
>>
>> SNIP
>>
>>>>
>>>> Windows,java,Flash,whatever-your-heart-desires gets updated in Windows
>>>> automatically,dummy.
>>>> Do you actual run Windows, or do you just despise it?
>>>
>>> You're wrong on all counts.
>>>
>>
>> Dumbass.
>
> Wrong again.
>

Java will update itself...flash will update itself...Windows and
Office will update itself...CrapCleaner(one of your fav tools,LOL) will
update itself...almost any friggen program I can think of will update
itself....as a user, you may turn that feature off, or like you have
"accidently" disabled it, thereby getting a "I gotta update your PC
service call"

>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Once I had
>>>>> to clean up an XP machine that had never been defragged (customer:
>>>>> what's that?) or updated (customer: what's that?). It took over ten
>>>>> minutes to boot up and once it booted, pop up Windows had a fucking
>>>>> field day. I ended up reinstalling XP because there was just too much
>>>>> malware to deal with and there was no guarantee that the AV and other
>>>>> anti malware programs would completely remove all malware.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You re-installed XP cause that is your skill level...stick a DVD/live-CD
>>>> in a tray, call it "support".
>>>
>>> You obviously know nothing about cleaning up Windows machines.
>>>
>>
>> I know what you do is called "clean install", but you make hammering
>> sounds, fire up some flashing lights, and make the customer think you
>> actually did something.
>>
>
> Not what I did. The machine had a hidden partition

Hidden where?
Under the chair?
In another part of the house?
What the fuck does that have to do with anything?

>so not only did I
> install XP, I removed Norton

You did that why?
Cause you read somewhere that Norton is a resource hog?
Incorrect assumption by a dumbass.
I use Norton360...and it's faster than most AV's.
When I made the comparison, It was better resource-wise than NOD32.


>and installed Adobe Reader, Flash, Java,
> Office 2003,

Oh,my...hope you didn't break a nail.

> all the Windows updates including service packs,

Including SPs?
Would you normally exclude them?
Utter newb talk.

> Avast,
> Antimalwarebytes, Spyware Blaster, Superantispyware,

Ah...another dumbass that totally and unnecessarily clutters a computer
with BS crapwarez.

> Windows Live
> Messenger, Windows Media 11 and I forget what else. The client was
> pleased. I was pleased. You're not pleased but, what the hell, two out
> of three ain't bad.
>

I'm pleased you sound like a moron.

--
Vita brevis breviter in brevi finietur,
Mors venit velociter quae neminem veretur.

 

[Alias]

Death wrote:
> Alias wrote:
>
>> On 05/15/2010 04:27 PM, Death wrote:
>>> Alias wrote:
>>>
>>>> Death wrote:
>>>
>>> SNIP
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Windows,java,Flash,whatever-your-heart-desires gets updated in Windows
>>>>> automatically,dummy.
>>>>> Do you actual run Windows, or do you just despise it?
>>>>
>>>> You're wrong on all counts.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Dumbass.
>>
>> Wrong again.
>>
>
> Java will update itself...flash will update itself...

No, it won't.

> Windows and
> Office will update itself.

Only if it's configured to update itself.

>..CrapCleaner(one of your fav tools,LOL) will
> update itself...

No, it won't.

> almost any friggen program I can think of will update
> itself....

Too bad that isn't true.

> as a user, you may turn that feature off, or like you have
> "accidently" disabled it, thereby getting a "I gotta update your PC
> service call"

Charming argument. Fuck off.

>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Once I had
>>>>>> to clean up an XP machine that had never been defragged (customer:
>>>>>> what's that?) or updated (customer: what's that?). It took over ten
>>>>>> minutes to boot up and once it booted, pop up Windows had a fucking
>>>>>> field day. I ended up reinstalling XP because there was just too much
>>>>>> malware to deal with and there was no guarantee that the AV and other
>>>>>> anti malware programs would completely remove all malware.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You re-installed XP cause that is your skill level...stick a DVD/live-CD
>>>>> in a tray, call it "support".
>>>>
>>>> You obviously know nothing about cleaning up Windows machines.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I know what you do is called "clean install", but you make hammering
>>> sounds, fire up some flashing lights, and make the customer think you
>>> actually did something.
>>>
>>
>> Not what I did. The machine had a hidden partition
>
> Hidden where?
> Under the chair?
> In another part of the house?
> What the fuck does that have to do with anything?

Um, you said I slipped in a CD. Connect the dots.

>
>> so not only did I
>> install XP, I removed Norton
>
> You did that why?
> Cause you read somewhere that Norton is a resource hog?
> Incorrect assumption by a dumbass.
> I use Norton360...and it's faster than most AV's.
> When I made the comparison, It was better resource-wise than NOD32.

Not the Norton that was installed.

>
>
>> and installed Adobe Reader, Flash, Java,
>> Office 2003,
>
> Oh,my...hope you didn't break a nail.

Was that supposed to be cute and clever, your little immature put down?

>> all the Windows updates including service packs,
>
> Including SPs?

Of course.

> Would you normally exclude them?

Of course not.

> Utter newb talk.

No just proving that I did more than slip in the CD. I didn't even use a CD.

>
>> Avast,
>> Antimalwarebytes, Spyware Blaster, Superantispyware,
>
> Ah...another dumbass that totally and unnecessarily clutters a computer
> with BS crapwarez.

You're the dumbass if you don't.

>
>> Windows Live
>> Messenger, Windows Media 11 and I forget what else. The client was
>> pleased. I was pleased. You're not pleased but, what the hell, two out
>> of three ain't bad.
>>
>
> I'm pleased you sound like a moron.
>

You and John are brothers or just sock puppets?

--
Alias

 

[Death]

Alias wrote:

> Death wrote:
>> Alias wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/15/2010 04:27 PM, Death wrote:
>>>> Alias wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Death wrote:
>>>>
>>>> SNIP
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Windows,java,Flash,whatever-your-heart-desires gets updated in Windows
>>>>>> automatically,dummy.
>>>>>> Do you actual run Windows, or do you just despise it?
>>>>>
>>>>> You're wrong on all counts.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dumbass.
>>>
>>> Wrong again.
>>>
>>
>> Java will update itself...flash will update itself...
>
> No, it won't.
>

Ok, whatever you say, ubuntard.
Mine do.

>> Windows and
>> Office will update itself.
>
> Only if it's configured to update itself.
>

Which is automatically yes, unless you say NO.
Windows Update will ask if you want to use Microsoft update...to update
all MS products you may have...in your case, you must answer NO...then
make an argument that it doesn't update itself.
You a weirdo.

>>..CrapCleaner(one of your fav tools,LOL) will
>> update itself...
>
> No, it won't.
>

Stick with ubuntushitsthebed, you lunatic.


>> almost any friggen program I can think of will update
>> itself....
>
> Too bad that isn't true.
>

Not on the mess you create, I suppose not.


>> as a user, you may turn that feature off, or like you have
>> "accidently" disabled it, thereby getting a "I gotta update your PC
>> service call"
>
> Charming argument. Fuck off.
>


Ahhh...I aim true.

>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Once I had
>>>>>>> to clean up an XP machine that had never been defragged (customer:
>>>>>>> what's that?) or updated (customer: what's that?). It took over ten
>>>>>>> minutes to boot up and once it booted, pop up Windows had a fucking
>>>>>>> field day. I ended up reinstalling XP because there was just too much
>>>>>>> malware to deal with and there was no guarantee that the AV and other
>>>>>>> anti malware programs would completely remove all malware.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You re-installed XP cause that is your skill level...stick a DVD/live-CD
>>>>>> in a tray, call it "support".
>>>>>
>>>>> You obviously know nothing about cleaning up Windows machines.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I know what you do is called "clean install", but you make hammering
>>>> sounds, fire up some flashing lights, and make the customer think you
>>>> actually did something.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not what I did. The machine had a hidden partition
>>
>> Hidden where?
>> Under the chair?
>> In another part of the house?
>> What the fuck does that have to do with anything?
>
> Um, you said I slipped in a CD. Connect the dots.
>

I connected them...an image of a moron fudging up someones PC appeared.

>>
>>> so not only did I
>>> install XP, I removed Norton
>>
>> You did that why?
>> Cause you read somewhere that Norton is a resource hog?
>> Incorrect assumption by a dumbass.
>> I use Norton360...and it's faster than most AV's.
>> When I made the comparison, It was better resource-wise than NOD32.
>
> Not the Norton that was installed.
>

Whatever ubuntard.

>>
>>
>>> and installed Adobe Reader, Flash, Java,
>>> Office 2003,
>>
>> Oh,my...hope you didn't break a nail.
>
> Was that supposed to be cute and clever, your little immature put down?
>
>>> all the Windows updates including service packs,
>>
>> Including SPs?
>
> Of course.
>
>> Would you normally exclude them?
>
> Of course not.
>
>> Utter newb talk.
>
> No just proving that I did more than slip in the CD. I didn't even use a CD.
>

The updates require no CD.
Hence the term "update".


>>
>>> Avast,
>>> Antimalwarebytes, Spyware Blaster, Superantispyware,
>>
>> Ah...another dumbass that totally and unnecessarily clutters a computer
>> with BS crapwarez.
>
> You're the dumbass if you don't.
>

I don't even need an AV....I just like Norton 360 and some of the
conveniences it offers.

>>
>>> Windows Live
>>> Messenger, Windows Media 11 and I forget what else. The client was
>>> pleased. I was pleased. You're not pleased but, what the hell, two out
>>> of three ain't bad.
>>>
>>
>> I'm pleased you sound like a moron.
>>
>
> You and John are brothers or just sock puppets?
>

No, its just you, dumbass, being paranoid.

--
Vita brevis breviter in brevi finietur,
Mors venit velociter quae neminem veretur.

 

[Death]

Alias wrote:

> Death wrote:

>>> Not what I did. The machine had a hidden partition
>>
>> Hidden where?
>> Under the chair?
>> In another part of the house?
>> What the fuck does that have to do with anything?
>
> Um, you said I slipped in a CD. Connect the dots.
>

No way...you actually have customers that hire you to boot from a
recovery partition?
LMFAO...
Can children enter into a contract in Spain?

--
Vita brevis breviter in brevi finietur,
Mors venit velociter quae neminem veretur.

 

[Alias]

Death wrote:
> Alias wrote:
>
>> Death wrote:
>
>>>> Not what I did. The machine had a hidden partition
>>>
>>> Hidden where?
>>> Under the chair?
>>> In another part of the house?
>>> What the fuck does that have to do with anything?
>>
>> Um, you said I slipped in a CD. Connect the dots.
>>
>
> No way...you actually have customers that hire you to boot from a
> recovery partition?

Most Windows users don't know what that is. People are paid to reinstall
Windows all the time. Where have you been, under a rock?

> LMFAO...
> Can children enter into a contract in Spain?
>

Do you think you could be a bit more supercilious and patronizing in
your vain quest to put yourself up and me down?
--
Alias

 

[Death]

"Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
news:hsmmbk$crf$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Death wrote:
>> Alias wrote:
>>
>>> Death wrote:
>>
>>>>> Not what I did. The machine had a hidden partition
>>>>
>>>> Hidden where?
>>>> Under the chair?
>>>> In another part of the house?
>>>> What the fuck does that have to do with anything?
>>>
>>> Um, you said I slipped in a CD. Connect the dots.
>>>
>>
>> No way...you actually have customers that hire you to boot from a
>> recovery partition?
>
> Most Windows users don't know what that is. People are paid to reinstall
> Windows all the time. Where have you been, under a rock?
>

Must have been.
Smart people probably don't.

>> LMFAO...
>> Can children enter into a contract in Spain?
>>
>
> Do you think you could be a bit more supercilious and patronizing in your
> vain quest to put yourself up and me down?

No, I'm actually restraining myself.
You find out how to update software yet?

--
Vita brevis breviter in brevi finietur,
Mors venit velociter quae neminem veretur.

 

[DanS]

John B. Slocomb <johnbslocomb@invalid.com> wrote in
news:m7atu55uq0eosj9caa6d302lrekicq5o91@4ax.com:

> On Sat, 15 May 2010 0770 -0500, DanS
> <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> wrote:
>
>>
>>> You allege that Windows is more susceptible to malware
>>> then Linux but other then your say so why should we
>>> believe you?
>>
>>Are you saying that Windows isn't more susceptible to
>>malware/virii ?
>
> Of course Windows is more susceptible to the present crop
> of virus/mal-ware. That wasn't the point I was making. I
> was stating that his simple waving his hands and shouting
> that "the sky is falling" isn't, particularly with Alias,
> who has a history of either lying or getting his facts
> mixed up.

<SNIP>

I'll repeat my paragraph below.

>>I just think you picked the wrong subject to try to make
>>your point, as we all know, Malware/Spyware, and either
>>through automatic infection, or by some socially engineered
>>infection method, **is written for the Windows OS**, so by
>>that token alone I would think that it proves Windows *is*
>>much much more susceptible than Linux.
>
> I don't think that is necessarily correct. There is no
> question that there is more Windows mal-ware, and more
> being written every day, but I think that Windows mal-ware
> is so pervasive simply because nearly all computers are
> using Windows. Any marketing guru will tell you to go for
> the mass market.
>
> But don't get the idea that Linux is somehow completely
> bullet proof.

I don't believe any OS is completely bulletproof.

> In fact Linux Format (a British magazine) in
> an article about firewalls went to some length to make the
> point that while the vast majority of mal-ware is for
> Windows as Linux gains a larger share of the market the
> amount of Linux mal-ware will become greater.

There may be an increase in Linux malware. Or, a little more
accurately, we may actually see malware that does target Linux
and that may be successful and exist in the wild. But it's not
really here now.

> Most personal Linux systems have java installed. Many run
> Thunderbird or Firefox, openoffice will run scripts and
> those are all ways that mal-ware can sneak into a system.
> If there are FTP or Telnet ports open those can be a source
> of infection.

Yes.

> Even today it is not uncommon to read about a web site that
> was hacked or financial records that were stolen. Nearly
> all of these take place on sites using Linux equipment.

It may sound cliche', but these are nearly exclusively traced
back to bad/unsafe configurations and weak passwords, or
unpatched systems, which can and do affect any OS. You would
expect any competant IT personel to follow proper security
measures and be able to keep up on things.

But I digress, the subject is maleware/spyware that affects
the home users. That is the biggest problem security wise. I'm
not concerned about some schmoe trying to gain access to my PC
using some remote buffer exploit and DOS attack......I'm
concerned about s/w being put on my machine that's stealing
logins and passwords from banking sites, and credit card
companies and such.

 

[Bob I]

The reason that "Linux" isn't targeted is that there aren't enough
installations to bother with. Lets face it, if the Mariposa botnet was
counted as separate OS, it would have more users than Linux!


On 5/15/2010 1:42 PM, DanS wrote:
> John B. Slocomb<johnbslocomb@invalid.com> wrote in
> news:m7atu55uq0eosj9caa6d302lrekicq5o91@4ax.com:
>
>> On Sat, 15 May 2010 0770 -0500, DanS
>> <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> wrote:
>>

<snipE>

>
> It may sound cliche', but these are nearly exclusively traced
> back to bad/unsafe configurations and weak passwords, or
> unpatched systems, which can and do affect any OS. You would
> expect any competant IT personel to follow proper security
> measures and be able to keep up on things.
>
> But I digress, the subject is maleware/spyware that affects
> the home users. That is the biggest problem security wise. I'm
> not concerned about some schmoe trying to gain access to my PC
> using some remote buffer exploit and DOS attack......I'm
> concerned about s/w being put on my machine that's stealing
> logins and passwords from banking sites, and credit card
> companies and such.
>

 

[DanS]

Bob I <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:H6GHn.4871$yx.324@newsfe13.iad:

> The reason that "Linux" isn't targeted is that there aren't
> enough installations to bother with. Lets face it, if the
> Mariposa botnet was counted as separate OS, it would have
> more users than Linux!

You are confirming is that Windows is the imminent target of
spyware/malware writers ? (Which was the original point of this
thread branch.)

It doesn't matter why. At this time, Windows is more susceptible
than Linux.

 

[Death]

"DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> wrote in message
news:Xns9D79D2D15CF9Fthisnthatroadrunnern@216.196.97.131...
> Bob I <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:H6GHn.4871$yx.324@newsfe13.iad:
>
>> The reason that "Linux" isn't targeted is that there aren't
>> enough installations to bother with. Lets face it, if the
>> Mariposa botnet was counted as separate OS, it would have
>> more users than Linux!
>
> You are confirming is that Windows is the imminent target of
> spyware/malware writers ? (Which was the original point of this
> thread branch.)
>
> It doesn't matter why. At this time, Windows is more susceptible
> than Linux.

People with money are more likely to be robbed.
No duh...moron.
Were you born stupid, or did a brick land in your brain cavity?

--
Vita brevis breviter in brevi finietur,
Mors venit velociter quae neminem veretur.

 

[John B. Slocomb]

On Sat, 15 May 2010 16:06:21 +0200, Alias
<aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:

>John B. Slocomb wrote:
>> On Sat, 15 May 2010 13:22:02 +0200, Alias
>> <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/15/2010 04:49 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 14 May 2010 15:45:42 +0200, Alias
>>>> <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Jackie wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/14/2010 13:13, Alias wrote:
>>>>>>> If I have to prove that Windows is vulnerable to malware and Linux is
>>>>>>> much more secure to you guys, then doing so is a futile endeavor and I'm
>>>>>>> not into futile endeavors.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is a very general statement compared to ones you have previously
>>>>>> given. For example, you gave a statements such as "If you click on an ad
>>>>>> laced with malware, you're giving it permission to run" and "there is
>>>>>> malware that has developed the ability to fool ALL anti virus/malware
>>>>>> apps and UAC". If you didn't see my response to this, please do that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now, to answer your general statement...
>>>>>> For malicious apps to cause any damage to the system, it must be
>>>>>> elevated. I have already responded about the link you gave about
>>>>>> bypassing AV software
>>>>>> (http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/New-attack-bypasses-anti-virus-software-997621.html).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In pre-release versions of Windows 7, it was possible for a malicious
>>>>>> application to take advantage of the automatic elevation option in
>>>>>> Windows 7. I do not know if this was fixed in the final version.
>>>>>> http://www.withinwindows.com/2009/0...n-mistake-lets-malware-elevate-freely-easily/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This feature is not present in Ubuntu, and you *can* turn it off in
>>>>>> Windows 7. That means it can no longer be taken advantage of.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course, a malicious app could mess up your personal files that you
>>>>>> always have full access to, but that applies for Linux as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ubuntu has AppArmor installed by default. This is a an access control
>>>>>> system developed by Novell.
>>>>>> You can read more about it here:
>>>>>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AppArmor
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unfortunately, Windows does not have that installed by default, but you
>>>>>> can get similar solutions. I said earlier that I used Outpost Firewall
>>>>>> Pro 2009 that has a "Host protection" feature that provides a pretty
>>>>>> good amount of access control (like I mentioned in an earlier post). I
>>>>>> also use Sandboxie to run certain applications with limited resources.
>>>>>> http://www.sandboxie.com/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Such solutions giving such great amount of control are not already
>>>>>> pre-installed and/or very well integrated with Windows.
>>>>>> Considering that a similar solution is pre-installed in Ubuntu and does
>>>>>> not cost anything, I would say that it is indeed unfortunate for Windows.
>>>>>
>>>>> Most people who use Windows don't update hardly anything. Techies can
>>>>> secure a Windows install but, like you said, with Ubuntu, it's installed
>>>>> securely by default.
>>>>
>>>> Alias, Alias, you are letting your ignorance show... yet again.
>>>>
>>>> Certainly you must know that configuring SELinux (you do know what
>>>> SELinux is?) is one of the most common hacks in Linux. "If you have
>>>> I/O problems just re-configure it to "disabled" and you're right,
>>>> mate."
>>>>
>>>> Of course, the Newbees have problems and have to ask for advise, so it
>>>> is pretty obvious to anyone who does a bit of reading that many Linux
>>>> systems are wide open.
>>>>
>>>> In addition, the possibility of acquiring mal-ware depends greatly on
>>>> how one uses the computer. I'm sure that you have discovered that
>>>> those who spend their time downloading warz and porn are very
>>>> susceptible to the problem while I can assure you that using the
>>>> computer in a more mature manner results in little or no mal-ware
>>>> being received.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> John B. Slocomb
>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>>
>>> I guess you've never heard of drive by malware and you are assuming that
>>> all Linux users are ignorant and all Windows users know what they're
>>> doing. You're wrong.
>>
>>
>> As I have told you, you really, really, need a course in English
>> comprehensive. I never said or implied that all Linux users are
>> ignorant or that windows users know what they are doing.
>
>No, you implied it.
>
>> although it
>> is quite plain to anyone that can read that the Linux Newbees are the
>> prime users of Ubuntu.
>
>And Windows.
>
>> Or, at least the problems that they seem to
>> post, looking for help, are generally not the sort that system
>> managers usually need help with.
>
>People without problems, even newbies, don't post on the forums much so
>what you're seeing is not a complete picture even though you represent
>it as such.


Alias, how stupid are you?

You state "People without problems, even newbies, don't post on the
forums much...".

Tell us, of all the vast multitude of posts you have made in this
group how many were concerned with a problem that you are having?

"Hoisted on his own petard" is a term commonly applied to people like
you. "Liar" is another.

John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[John B. Slocomb]

On Sat, 15 May 2010 16:078 +0200, Alias
<aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:

>John B. Slocomb wrote:
>> On Sat, 15 May 2010 13:23:57 +0200, Alias
>> <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/15/2010 04:53 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 14 May 2010 15:46:50 +0200, Alias
>>>> <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 14 May 2010 126:07 +0200, Alias
>>>>>> <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jackie wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2010 03:06, John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Ah Jackie, you are learning about Alias. He posts some unsupported
>>>>>>>>> slander about Windows and when someone rebuts his post complete with
>>>>>>>>> quotes and references to demonstrate validity he replies with
>>>>>>>>> irrelevancies.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It would be nice if he could actually try to back anything he says up
>>>>>>>> even he doesn't have any reliable references, because it really is like
>>>>>>>> you say. Technical details would be good so that we can see if it even
>>>>>>>> sounds logical or not.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OR, you could do your own research and see if what I am saying is true.
>>>>>>> What is it about you Windows users that makes you think everyone has to
>>>>>>> prove to you what they say is true?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suppose because most of us prefer not to be lied to. If you
>>>>>> don't/can't prove it how do we know that you aren't deliberately
>>>>>> lying? And after you display your ignorance of computers a few times
>>>>>> it is very difficult to accept that you know anything at all. Another
>>>>>> reason is because many people are naturally polite and dislike saying
>>>>>> "You are a liar" so instead that say something like "can you prove
>>>>>> it?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And I don't believe that it is confined to Windows users, I doubt that
>>>>>> many actually like to be lied to.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John B. Slocomb
>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>>>>
>>>>> Double yawn.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I'm sure that you are correct. Telling the truth is a boring
>>>> subject, isn't it? Certainly you appear to be much more inclined to
>>>> tell lies then tell the truth.
>>>>
>>>> Or is it simple ignorance that you suffer from?
>>>>
>>>> John B. Slocomb
>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>>
>>> You can't reply to me without stating you are perfect and I am
>>> imperfect, can you? You, sir, are a BORE and a very amateurish debater.
>>
>>
>> You really are bad at the English language aren't you.
>
>First lie.
>
>< I talk about
>> you telling lies and you say that I'm perfect?
>
>Second lie.

You see, you prove my point that your English is faulty.

I write that I talk about you telling lies and you say that I'm
perfect"
You call it a lie.

I wrote, " Certainly you appear to be much more inclined to tell lies
then tell the truth."
You wrote, "You can't reply to me without stating you are perfect..."

Then you state that I am lying when I repeat it.
Alias, you either can't read or you have an extremely short memory.
Or you are lying yet again.

>>
>> Perhaps using your standards I am... I don't tell lies.
>
>Third lie.

Ah.. And what have I lied about?

>> Does that make
>> me a perfect person in your society?
>>
>> John B. Slocomb
>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>
>You're far from perfect. You rely on ad hominem attacks for your
>"arguments". That's very amateurish.

Are you really saying that when you expose your complete ignorance
about Windows (the kernel is the Registry) and Linux (based on the
desktop environment) and I state that you don't know what you are
talking about, that is a personal attack?

Either you don't actually know what the Latin means or you are simply
trying to cover up your ignorance.

An ad hominem (Latin: "argument toward the person" or "argument
against the person"), is an argument which links the validity of a
premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the
premise.
In other words, if I argue that because you are a "dirty rat" your
evidence that you saw me rob the bank is not valid.

But that is not what happened. You made a totally erroneous statement
and I stated that you demonstrated your ignorance of the subject by
making that statement.
Hardly a personal attack, rather a statement of fact.

John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[John B. Slocomb]

On Sat, 15 May 2010 16:02:52 +0200, Alias
<aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:

>John B. Slocomb wrote:
>> On Sat, 15 May 2010 13:18:44 +0200, Alias
>> <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/15/2010 05:40 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 14 May 2010 18:53:28 +0200, Jackie<Jackie@an.on> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/14/2010 18:10, Heywood Jablowme wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Who the hell wants to run Windows applications in Ubuntu and who the
>>>>>> hell would want to run them under WHINE? If you need Microsoft
>>>>>> applications, and most people want MS apps, then use Windows. No need to
>>>>>> use that INFERIOR Ubuntu that nobody wants.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ubuntu was written by geeks for geeks who can't get laid.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Having *options* is a very good thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> It can be nice if you want to use Ubuntu and you actually have that
>>>>> option to use them via an emulator (Wine, CXGames, Cedega).
>>>>>
>>>>> Having used Windows since Windows 95 up until present version and not
>>>>> much Linux, I wouldn't exactly say that Ubuntu is bad. Overall, I
>>>>> personally feel that Windows is more complete. But... Windows still
>>>>> lacks essential features that Ubuntu has pre-installed. I, for one,
>>>>> think that finding and installing applications and the best drivers
>>>>> could (and should) be easier in Windows. There's a potential solution
>>>>> for this if you could gather developers and their products into one
>>>>> place. There were no good solution in Windows as early as in (most?)
>>>>> Linux distros (and still not now). I believe that is why applications
>>>>> for Windows are so spread without a good, easy, built-in way to find,
>>>>> browse and install them from one single place.
>>>>
>>>> I think that one of the reasons for the "Oh! Linux can do anything
>>>> that Windows can" fiction is that most of the people using either
>>>> system aren't using it professionally.
>>>>
>>>> One of the major reasons is that the vast majority of the business
>>>> world uses Windows and the associated applications. If you do a job
>>>> for most companies you will run head on into the fact that your Linux
>>>> system doesn't match their Windows.
>>>>
>>>> Almost every project I have been on used Auto-Cad and during
>>>> construction of a project there are innumerable changes in the
>>>> drawings. The normal practice is to e-mail complete drawings back and
>>>> forth between the Engineering Office and the Field. Up-dated drawing
>>>> going out to the Field and marked up drawings showing the "As-builts"
>>>> sent back.
>>>>
>>>> Frequently if one writes a report the company will request that both a
>>>> printed report and a disk copy be furnished, particularly if any form
>>>> of legal problems are anticipated. And, with extremely rare exceptions
>>>> they want the disks in "Word format".
>>>>
>>>> It is all well and good to say "Well, Open Office can do the job", but
>>>> if you deliver a Linux formatted disk with a OO document on it you
>>>> will probably be told in no uncertain terms that it is not what you
>>>> contracted to do.
>>>>
>>>> Of course Auto-Cad will run on Linux using Wine but how big a data
>>>> file can it handle? Are you sure that it can edit the largest drawing
>>>> that the Engineers want to send? If you are out in the middle of a 100
>>>> Sq. Km. sugar cane plantation in the middle of Java building a gas
>>>> plant for the National Oil Company it is not really a good time to
>>>> discover that you can't do your job because Linux won't do it.
>>>>
>>>> No, as long as windows is the dominant computer operating system Linux
>>>> is never going to be a wholly acceptable system..
>>>>
>>>> John B. Slocomb
>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>>
>>> You're right. Some things can only be done with Windows, at least for
>>> now. My point is that most HOME USERS can do everything they do with
>>> Windows but more securely if they use Ubuntu or another Linux distro.
>>
>> I just installed Fedora 13 (beta) on my Granddaughter's game computer
>> - dual boot, Win 7 and Fedora - and set up Clamav to do periodic virus
>> scans on the Linux partition. Thought I'd give the kid a fighting
>> chance so changed things around a bit so that Linux could see the
>> windows directory and set up Clamav to scan that partition too.
>>
>> This is a machine that a 7 year old girl uses and has the installed
>> Win 7 firewall and whatever they call it that won't let you run a
>> program without clicking on yet another permission box. Probably not
>> earth shaking protection.
>>
>> Results - no virus.
>>
>> Actually, I have had one serious virus in something like 20 years and
>> I got that one from a bootleg copied disk. I use a firewall and do
>> periodic virus scans but frankly I have never had a problem with
>> mal-ware or virus that effected the operations of the computer.
>>
>> My own suspicions are that these people who have massive problems with
>> mal-ware or virus are very likely not using a decent firewall or are
>> downloading a lot of porn and warz.
>>
>> John B. Slocomb
>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>
>You're forgetting about not updating Windows, Java, Flash, etc. as
>causes. That's the beautiful thing about Linux: the updates update
>everything you have installed if you configure it properly. Once I had

That sounds quite modern - automatic updates. Of course Windows offers
that service, if you want it.
However I consider it a bit risky as at least twice I have updated
Linux and in one case OpenOffice stopped running and in another the
Nvidia display stopped working.

Hardly the miracle that you represent it to be.

>to clean up an XP machine that had never been defragged (customer:
>what's that?) or updated (customer: what's that?). It took over ten
>minutes to boot up and once it booted, pop up Windows had a fucking
>field day. I ended up reinstalling XP because there was just too much
>malware to deal with and there was no guarantee that the AV and other
>anti malware programs would completely remove all malware.

You seem to be talking about three different things here. (1),
updating software; (2), de fragmenting a disk; and (3), mal-ware. None
of which have any relationship to the other.

>Oh, and Warez went out of business almost a decade ago. The new sites
>are www.PirateBay.org and www.Torrents.to. Where I live it is LEGAL to

Warez, or warz, is a generic term commonly used by a certain portion
of the computer world to indicate illegally copied software, and there
are certainly plenty of sites offering it under those names.

And Pirate's Bay is hardly a new site, either.


John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[John B. Slocomb]

On Sat, 15 May 2010 16:15:24 +0200, Alias
<aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:

>Death wrote:
>> Alias wrote:
>>
>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 15 May 2010 13:18:44 +0200, Alias
>>>> <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 05/15/2010 05:40 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 14 May 2010 18:53:28 +0200, Jackie<Jackie@an.on> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/14/2010 18:10, Heywood Jablowme wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Who the hell wants to run Windows applications in Ubuntu and who the
>>>>>>>> hell would want to run them under WHINE? If you need Microsoft
>>>>>>>> applications, and most people want MS apps, then use Windows. No need to
>>>>>>>> use that INFERIOR Ubuntu that nobody wants.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ubuntu was written by geeks for geeks who can't get laid.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Having *options* is a very good thing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It can be nice if you want to use Ubuntu and you actually have that
>>>>>>> option to use them via an emulator (Wine, CXGames, Cedega).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Having used Windows since Windows 95 up until present version and not
>>>>>>> much Linux, I wouldn't exactly say that Ubuntu is bad. Overall, I
>>>>>>> personally feel that Windows is more complete. But... Windows still
>>>>>>> lacks essential features that Ubuntu has pre-installed. I, for one,
>>>>>>> think that finding and installing applications and the best drivers
>>>>>>> could (and should) be easier in Windows. There's a potential solution
>>>>>>> for this if you could gather developers and their products into one
>>>>>>> place. There were no good solution in Windows as early as in (most?)
>>>>>>> Linux distros (and still not now). I believe that is why applications
>>>>>>> for Windows are so spread without a good, easy, built-in way to find,
>>>>>>> browse and install them from one single place.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that one of the reasons for the "Oh! Linux can do anything
>>>>>> that Windows can" fiction is that most of the people using either
>>>>>> system aren't using it professionally.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One of the major reasons is that the vast majority of the business
>>>>>> world uses Windows and the associated applications. If you do a job
>>>>>> for most companies you will run head on into the fact that your Linux
>>>>>> system doesn't match their Windows.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Almost every project I have been on used Auto-Cad and during
>>>>>> construction of a project there are innumerable changes in the
>>>>>> drawings. The normal practice is to e-mail complete drawings back and
>>>>>> forth between the Engineering Office and the Field. Up-dated drawing
>>>>>> going out to the Field and marked up drawings showing the "As-builts"
>>>>>> sent back.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Frequently if one writes a report the company will request that both a
>>>>>> printed report and a disk copy be furnished, particularly if any form
>>>>>> of legal problems are anticipated. And, with extremely rare exceptions
>>>>>> they want the disks in "Word format".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is all well and good to say "Well, Open Office can do the job", but
>>>>>> if you deliver a Linux formatted disk with a OO document on it you
>>>>>> will probably be told in no uncertain terms that it is not what you
>>>>>> contracted to do.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course Auto-Cad will run on Linux using Wine but how big a data
>>>>>> file can it handle? Are you sure that it can edit the largest drawing
>>>>>> that the Engineers want to send? If you are out in the middle of a 100
>>>>>> Sq. Km. sugar cane plantation in the middle of Java building a gas
>>>>>> plant for the National Oil Company it is not really a good time to
>>>>>> discover that you can't do your job because Linux won't do it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, as long as windows is the dominant computer operating system Linux
>>>>>> is never going to be a wholly acceptable system..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John B. Slocomb
>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>>>>
>>>>> You're right. Some things can only be done with Windows, at least for
>>>>> now. My point is that most HOME USERS can do everything they do with
>>>>> Windows but more securely if they use Ubuntu or another Linux distro.
>>>>
>>>> I just installed Fedora 13 (beta) on my Granddaughter's game computer
>>>> - dual boot, Win 7 and Fedora - and set up Clamav to do periodic virus
>>>> scans on the Linux partition. Thought I'd give the kid a fighting
>>>> chance so changed things around a bit so that Linux could see the
>>>> windows directory and set up Clamav to scan that partition too.
>>>>
>>>> This is a machine that a 7 year old girl uses and has the installed
>>>> Win 7 firewall and whatever they call it that won't let you run a
>>>> program without clicking on yet another permission box. Probably not
>>>> earth shaking protection.
>>>>
>>>> Results - no virus.
>>>>
>>>> Actually, I have had one serious virus in something like 20 years and
>>>> I got that one from a bootleg copied disk. I use a firewall and do
>>>> periodic virus scans but frankly I have never had a problem with
>>>> mal-ware or virus that effected the operations of the computer.
>>>>
>>>> My own suspicions are that these people who have massive problems with
>>>> mal-ware or virus are very likely not using a decent firewall or are
>>>> downloading a lot of porn and warz.
>>>>
>>>> John B. Slocomb
>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>>
>>> You're forgetting about not updating Windows, Java, Flash, etc. as
>>> causes. That's the beautiful thing about Linux: the updates update
>>> everything you have installed if you configure it properly.
>>
>> Windows,java,Flash,whatever-your-heart-desires gets updated in Windows
>> automatically,dummy.
>> Do you actual run Windows, or do you just despise it?
>>
>>
>>> Once I had
>>> to clean up an XP machine that had never been defragged (customer:
>>> what's that?) or updated (customer: what's that?). It took over ten
>>> minutes to boot up and once it booted, pop up Windows had a fucking
>>> field day. I ended up reinstalling XP because there was just too much
>>> malware to deal with and there was no guarantee that the AV and other
>>> anti malware programs would completely remove all malware.
>>>
>>
>> You re-installed XP cause that is your skill level...stick a DVD/live-CD
>> in a tray, call it "support".
>>
>>
>>> Oh, and Warez went out of business almost a decade ago. The new sites
>>> are www.PirateBay.org and www.Torrents.to. Where I live it is LEGAL to
>>> download from those sites as long as you don't plan on selling what you
>>> download. The so-called loss that the audio and video companies
>>> supposedly suffer is made up by a charge on every single blank CD or DVD
>>> that you buy. Quite sensible, really. I would never download software
>>> from there because we are talking about millions of files. Audio and
>>> video, OTOH, can be scanned before running and I've never had a problem.
>>>
>>
>> It's still all called "warez", dummy.
>
>Only by dummies like you.
>
>> You and your pendantic ass.
>>
>
>Warez was a specific group and they got busted. You probably also ask
>for a "Xerox" copy when you should say photo copy.


Alias, go to google (www.google.com) and type "warez" (without the
inverted commas) into the search block. You'll get thousands of hits
on God only knows how many sites.

It is a generic term.

Why do you insist on displaying your ignorance?

John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[John B. Slocomb]

On Sat, 15 May 2010 18:14:54 +0200, Alias
<aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:

>Death wrote:
>> Alias wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/15/2010 04:27 PM, Death wrote:
>>>> Alias wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Death wrote:
>>>>
>>>> SNIP
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Windows,java,Flash,whatever-your-heart-desires gets updated in Windows
>>>>>> automatically,dummy.
>>>>>> Do you actual run Windows, or do you just despise it?
>>>>>
>>>>> You're wrong on all counts.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dumbass.
>>>
>>> Wrong again.
>>>
>>
>> Java will update itself...flash will update itself...
>
>No, it won't.
>
>> Windows and
>> Office will update itself.
>
>Only if it's configured to update itself.
>

Ah... You are the one that said Linux would update itself "IF IT WAS
CONFIGURED TO".

If that is an asset in Linux why is it that you don't accept that it
is an asset in windows?

John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[John B. Slocomb]

On Sat, 15 May 2010 13:422 -0500, DanS
<t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> wrote:

>John B. Slocomb <johnbslocomb@invalid.com> wrote in
>news:m7atu55uq0eosj9caa6d302lrekicq5o91@4ax.com:
>
>> On Sat, 15 May 2010 0770 -0500, DanS
>> <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> You allege that Windows is more susceptible to malware
>>>> then Linux but other then your say so why should we
>>>> believe you?
>>>
>>>Are you saying that Windows isn't more susceptible to
>>>malware/virii ?
>>
>> Of course Windows is more susceptible to the present crop
>> of virus/mal-ware. That wasn't the point I was making. I
>> was stating that his simple waving his hands and shouting
>> that "the sky is falling" isn't, particularly with Alias,
>> who has a history of either lying or getting his facts
>> mixed up.
>
><SNIP>
>
>I'll repeat my paragraph below.
>
>>>I just think you picked the wrong subject to try to make
>>>your point, as we all know, Malware/Spyware, and either
>>>through automatic infection, or by some socially engineered
>>>infection method, **is written for the Windows OS**, so by
>>>that token alone I would think that it proves Windows *is*
>>>much much more susceptible than Linux.
>>
>> I don't think that is necessarily correct. There is no
>> question that there is more Windows mal-ware, and more
>> being written every day, but I think that Windows mal-ware
>> is so pervasive simply because nearly all computers are
>> using Windows. Any marketing guru will tell you to go for
>> the mass market.
>>
>> But don't get the idea that Linux is somehow completely
>> bullet proof.
>
>I don't believe any OS is completely bulletproof.
>
>> In fact Linux Format (a British magazine) in
>> an article about firewalls went to some length to make the
>> point that while the vast majority of mal-ware is for
>> Windows as Linux gains a larger share of the market the
>> amount of Linux mal-ware will become greater.
>
>There may be an increase in Linux malware. Or, a little more
>accurately, we may actually see malware that does target Linux
>and that may be successful and exist in the wild. But it's not
>really here now.
>
>> Most personal Linux systems have java installed. Many run
>> Thunderbird or Firefox, openoffice will run scripts and
>> those are all ways that mal-ware can sneak into a system.
>> If there are FTP or Telnet ports open those can be a source
>> of infection.
>
>Yes.
>
>> Even today it is not uncommon to read about a web site that
>> was hacked or financial records that were stolen. Nearly
>> all of these take place on sites using Linux equipment.
>
>It may sound cliche', but these are nearly exclusively traced
>back to bad/unsafe configurations and weak passwords, or
>unpatched systems, which can and do affect any OS. You would
>expect any competant IT personel to follow proper security
>measures and be able to keep up on things.

Read "The Cuckoo's Egg". It describes an attack made on a large number
of Unix installations. The point is that when the author attempted to
alert sites to the problem, in nearly all cases the sites refused to
answer as "their security was perfect".

System Administrators are hardly perfect.

(its a good read too

>
>But I digress, the subject is maleware/spyware that affects
>the home users. That is the biggest problem security wise. I'm
>not concerned about some schmoe trying to gain access to my PC
>using some remote buffer exploit and DOS attack......I'm
>concerned about s/w being put on my machine that's stealing
>logins and passwords from banking sites, and credit card
>companies and such.

I agree, at the moment. The point that I was trying to make is that if
Linux ever gains a dominant position in the computer world that the
amount of Linux mal-ware will increase proportionally.

Reading http://www.linuxsecurity.com/content/section/3/170/ indicates
that essentially all Linux distros have weak areas that could be
exploited.

John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[Alias]

On 05/15/2010 08:02 PM, Death wrote:
> "Alias"<aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
> news:hsmmbk$crf$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Death wrote:
>>> Alias wrote:
>>>
>>>> Death wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Not what I did. The machine had a hidden partition
>>>>>
>>>>> Hidden where?
>>>>> Under the chair?
>>>>> In another part of the house?
>>>>> What the fuck does that have to do with anything?
>>>>
>>>> Um, you said I slipped in a CD. Connect the dots.
>>>>
>>>
>>> No way...you actually have customers that hire you to boot from a
>>> recovery partition?
>>
>> Most Windows users don't know what that is. People are paid to reinstall
>> Windows all the time. Where have you been, under a rock?
>>
>
> Must have been.
> Smart people probably don't.

Note I wrote "most", not "all". I've never paid anyone to reinstall an
OS for me, for example.

>
>>> LMFAO...
>>> Can children enter into a contract in Spain?
>>>
>>
>> Do you think you could be a bit more supercilious and patronizing in your
>> vain quest to put yourself up and me down?
>
> No, I'm actually restraining myself.

Then go for it.

> You find out how to update software yet?
>

I've known how to do that longer than you have.

--
Alias

 

[Alias]

On 05/16/2010 04:17 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
> On Sat, 15 May 2010 18:14:54 +0200, Alias
> <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:
>
>> Death wrote:
>>> Alias wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 05/15/2010 04:27 PM, Death wrote:
>>>>> Alias wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Death wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> SNIP
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Windows,java,Flash,whatever-your-heart-desires gets updated in Windows
>>>>>>> automatically,dummy.
>>>>>>> Do you actual run Windows, or do you just despise it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You're wrong on all counts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dumbass.
>>>>
>>>> Wrong again.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Java will update itself...flash will update itself...
>>
>> No, it won't.
>>
>>> Windows and
>>> Office will update itself.
>>
>> Only if it's configured to update itself.
>>
>
> Ah... You are the one that said Linux would update itself "IF IT WAS
> CONFIGURED TO".

I was referring to programs that are not installed by default and the
repository needs to be added.

>
> If that is an asset in Linux why is it that you don't accept that it
> is an asset in windows?
>
> John B. Slocomb
> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

It's getting better in Windows but you still need to get updates from
more than one source, unlike Linux. You see, for home users, the less
complicated you make it, the better for the home user and the safer for
everyone on the Net. But you don't care about that. All you care about
is winning a pissing contest with someone.

--
Alias

 

[Alias]

On 05/16/2010 04:03 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
> On Sat, 15 May 2010 16:02:52 +0200, Alias
> <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:
>
>> John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>> On Sat, 15 May 2010 13:18:44 +0200, Alias
>>> <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 05/15/2010 05:40 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 14 May 2010 18:53:28 +0200, Jackie<Jackie@an.on> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/14/2010 18:10, Heywood Jablowme wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Who the hell wants to run Windows applications in Ubuntu and who the
>>>>>>> hell would want to run them under WHINE? If you need Microsoft
>>>>>>> applications, and most people want MS apps, then use Windows. No need to
>>>>>>> use that INFERIOR Ubuntu that nobody wants.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ubuntu was written by geeks for geeks who can't get laid.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Having *options* is a very good thing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It can be nice if you want to use Ubuntu and you actually have that
>>>>>> option to use them via an emulator (Wine, CXGames, Cedega).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Having used Windows since Windows 95 up until present version and not
>>>>>> much Linux, I wouldn't exactly say that Ubuntu is bad. Overall, I
>>>>>> personally feel that Windows is more complete. But... Windows still
>>>>>> lacks essential features that Ubuntu has pre-installed. I, for one,
>>>>>> think that finding and installing applications and the best drivers
>>>>>> could (and should) be easier in Windows. There's a potential solution
>>>>>> for this if you could gather developers and their products into one
>>>>>> place. There were no good solution in Windows as early as in (most?)
>>>>>> Linux distros (and still not now). I believe that is why applications
>>>>>> for Windows are so spread without a good, easy, built-in way to find,
>>>>>> browse and install them from one single place.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that one of the reasons for the "Oh! Linux can do anything
>>>>> that Windows can" fiction is that most of the people using either
>>>>> system aren't using it professionally.
>>>>>
>>>>> One of the major reasons is that the vast majority of the business
>>>>> world uses Windows and the associated applications. If you do a job
>>>>> for most companies you will run head on into the fact that your Linux
>>>>> system doesn't match their Windows.
>>>>>
>>>>> Almost every project I have been on used Auto-Cad and during
>>>>> construction of a project there are innumerable changes in the
>>>>> drawings. The normal practice is to e-mail complete drawings back and
>>>>> forth between the Engineering Office and the Field. Up-dated drawing
>>>>> going out to the Field and marked up drawings showing the "As-builts"
>>>>> sent back.
>>>>>
>>>>> Frequently if one writes a report the company will request that both a
>>>>> printed report and a disk copy be furnished, particularly if any form
>>>>> of legal problems are anticipated. And, with extremely rare exceptions
>>>>> they want the disks in "Word format".
>>>>>
>>>>> It is all well and good to say "Well, Open Office can do the job", but
>>>>> if you deliver a Linux formatted disk with a OO document on it you
>>>>> will probably be told in no uncertain terms that it is not what you
>>>>> contracted to do.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course Auto-Cad will run on Linux using Wine but how big a data
>>>>> file can it handle? Are you sure that it can edit the largest drawing
>>>>> that the Engineers want to send? If you are out in the middle of a 100
>>>>> Sq. Km. sugar cane plantation in the middle of Java building a gas
>>>>> plant for the National Oil Company it is not really a good time to
>>>>> discover that you can't do your job because Linux won't do it.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, as long as windows is the dominant computer operating system Linux
>>>>> is never going to be a wholly acceptable system..
>>>>>
>>>>> John B. Slocomb
>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>>>
>>>> You're right. Some things can only be done with Windows, at least for
>>>> now. My point is that most HOME USERS can do everything they do with
>>>> Windows but more securely if they use Ubuntu or another Linux distro.
>>>
>>> I just installed Fedora 13 (beta) on my Granddaughter's game computer
>>> - dual boot, Win 7 and Fedora - and set up Clamav to do periodic virus
>>> scans on the Linux partition. Thought I'd give the kid a fighting
>>> chance so changed things around a bit so that Linux could see the
>>> windows directory and set up Clamav to scan that partition too.
>>>
>>> This is a machine that a 7 year old girl uses and has the installed
>>> Win 7 firewall and whatever they call it that won't let you run a
>>> program without clicking on yet another permission box. Probably not
>>> earth shaking protection.
>>>
>>> Results - no virus.
>>>
>>> Actually, I have had one serious virus in something like 20 years and
>>> I got that one from a bootleg copied disk. I use a firewall and do
>>> periodic virus scans but frankly I have never had a problem with
>>> mal-ware or virus that effected the operations of the computer.
>>>
>>> My own suspicions are that these people who have massive problems with
>>> mal-ware or virus are very likely not using a decent firewall or are
>>> downloading a lot of porn and warz.
>>>
>>> John B. Slocomb
>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>
>> You're forgetting about not updating Windows, Java, Flash, etc. as
>> causes. That's the beautiful thing about Linux: the updates update
>> everything you have installed if you configure it properly. Once I had
>
> That sounds quite modern - automatic updates. Of course Windows offers
> that service, if you want it.
> However I consider it a bit risky as at least twice I have updated
> Linux and in one case OpenOffice stopped running and in another the
> Nvidia display stopped working.
>
> Hardly the miracle that you represent it to be.

Not my experience and you are expecting me to believe you without any
proof? Can you say "hypocrite"?

>
>> to clean up an XP machine that had never been defragged (customer:
>> what's that?) or updated (customer: what's that?). It took over ten
>> minutes to boot up and once it booted, pop up Windows had a fucking
>> field day. I ended up reinstalling XP because there was just too much
>> malware to deal with and there was no guarantee that the AV and other
>> anti malware programs would completely remove all malware.
>
> You seem to be talking about three different things here. (1),
> updating software; (2), de fragmenting a disk; and (3), mal-ware. None
> of which have any relationship to the other.

I was giving an example of a Windows box that wasn't updated and what
happens to Windows boxes that don't update. The lack of defragging was
just another sign of how many home users "maintain" their computers.

>
>> Oh, and Warez went out of business almost a decade ago. The new sites
>> are www.PirateBay.org and www.Torrents.to. Where I live it is LEGAL to
>
> Warez, or warz, is a generic term commonly used by a certain portion
> of the computer world to indicate illegally copied software, and there
> are certainly plenty of sites offering it under those names.

Just like people say Xerox copy instead of photocopy.

>
> And Pirate's Bay is hardly a new site, either.
>
>
> John B. Slocomb
> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

Compared to the original Warez groups, it's brand new.

--
Alias

 

[Alias]

On 05/16/2010 03:27 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
> On Sat, 15 May 2010 16:06:21 +0200, Alias
> <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:
>
>> John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>> On Sat, 15 May 2010 13:22:02 +0200, Alias
>>> <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 05/15/2010 04:49 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 14 May 2010 15:45:42 +0200, Alias
>>>>> <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Jackie wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/14/2010 13:13, Alias wrote:
>>>>>>>> If I have to prove that Windows is vulnerable to malware and Linux is
>>>>>>>> much more secure to you guys, then doing so is a futile endeavor and I'm
>>>>>>>> not into futile endeavors.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is a very general statement compared to ones you have previously
>>>>>>> given. For example, you gave a statements such as "If you click on an ad
>>>>>>> laced with malware, you're giving it permission to run" and "there is
>>>>>>> malware that has developed the ability to fool ALL anti virus/malware
>>>>>>> apps and UAC". If you didn't see my response to this, please do that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now, to answer your general statement...
>>>>>>> For malicious apps to cause any damage to the system, it must be
>>>>>>> elevated. I have already responded about the link you gave about
>>>>>>> bypassing AV software
>>>>>>> (http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/New-attack-bypasses-anti-virus-software-997621.html).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In pre-release versions of Windows 7, it was possible for a malicious
>>>>>>> application to take advantage of the automatic elevation option in
>>>>>>> Windows 7. I do not know if this was fixed in the final version.
>>>>>>> http://www.withinwindows.com/2009/0...n-mistake-lets-malware-elevate-freely-easily/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This feature is not present in Ubuntu, and you *can* turn it off in
>>>>>>> Windows 7. That means it can no longer be taken advantage of.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Of course, a malicious app could mess up your personal files that you
>>>>>>> always have full access to, but that applies for Linux as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ubuntu has AppArmor installed by default. This is a an access control
>>>>>>> system developed by Novell.
>>>>>>> You can read more about it here:
>>>>>>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AppArmor
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unfortunately, Windows does not have that installed by default, but you
>>>>>>> can get similar solutions. I said earlier that I used Outpost Firewall
>>>>>>> Pro 2009 that has a "Host protection" feature that provides a pretty
>>>>>>> good amount of access control (like I mentioned in an earlier post). I
>>>>>>> also use Sandboxie to run certain applications with limited resources.
>>>>>>> http://www.sandboxie.com/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Such solutions giving such great amount of control are not already
>>>>>>> pre-installed and/or very well integrated with Windows.
>>>>>>> Considering that a similar solution is pre-installed in Ubuntu and does
>>>>>>> not cost anything, I would say that it is indeed unfortunate for Windows.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Most people who use Windows don't update hardly anything. Techies can
>>>>>> secure a Windows install but, like you said, with Ubuntu, it's installed
>>>>>> securely by default.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alias, Alias, you are letting your ignorance show... yet again.
>>>>>
>>>>> Certainly you must know that configuring SELinux (you do know what
>>>>> SELinux is?) is one of the most common hacks in Linux. "If you have
>>>>> I/O problems just re-configure it to "disabled" and you're right,
>>>>> mate."
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course, the Newbees have problems and have to ask for advise, so it
>>>>> is pretty obvious to anyone who does a bit of reading that many Linux
>>>>> systems are wide open.
>>>>>
>>>>> In addition, the possibility of acquiring mal-ware depends greatly on
>>>>> how one uses the computer. I'm sure that you have discovered that
>>>>> those who spend their time downloading warz and porn are very
>>>>> susceptible to the problem while I can assure you that using the
>>>>> computer in a more mature manner results in little or no mal-ware
>>>>> being received.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> John B. Slocomb
>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>>>
>>>> I guess you've never heard of drive by malware and you are assuming that
>>>> all Linux users are ignorant and all Windows users know what they're
>>>> doing. You're wrong.
>>>
>>>
>>> As I have told you, you really, really, need a course in English
>>> comprehensive. I never said or implied that all Linux users are
>>> ignorant or that windows users know what they are doing.
>>
>> No, you implied it.
>>
>>> although it
>>> is quite plain to anyone that can read that the Linux Newbees are the
>>> prime users of Ubuntu.
>>
>> And Windows.
>>
>>> Or, at least the problems that they seem to
>>> post, looking for help, are generally not the sort that system
>>> managers usually need help with.
>>
>> People without problems, even newbies, don't post on the forums much so
>> what you're seeing is not a complete picture even though you represent
>> it as such.
>
>
> Alias, how stupid are you?
>
> You state "People without problems, even newbies, don't post on the
> forums much...".
>
> Tell us, of all the vast multitude of posts you have made in this
> group how many were concerned with a problem that you are having?
>
> "Hoisted on his own petard" is a term commonly applied to people like
> you. "Liar" is another.
>
> John B. Slocomb
> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

You really are desperate to find *something* you can use to discredit me
and make yourself look wonderful. You really need to do something about
that. I help people under a different nym, a nym you'll never guess or
know so STFU. Now, for your infantile benefit, I will rephrase what I
said to meet your idiotic standards:

"MOST people who don't have problems with their OS do not post on
forums". Happy?

--
Alias