Slashdot Mirror
Teacher Gets Stolen Car Back, All Souped Up
Police found Amanda Pogany's stolen 1996 Honda in a chop shop and were able to return it to her. While in the custody of the thieves, the car got a few upgrades, including a new V-8 engine, manual transmission, leather interior, tinted windows, and oversize tires. Unfortunately Amanda won't be able to play The Fast and the Furious around the neighborhood with her new souped up car. She doesn't know how to drive a stick.
If this were true, I would be very interested in seeing it. Swapping a V8 into any Honda would require a ton of custom work.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
Cry me a river! Everyone talks about banning this and banning that. How about you just grow up and accept that people in a civilized world have different interests and hobbies. Why should we allow the few irresponsible to punish it for the rest of us law abiding citizens?
You want that 10K watt system? Turn is way down in residential areas. Want that 600+ HP engine crammed in a pocket rocket? Sure, but leave the racing at the track. Want aftermarket mufflers? Be tasteful about it. Unlike you Mr AC, we don't all want to live in a lock-step with each other and drive cookie-cutter bland vehicles. What we want, IS TO ENJOY LIFE and not be under the thumb of a bunch of busy-body-nanny-nosy people.
Life is not for the lazy.
Looks like a turbo 4.
Would learn to drive stick.
OR
Sell it for a new Car.
Either way. They can steal and my car any day if they bring it back like that
BUT it's a one out of a million chance. Couldn't of happened to a nicer person.
Say goodbye to all innovation in the automotive industry.
Responsibility is an addiction
Virtue is a temptation
Community is a cartel
Funny how a lot of these Anonymous Cowards all misspell exactly the same word exactly the same way. And APK always misspelled that word too. It’s almost like they’re all APK and he thinks he’s fooling anyone.
So you can't ID them and you can't catch them and they already break at least 2 laws (noise and speeding) but you believe they will stop if they would be breaking 3 laws instead of 2? Or were you hoping to have all cars pulled over and inspected for excessive stereo systems?
Do you want us to get off your lawn while we are at it, you fucking retard?
There is a war going on for your mind.
I am, he is, and I’m loving every second of it.
The guy stalking me is apk, in case that wasn’t painfully obvious.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
Clone hasn't disappeared, he posted yesterday. And believe me, most of the responses to you are from me, not him. In his shoes, I would be laughing at you. I'm a tad surprised that he removed the link from his signature, but I doubt your campaign is doing anything seriously to upset him.
And why am I posting? Well, I enjoy a good train-wreck as much as the next guy. This is one of the most bizarre meltdowns I've ever seen. Seriously dude, because of a link to an unflattering article in a signature, you're stalking Clone, and running some kind of campaign against some nobody from Ars Technica?
Really?
REALLY?
I told you two days ago how this looked. You're STILL DOING IT!
I'm going to get the pop-corn, this is going to be fun.
In the mean time, this is hilarious and deserves to be spread more widely: http://www.jeremyreimer.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=4128&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
I'm tempted to tweet it actually.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
I told you two days ago how this looked. You're STILL DOING IT!
Actually he’s been doing it for a lot longer than 2 days (yes, that is the same disagreement that he is currently having a hissy fit about). And only he would be psychotic enough to still be at it... at least, of the people I think I’ve met so far.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
Well, I was only referring to my original comment wondering what the hell he was doing, which was about two days ago. It had obviously been going on for a day or two before that, but I'm surprised by your link.
I have to say, I'm completely baffled by this one. I have no idea what the original argument was about, but, put it this way: I've certainly had arguments with people that went on for too long and drove me nuts, my normal response - and I assume the response of most sane people - is to walk away after a bit, make your point as calmly as possible, and let it go. Maybe have a final rant in a journal to get it off one's chest. This... this doesn't make sense.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Well, if you're not a spyware maker then obviously it's unfortunate, but in the US libel does require an element of malice, and from some quick Googling, it does appear that multiple sources believe you are, indeed, a spyware author. They may or may not be correct, but someone can legitimately, in good faith, say you are one because it's very easy to believe you are.
I say this because I googled "Alexander Peter Kowalski". The very first link is this one:
How to Respond When People Threaten to Sue You on the Web.
Now, in the above posting, you threaten the author of a spyware removal tool because his tool (and apparently others too) have identified one of your programs as being spyware. As with Jeremy Reimer and, indeed, Clone here, you were, apparently quick to yell "Libel", and your responses appear (to me - and I'm just giving you my honest opinion, this is how you're coming across to me) as hysterical and nutty. The impression anyone reading the article gets is not "My, Mr Kowalski has been given a very rough time, poor thing.", but "Some Spyware manufacturer is trying to intimidate anti-spyware people."
And, for what it's worth, doing some googling on the executable described by the above link continues the theme whereby apparently rather a lot of people are under the impression your software is spyware. The first eight links I get when I Google are all from anti-spyware organizations, and the other two on the first page aren't flattering either.
Coupled with the fact that respected agencies such as CA are apparently standing behind their claim your software is spyware, there is nothing libelous about Clone's viewpoint. It might be wrong, I can't comment, I've never been privileged enough to have your software on my PC (I'm a GNU/Linux guy personally), but it's not a malicious written falsehood that damages your reputation.
So, no, Clone isn't libeling anyone here. Here's what to do about it if you're telling the truth:
I'm saying this not because I think you will, but because it's what you have to do. At this point, Alexander Peter Kowalski's name is mud. It's mud not so much because someone got confused and thought you were making spyware when really you were making the coolest app evah, but because you haven't handled the criticism of the app particularly well.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
You realize that was a joke don't you? It was a response to someone who thought you have to drop into the command line when you install software under GNU/Linux.
Like I said, step back, take a deep breath, and calm down. You're your own worst enemy.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
*shrug* Oh well, at least I tried.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
You hit upon something I think when you mentioned sane people.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
The problem is that anyone who threatens to sue and then doesn't follow through has zero credibility. Posting as an A.C. also starts with a score of zero credibility ... that adds up to Double Zero credibility. The Double Zero ( oo ) looks a lot like the symbol for infinity, so to most people it probably looks like you score $_INFINITE_MINUS_CREDIBILITY. Either that or NaN.
About what you'd expect from someone who makes spyware ...
Of course, that brings on the whole question of "is it even possible to defame someone who posts under the name "Anonymous Coward"? Methinks not - after all, you're ... ummm ... you know ... anonymous. So you don't fall into the groups that can be defamed/libeled/slandered/whatever - an identifiable individual, business, product, group, government, or nation. ;-p
(cue Bugs Bunny saying "What a maroon!")
You can't defame someone who is anonymous. You can libel an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation. "Anonymous Coward" is none of those.
Instead of hiding behind the "Anonymous Coward" label (which seems to be rather appropriate, n'est pas?), why not take two seconds and get an account. Suggestion: If you want to have any credibility, don't use some throwaway freemail address, like cowards and spammers and malware writers do.
Or you could keep on ranting about how "Anonymous Coward" is being defamed. I'm sure there are plenty of other "Anonymous Cowards" who will, tongue in cheek, say "I resemble that remark!"
Does your momma know you talk like that to people who try to play nice?
Libel (or more accurately, defamation - libel and slander are actually different forms of defamation - which you would know if you had a lawyer, but don't let that stop you ... ) has certain requirements, and clone54321's postings don't meet the standard. While the truth is no longer an absolute defense against libel, it's a pretty good one, as is the defense of opinion. "Statements of opinion or pure opinion are not actionable." I think you're an idiot. That's my opinion, publicly stated. It's not actionable, because (1) I think you're acting like an idiot, and (2) I'm entitled to express my opinion, (3) I'm not doing so in a "false light", (4) it's in the public interest that whiny idiots be called on it, (5) consent - by posting here on slashdot, you have consented to the community norms, which include labeling people who act like you idiots.
clone54321 benefits from the same defenses.
Hi, idiot! Or sock-puppet. Or whatever.
Sue me! After all you said I was stalking you, so do it.
Yet another example of how deeply in over his head APK is, and doesn’t even know it.
Stalking and harassment are CRIMINAL offenses, not civil ones. This is not a matter of me suing you (you have no money anyway). You don’t sue over criminal matters. You press charges.
If you are convicted, apk, you can go to JAIL.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
On a 400 hertz computer. That's some antique you got going there. How's the supply of paper punch tape holding up? Need some more green bar fan-fold for the console?
If you can get a couple of viruses a month to run on a 400 hz computer, that's something we all want to see. Frankly, even the cheapest 4k 8-bit computers from 25-30 years ago ran around 1 mh (or double that with the right POKE command).
But getting "only" one or two viruses a month is nothing to brag about. I got zero this millennium.
So tell us more, "Mr. 400 hz 2 viruses a month club charter member."
BTW - use of a hosts file to avoid malware is deprecated because it's slower than other solutions, and no longer works. Your 2 viruses a month is proof of that. :-p
Thanks for the heads-up. How have I missed all this stupidity for so long :-)
One hour of work to save years of grief.
There IS a guide to making Windows secure - it's called "Windows Unplugged."
It has one page.
the page says:
Friends don't let friends use Windows.
One or two viruses every month means it doesn't work.
Next you'll be claiming that one or two STDs a month means that you're practicing safe sex. ... hello, Bristol!
Or one or two child rapes a month doesn't make you either a priest or a pedophile.
Or that an under-age pregnant daughter or two means that fundie faith-based abstinence instruction works
Or that going to a gay bar once or twice a month to get pounded doesn't make you gay.
Or that binge-drinking once or twice a month doesn't mean you have an alcohol problem.
Or that one or two criminal convictions a month doesn't make you a felon.
Or (bad car analogy time) that one or two car accidents a month doesn't make you a bad driver.
See the pattern? One or two viruses a month is FAIL. You can no has cheeseburger. Or, to put it in simpler terms, your faith-based computing sux.
The best way is for her to simply switch operating systems. I haven't seen a single virus in the wild on any *bsd or linux systems (or even the aix box). The second best way is for her to get someone who knows what they're doing to take over from you. Maybe she can ask the kid next door?
You obviously don't know me. I've spent LOTS of time in civil, regulatory, and criminal courts arguing cases, examining witnesses, writing, filing and arguing motions, and other fun stuff.
In one 4-day proceeding, I went head-to-head against the judge AND the government lawyers for 5 minutes before the judge finally saw the light - that I was right, and that the witness had done everything except answer the question.
My most recent me-against-the-government case - a couple of years ago, I sued the government - 2 days in court, and they had to not only drop their claim that I owed $70k - they had to pay me.
What else? I won a judgment that forced the city I'm living in now to change almost every street sign, etc., over a stupid $15 parking ticket that they wouldn't admit was wrong. The judge agreed with me.
I have Well over 1,000 hours experience. I enjoy it. So why don't you STFU? Oh wait, people without a clue have to keep babbling so that they can't hear the truth.
I already posted my solution - friends don't let friends use Windows.
According to your own argument, you should be encouraging everyone you know to switch from Windows, since linux and bsd are less of a target.
Look, your attempts to pimp your host-based "security solution" aren't working. It didn't work back in 1995 when we started playing around with that sort of stuff, and it doesn't work now. Your own figures prove it. Stupid shill, all you're doing is drawing more attention to the fact that you don't know what you're talking about, and that the apk hosts "solution" is a fraud.
So, why don't you answer the real question - why are you attempting to push a fraudulent anti-virus solution? One that you have demonstrated by your own figures doesn't work? That's the real question - the one you have failed to answer, despite changing the topic SO many times.
The apk "hosts file security solution" is a failure. Your own posts show it. "One or two viruses a month" is a failure. And no, reading "Windows IT Pro" magazine doesn't make you a professional - paid employment in the IT field makes you a professional (and no, working the cash at McD doesn't count).
So - how many Happy Meals did you serve yesterday, Mr. "I read Windows IT Pro magazine"?
Because it's obvious you never had a real paying job in IT.
Dear Lord you're a moron. You know, with your AWESOME detective skills you should really be a PI or work for the cops. If this is the level of skill you bring to software, it's no wonder that your shitware gets redflagged.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Wouldn't APK require a reputation in order to lose it? Searching on his full name gives Clone's link on the first page (first link?) of hits. I'd say that he has well and truly shot himself in the foot. Classic internet tough guy.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon