Slashdot Mirror
"Dislike" Button Scam Hits Facebook Users
An anonymous reader writes "A message saying 'I just got the Dislike button, so now I can dislike all of your dumb posts lol!!'
is spreading rapidly on Facebook, tempting unsuspecting users into believing that they will be able to "dislike" posts as well as "like" them.
However, security researchers say that it is just the latest 'survey scam', tricking Facebook users into into giving a rogue Facebook application permission to access their profile, and posting spam messages from their account.
The rogue application requires victims to complete an online survey (which makes money for the scammers) before ultimately redirecting to a Firefox browser add-on for a Facebook dislike button developed by FaceMod.
"As far as we can tell, FaceMod aren't connected with the scam — their browser add-on is simply being used as bait," says Sophos security blogger Graham Cluley."
-1 "Dislike"
Been going on for months.
OH Noes!
(obligatory anim GIF) http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n13/greatcapp/oh-noes-everybody-panic.gif
I never listen to those "check out this new feature" ads.
Invariably you have to hop through hoops. It's never free.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
1. Set up really popular new big thing!
2. Have 500 million morons congregate.
3. They do ??? which is important because ???
4. Sell ads for products they probably don't purchase because they're just goofing off on the internet because they're too broke to go do something fun instead.
5. ???
6. Profit!
Futurist Traditionalism
Can I just have a 'Dislike' button for all of Facebook, please?
Actually, I think I'll take a 'Tactical Nuclear Strike' button instead, now that I think of it.
This is not new news, really. There is always some scam going around that takes advantage of the inability of most users to distinguish untrusted content from trusted content, not to mention the people who click Yes to every pop-up without understanding what they've just done.
Facebook is a gold mine for scams like this. There are way too many people using the site that don't care about the dangers. Apathy and ignorance are best ways to spread this kind of thing, and they are found aplenty in any social networking crowd, at least when it comes to the technology behind the social aspect.
Green's Law of Debate: Anything is possible if you don't know what you're talking about.
-dislike-
everyone of you jerks who beat me to the coveted 'first post'. I dislike you all, a lot.
3295671st variation of "I love you" malware appeared online affecting mostly dumb BFUs.
839*929
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The scam hits Firefox + Facebook users, not Facebook users.
Nothing will happen if they're using IE, Safari, Chrome or Opera.
This is everything on facebook. All the "find out what Brady bunch character you are" polls exist only to gain access to your account. Even farmville is just a clever trick to lire users in with a game. Then it spans you and makes money from offers and by directly asking you for money.
Hell, even facebook itself is just a moneymaking ruse cleverly designed as a way to keep in touch with friends while it gains all your personal info. .
I can't really understand the loathing most people here display for facebook. Or rather, I do, but it seems like people loathe the basic idea of a "IRL overlay" social web? As long as you know enough people who use it, it's great for coordinating IRL activities like parties, birthdays, the nicer kind of activism, etc...
Emotions! In your brain!
Make it a game. Every one of those apps (with a few exceptions) are just spam. You can block them by clicking on the "posted by 'stupid app'" then on the apps page click on "block application".
Word on the street is there exists a firefox addin that does this for you--but I have never bothered to find it.
Facebook is one of the most useful applications ever on the Internet. Love it or hate it, it connects people and their media. It's social networking on a grand scale.
With that said, to use one of the greatest applications ever, you must compromise your privacy and security. That's how good Facebook is, no matter how bad the bad is, people keep using it.
I've thought of emptying my profile several times, and just providing a link to a personal web site. I don't want to delete my account totally, there are still people that I want to keep in contact with that aren't really computer savvy, but know how to use Facebook. I also have a MyBand page for, well, my band. Very useful for letting people know when our shows will be, as well as a great way to connect to our fans.
I have enough experience with computers (30+ years) to know the scams when I see them. I have never gotten malware/spyware from an online social site. The one thing I do give up is a bit of my privacy. Not that I'm too worried about all the boogie men out there (although I will be more fearful when my kids are old enough to be on it). I do however sometimes feel like George Costanza on Seinfeld where his worlds were colliding. I don't always want to mix personal and business lives, but it seems to happen on Facebook.
I guess for now, I take the bad with the good and vice versa. I'm too lazy to change the world myself, so I'll leave it to the next visionaries to build a better Facebook and one that is just as popular.
Oh, noes! Where oh where have I seen that before...?
It looks like a regular waste of time (which, by definition, is the point of all facebook activities, right?).
Now, there may indeed be a more nefarious info-gathering subtext to this, but otherwise it looks like it posts that you like this app (which many do), that you fill out a survey (which is what lots of people do on FB, based on many of my friends' status updates), and it sends you to a FF add-on.
This sounds like everything else on FaceBook...I'm waiting for the "then is steals your children and sells them into slavery" part that will make us care about it.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
oblig. "I'm too cool for Facebook, and anyone who uses it is Teh Stoopid". post. In fact, I'm so indie I only use websites that don't exist yet that no one else uses, either. And I don't communicate with anyone or anything via the Internet, I only passively consume it. Yay!
..or you could simply add "127.0.0.1 facebook.com" to your hosts file - one little tweak, works on every OS, on every browser. The cleanest way for all those who just don't care much for it.
(Btw if you're using localhost as a webserver it's probably better to use 0.0.0.0 for all you annoyance blocking needs instead)
And when you gaze long enough into the code, the code will also gaze into you.
I think socially it would make sense to have some more buttons.
But they should always be anonymous.
So when someone posts: "I'm washing my car! Isn't water so amazing!"...
they'll get a variety of feedback like:
1 friend likes this
12 friends think this is stupid
7 friends say "so what?"
Then maybe people wouldn't post everything that comes to mind. It would be just like in the real world.
When someone walks blindly into a group of friends and just says, "I'm washing my car! Isn't water so amazing!", it's bizarre.
This article isn't really news. It seems that there is *always* something like this happening. Facebook is the perfect place for scams to happen. It's basically the new AOL.
You have many amateur users who don't understand the first thing about security, and you have millions of them. Millions! Make something that looks slightly "official," and you've got it made. (Remember the old antivirus popups on websites?)
We basically have a conglomerated database of targets for any exploit in a system that changes its layouts and features so frequently that no one can ever recognize that something looks a little off...
n/t
The bottom line is that this scam wouldn't be possible if Facebook had implemented a real dislike button years ago when people demanded one.
I've been seeing a lot of posts saying "[Name] likes [platitude] on ." from people who would probably never post [platitude]. Things like "Clarence likes “I don't have a temper problem, everyone else needs to stop pissing me off” on ." I'm afraid to click either the platitude or the heart, but I can't really find any evidence about what the hell is going on.
Give us a dislike button already.
FACEBOOK IS A SCAM.
They exist to derive value from your information. Friends, addresses, posts, even images.
That the scammers also sell you to other scammers should not be surprising.
So give Facebook only what you are willing to part with.
Ok?
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
It's "stories" like this that make me wonder if people are trying to use Slashdot to get experienced people to do something about it so they don't have to.
"Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
I run Facebook with almost everything turned off. And Flash with almost everything turned off. And Firefox with the privacy settings on high.
About half of sites with video won't play. Other sites produce errors because their Flash cookies won't work. YouTube's "Press ESC to exit full screen mode" message stays up forever. (I suspect YouTube does that just to keep people from running with high privacy settings.)
It's interesting to see who's evil, but somewhat annoying. Still, for every site that's blocked, there seems to be a competitor just as good.
Can somebody explain this? I don't think anybody can integrate any bit of code into Facebook.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I saw one of my facebook friends fall for this. Months ago, I saw the same person show up in my "stalkers" list on OKCupid. OKCupid shows you questions on which you are compatible or not compatible with a fellow user. Here was one of her answers:
Q: Which is bigger, the earth or the sun?
A: The Earth. /facepalm
Facebook users need to learn no one really cares that much about their lives and what they do from minute to minute, and having 50000 friends online waiting for you to post what you ate last night makes no sense, and that it is time ill spent, so guess what, more people should just walk away, it has its uses, but really , are we all stars? As for the app being thrown in there, too bad there is no real schema in place AI type going through all the posts to see what facebook users are spewing, and if too much is the same (like a spam) it gets analyzed further, and gets stopped much quicker....i could see that.
Silanea, I read that url and the exchange you had with apk there. You lost it badly. First of all, apk noted that 0 is legal in a hosts files Windows since it pings back as 0.0.0.0 on Windows 2000, Windows XP, and even VISTA prior to 12/09/2008 hotfix patch tuesday by Microsoft and apk did manage to get one of Microsoft's senior managers of their Windows Client Performance Division to admit that apk was correct on a smaller file resulting by using 0 versus 0.0.0.0 or 127.0.0.1 is a faster loading and performing hosts file not only due to smaller filesize results but also because 0 doesn't perform a loopback op as does 127.0.0.1 (the loopback adapter is just a dummy NIC driver filter only if you install it, so SQL Server and the like can install on system minus a NIC is all) also, because since 12/09/2008 Microsoft Patch Tuesday, VISTA cannot and neither can Windows Server 2008 and Windows 7 either. So much for you saying you think apk is a fool silanea, most of all by replying to yourself as an ac poster, because apk used those points on silanea as well as backing quotes from respected sources, and in doing so apk burned your ass badly with the facts he used above and far more silanea. Silanea, you can stop posting as AC to your own posts to try to cover your stupid ass because you lost on all of the points in the exchange link url here on this site when you tried to get the best of apk and lost your ass to him on all of the points above. I can read and saw it in that same exchange and this is my summation of it. If anyone's the fool silanea, it is yourself. Do you think that posting as ac in reply to yourself fooled anyone here you idiot? Guess again.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1687452&cid=32587238
A poster here on /. named Foredecker is that very MS Vice President who agrees with apk though silanea (In fact, Foredecker is Microsoft's very own Senior Exec/VP of the Windows Client Performance Division no less who has a B.S. CSC degree and we know you don't silanea). Foredecker even agreed that apk has a point on his usage of 0 or 0.0.0.0 being faster and more efficient for both size of a hosts file of any size, and also that they do not perform the loopback operation of 127.0.0.1 or the Windows dummy NIC adapter (loopback adapter) either. Foredecker is looking into this for apk because of apk's points on efficiency and speed that existed from Windows 2000 in a service pack for it, through Windows XP, into Windows Server 2003, and even into VISTA when it suddenly stopped working on 12/09/2008 on a Microsoft "Patch Tuesday". APK pointed this out to both S. Sinofsky on msdn and ms technet (he's head of Windows development) and also to Richard Russell of MS (Foredecker's real name). Have you done anything remotely the same and had people of that ilk have to admit that you were correct as apk did silanea? I doubt it.
See here where Foredecker the Senior VP of Windows Client Performance Division has to admit apk was right on HOSTS files:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1755714&cid=33349528
And iirc, Dr. Mark Russinovich has even had his work corrected by APK also in his pagedefrag program (for how to do the job right and also to remove hardcodes from that program http://dis.4chan.org/read/prog/1235936964, and more on memory mgt in memory compaction which even Linux latest kernel 2.6.35 has added features for because it works for programs like Microsoft Exchange which has issues with memory fragmentation as does firefox even).
It also appears that and apk's even active lately helping the freeware movement in the 64-bit area in more difficult type applications in defraggers it seems this year in UltraDefrag 64 http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/handbook/Credits.html as well.
APK, unlike yourself, also has this set of published programs or articles in respected written publications in print and online that he's done since 1995 inclusive of both shareware, freeware, and commercial software to his name that even did well 2 yrs. in a row at Microsoft Tech Ed speak well for he which I just clipped from a post of his that Silanea put up here in this thread discussion:
"My Name is Ozymandias: King of Kings - Look upon my works, ye mighty, & DESPAIR..."
----
Windows NT Magazine (now Windows IT Pro) April 1997 "BACK OFFICE PERFORMANCE" issue, page 61
(&, for work done for EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com on PAID CONTRACT (writing portions of their SuperCache program increasing its performance by up to 40% via my work) albeit, for their SuperDisk & HOW TO APPLY IT, took them to a finalist position @ MS Tech Ed, two years in a row 2000-2002, in its HARDEST CATEGORY: SQLServer Performance Enhancement).
WINDOWS MAGAZINE, 1997, "Top Freeware & Shareware of the Year" issue page 210, #1/first entry in fact (my work is there)
PC-WELT FEB 1998 - page 84, again, my work is featured there
WINDOWS MAGAZINE, WINTER 1998 - page 92, insert section, MUST HAVE WARES, my work is again, there
PC-WELT FEB 1999 - page 83, again, my work is featured there
CHIP Magazine 7/99 - page 100, my work is there
GERMAN PC BOOK, Data Becker publisher "PC Aufrusten und Repairen" 2000, where my work is contained in it
HOT SHAREWARE Numero 46 issue, pg. 54 (PC ware mag from Spain), 2001 my work is there, first one featured, yet again!
Also, a British PC Mag in 2002 for many utilities I wrote, saw it @ BORDERS BOOKS but didn't buy it... by that point, I had moved onto other areas in this field besides coding only...
Lastly, being paid for an article that made me money over @ PCPitstop in 2008 for writing up a guide that has people showing NO VIRUSES/SPYWARES & other screwups, via following its point, such as THRONKA sees here -> http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=ee926d913b81bf6d63c3c7372fd2a24c&t=28430&page=3
----
What do I have to say about that much above? I can't say it any better, than this was stated already (from the greatest book of all time, the "tech manual for life" imo):
"But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me." - Corinthians Chapter 10, Verse 10
(And, because I got LUCKY to have been exposed to some really GREAT classmates, professors, & colleagues on the job over time as well)
====
Have you done the same or be
That user is wrong, though, as on FreeBSD at least, 0.0.0.0 goes to the local gateway. So it is not always faster. - by MechaStreisand (585905)
on Monday August 16, @03:03PM (#33266758)
That is totally misleading bullshit. I know that, because when I setup my wireless RF connection here on PCBSD 8.1 which is a FreeBSD variant with KDE on it I had to manually enter in the local gateway for my connection to even work properly because otherwise it does not, and yes, by default only does BSD put that up as your gateway but what damn good is it? None is the answer because you don't have a working connection that way using 0.0.0.0 as your internet connection's gateway, you idiot. Sometimes I love the morons that post around here like you that try to pass off utter bullshit and misinformation to others, especially the way you have in your doubtless thinking others don't use BSD variants. I do so guess again. You can't pass your crap off as somekind of truth when it's misleading and wrong. I looked into its hosts file and that is not the case for the loopback adapter for starters to localhost. It uses 127.0.0.1 as well, and in case you all don't know this? Microsoft's own IP stack is BSD based also, as are most all others (Linux and MacOS X included for example) being based off the BSD reference design so they're all going to act alike.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1755714&cid=33349654 take a read there, after your attempts at libeling this apk ac behind his back here in this statement quoted below alongside others you have made here also like this one quoted below from you:
Apparently he's been going for at least a decade. - by LinuxIsGarbage (1658307) on Monday August 16, @04:00PM (#33267400)
Arstechnica and what they have against APK - a history thereof:
Apparently and rather obviously, you're just another arstechnica idiot who is still smarting from the beating you and yours took from apk who only asked a decade ago whether any of you had done anything of note that others in written respected publications in the area of computers noted as good. Not a single one of you had, and it sent a good deal of you into a frenzy that immature children might have in following apk to other forums like ntcompatible.com, windows it pro magazine forums, majorgeeks.com and 3dfiles.com and others also to harass apk.
You kept it up then and still do that same now under multiple assumed registered username logons or anonymous coward posts in forums, which only makes it fairly obvious he really got the best of you because you're so obsessed and all it ever gets you and yours is more losses to him every time.
Jeremy Reimer is the classic case. He's the "self published via lulu" LOSER, lol, that calls himself a "published author". The guys' life is an illusion/fantasy, even his wife is "paid for" and is basically a hooker (a 'dancer' - give us a break, please. That's a stripper and any man knows they are filth) that pays Reimer's way in life because he has no job.
Jeremy Reimer has no degrees in computers or years to decades of experience professionally coding them or networking them, so he then used 1 so-called programmer, a self-titled one no less with a IS 2 yr. degree only from a southern tech school (worst there are, Greenville SC? LOL) in an obese swine named Jay Little who said he was an "expert on Exchange server".
Jay Little immediately blew it vs. apk right off the bat because apk showed that memory compacting programs he built or even MS' own clearmem.exe fix stalled exchange servers. Reimer then brought in another "helper", a Jarrett DeAngelis (doctoral candidate from Notre Dame) who in the end agreed with 95% or better of what apk noted which were 15 points and examples showing the usefulness and efficacy of memory compacting programs from sources like Microsoft, ibm, and others of that ilk (respectable and reputable), along with quotes from users too in the same vein. Jay Little then made death threats to apk on his personal website and email harassed apk and stalked apk to ntcompatible.com where he tried to trash apk's posts and again he blew it on nt blue screen dump codes and ramdisks too.
Reimer who was off topic the entire time because he has no degrees or decades of hands on experience programming or networking even then had to use helpers because he is a fake with no degree or years to decades professional experience hands on in computing and he sti'sll lost his pants to apk. Nobody put out Reimer's plagiarized "articles" anymore, not even arstechnica because of that and the fact he and Jay Little as well as Jarrett DeAngelis (all 3 are from arstech) were caught by their isp's for email harassment of apk, stalking apk online, and for impersonating apk.
Reimer in particula had the vancouver/bc police (det. felton) called on him for all of this and had parts of his website removed for libel forcefully and also ceased his email harassment of apk also rather quickly after the police contacted he.
Jay Little of Atlanta Ga. had his entire website removed by CrystalTech for death threats directed apk's way.
Talk about 'geek angst' and a sick pack of freaks in the arstechnica crowd, and all because apk merely asked what they had done that others noted in publicatio
ArsTechnica blocking Adblock?
https://adblockplus.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5266
However, they could NOT do that to HOSTS files users though! APK likes hosts files as do many 1000's of others online (see mvps.org forums as only 1 small example thereof), and apk exposed arstechnica in their dirty tricks as shown above.
Due to that? You know know part of why these idiots at arstechnica who stalked apk for years forums to forums online as well as impersonated apk at arstechnica posted their usual crap here on this forums in this exchange => http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1755714&cid=33267350 .
They try to libel, impersonate, threaten and harass, and do worse to apk, and for more than a decade now. That's sick.
They do so, not only on their arstech forums, but also their own members personal forums (Jeremy Reimer - the self published on lulu fake who calls himself a published author, what a joke, and he's one with no real hands on pro experience in computers and fakes it and with no degrees in the sciences of computing or even certs to his credit. He's a fake that tried to pass himself off as some computer expert and apk exposed him for it, and his wife the stripper gives blowjobs to pay their bills, lol) and made death threats to apk and libeled he only to have the police called on them and their websites removed from their hosting providers and being caught email harassing and online stalking apk by their isp's (Jay Little and Jeremy Reimer both here on this account) and why they posted their utter crap here in this very exchange in that url above. The link below shows even more in addition to apk exposing arstechnica for being charlatans and frauds as well as sickos online.
Arstechnica doesn't like being exposed for the cowards, fakes, and behind the back operating little cowards they are. Especially in this post here from this very exchange that goes into this even more: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1755714&cid=33352200
From the ac apk http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1743902&cid=33191488 where he showed the dirty tricks arstechnica played on their own users no less:
****
10 ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER BROWSER ADDONS ALONE, & EVEN DNS SERVERS:
1.) HOSTS files eat A LOT LESS CPU cycles than browser addons do no less (since browser addons have to parse each HTML page & tag content in them)!
2.) HOSTS files are also NOT severely LIMITED TO 1 BROWSER FAMILY ONLY... browser addons, are. HOSTS files cover & protect (for security) and speed up (all apps that are webbound) any app you have that goes to the internet (specifically the web).
3.) HOSTS files allow you to bypass DNS Server requests logs (via hardcoding your favorite sites into them to avoid not only the TIME taken roundtrip to an external DNS server, but also for avoiding those logs OR a DNS server that has been compromised (see Dan Kaminsky online, on that note)).
4.) HOSTS files will allow you to get to sites you like, via hardcoding your favs into a HOSTS file, FAR faster than DNS servers can by FAR (by saving the roundtrip inquiry time to a DNS server & back to you).
5.) HOSTS files also allow you to not worry about a DNS server being compromised, or downed (if either occurs, you STILL get to sites you hardcode in a HOSTS file anyhow in EITHER case).
6.) HOSTS files are EASILY user controlled, updated and obtained (for reliable ones see mvps.org ) & edited too, via texteditors like Windows notepad.exe or Linux nano or kate (etc.)
7.) HOSTS files aren't as vulnerable to "bugs" either like programs/libs/extensions of that nature are, OR even DNS servers, as they are NOT code, & because of what's next too
8.) HOSTS files are also EASILY secured well, via write-protection "read-only" attributes set on them, or more radically, via ACL's even.
9.) HOSTS files are a solution which also globally extends to EVERY WEBBOUND APP YOU HAVE - NOT just a single webbrowser type (e.g. FireFox/Mozilla & its addons exemplify this, such as ADBLOCK) and you already own one, and they run on any OS that uses the BSD reference design IP stack (all of them today pretty much if NOT all of them).
10.) AND, LASTLY? SINCE MALWARE GENERALLY HAS TO OPERATE ON WHAT YOU YOURSELF CAN DO (running as limited class/least privlege user, hopefully, OR even as ADMIN/ROOT/SUPERUSER)? HOSTS "LOCK IN" malware too, vs. communicating "back to mama" for orders (provided they have name servers + C&C botnet servers listed in them, blocked off in your HOSTS that is) - You might think they use a hardcoded IP, which IS possible, but generally they do not & RECYCLE domain/host names they own, & this? This stops that cold, too! Bonus...
Still, it's a GOOD idea to layer in the usage of BOTH browser addons for security like adblock, &/or NoScript (especially this one, as it covers what HOSTS files can't in javascript which is the main deliverer of MOST attacks online & SECUNIA.COM can verify this for anyone really by looking @ the past few years of attacks nowadays), for the concept of "layered security".
****
After reading this comment http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1755714&cid=33267350 , I had to respond because I was there and saw this and other wrong doings by the arstechnica lusers.
ArsTechnica blocking Adblock?
https://adblockplus.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5266
However, they could NOT do that to HOSTS files users though!
Due to that? You know know part of why these idiots at arstechnica who stalked apk for years forums to forums online as well as impersonated apk at arstechnica posted their usual crap here on this forums in this exchange =>
"No contest indeed, moron. Who summoned you?" - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 24, @09:52AM (#33354382)
Talking behind others' backs, like some beyotch? Yes, that's arstechnica's "specialty". Makes sense - you're all "not men" (the kind of guys whose girl friends we all banged in highschool and we also made you do our homework for us too, lol. You've got NO balls, is why).
Oh also, get this thru your head, whimp: You don't run me, first of all, and secondly? I came of my own volition, beyotch: Going to stop me???
New NEWS: On your best day, you aren't capable of that. The best fools like you are capable of are impersonating others, and your own Jeremy Reimer, a "self-published loser" via lulu found out what happened then, now didn't he??
Sure did, lol, in front of the entire planet at windows it pro mag's forums when he was shown to be nothing more than an off topic fake with no degrees or hands on experience in the computer sciences who libeled and impersonated apk and had his website shredded for it along with his fellow arstech luser, Jay Little.
---
"Know what Arstechnica could do to serve ads to lusers like you? Put them on their own frigging server." - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 24, @09:52AM (#33354382)
Good, I love it: Tear up your own bandwidth some more, lol. I loved seeing your "lord & master (bator)" Ken Fisher begging for viewers here BY PULLING DIRTY TRICKS ON HIS OWN VIEWERSHIP https://adblockplus.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5266 .
(Nothing could have made me happier in fact, it was hilarious! Hehehe, arstech's falling apart and we all KNOW it. The more folks block your ads, the slower you die, lol!)
---
"Where is your "Lord of HOSTS" file now?" - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 24, @09:52AM (#33354382)
Same place as usual, and doing what it always has: Speeding up and securing my system and those of others (just like the one from mvps.org, etc./et al)...
---
"You get your ass handed to you every time you try to argue with the people at Arstechnica." - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 24, @09:52AM (#33354382)
AHEM: The planet saw quite differently at the Windows IT Pro magazine forums where Jay Little fell flat on his fat face on Exchange servers, and Jeremy Reimer had to remain off topic the entire time being caught with his pants down impersonating apk and having to admit it too, lol. Hilarious. Both had their websites removed by their hosting providers also, forcibly, for libeling, impersonating, and threatening apk.
(So much for your "editing and impersonating apk on your private playpen at ars' forums only. We all know better and we know how you women there operate).
---
"They say insanity is repeating the same thing over and over and expecting different results. So who's obsessed?" - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 24, @09:52AM (#33354382)
I must have struck a nerve here saying you always talk behind apk's back, and nothing hurts like the truth, eh?
(ADDITIONALLY? WELL, IT'S SORT OF Funny BUT... ,B.AREN'T You are the ones talking behind apk's back here and getting bitch slapped by myself as usual though??)
I mean, lol: LOOK AT YOUR REACTION! HILARIOUS AND PRICELESS. TELLS ME ALL I HAD TO KNOW.
"You ARE apk. We all know it. Drop the charade." - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 24, @02:23PM (#33358838)
First: Arstech's falling apart and we all KNOW it. Especially now, per Ken Fisher of arstechnica caught PULLING DIRTY TRICKS ON HIS OWN VIEWERSHIP to do so no less and being caught in it red handed here, https://adblockplus.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5266 ?
Leave it to arstechnica to "do themselves in", lol... they'll do so, everytime, be it in blunders in tech debate due to their lack of know-how, or treating users like they don't know anything and they end up "busting themselves" as shown above.
(Hilarious, utterly hilarious...)
No amount of "arstechnica off topic 'spin/damage control'" attempts are going to hide what you arstech scumbags try to pull on your own viewers, which is dwindling and getting smaller everyday because of what's shown in the url above, and lmao, I LOVE IT.
Secondly: Once more, as far as YOU are concerned, per my subject above? Again: I am "the 'Green Lantern of sector 2814'" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hTiRnqnvDs&NR=1 ... and as others here noted it is obvious you're just an arstechnica luser.
Lastly, see above as well as the rest of this exchange which is beyond the control of the arstechnica forums playpen members edits of others' posts or posting as others, because they are known to impersonate apk and others as arstechnica's Jeremy Reimer was caught doing and he admitted to, then as rinse, lather, & repeat because arstech forums stalkers of apk only exemplify the insanity of attempting to attack apk online again and again and expecting different results but with them just failing as usual vs apk, just as they have here behind apk's back as is their "gossiping women of arstechnica style" usual.
See subject line, and realize that we know you're just another "technically challenged" arstechnica forums wannabe. We know this because you always have to go off topic vs. apk instead of attacking his technical points he listed in favor of HOSTS files in the post you replied to luser. Ad hominem attacks of arstechnica trolls online and it marks you as lusers.
Funny how you have to go off-topic. Where did you explain how your "Lord of HOSTS" file will protect you from Arstechnica's ads if they started serving them from the same host that the rest of their site was hosted on? I'm pretty sure you didn't. Why did you have to go off topic instead of answering my technical point? Your ad hominem attacks show what a moron you are.
P.S. Why do you post multiple responses to the same post? It implies that your first post was incomplete... but then, you also seem to hate incomplete posts. That appears to be rather disjointed, almost like you are mentally imbalanced.
See subject FIRST: Why avoid disproving apk's 10 points in favor of HOSTS files on your part, as well as your repeatedly going off topic here constantly, and your also using illogical effete ad hominem attacks, you ac from arstechnica? We know why, lol... and this from you next? Hilariously dumb of you:
"Where did you explain how your "Lord of HOSTS" file will protect you from Arstechnica's ads if they started serving them from the same host that the rest of their site was hosted on?" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 25, @12:37PM (#33370460)
I already said they'd burn up their own bandwidth serving up their own banners at arstechnica, and funny - why aren't they doing what you said then you "wannabe genius"?
First, LOL, I will tell you why, beyond the fact they'd scorch their own bandwidth doing so.
Secondly, I'd like to see any agency OR SPONSOR trust a single website to serve up their ads for them rather than they themselves.
(They generally won't and don't do that for a couple reasons - to keep view counts/hits of ad banner honest and to make sure the content is current and consistent as THE SPONSOR SEES FIT, not the website showing banners).
Man, you really do NOT know what the hell you are talking about, do you?
This next quote from you? truly is hilarious though, because since you called me more names? WELL - That next quote of yours below is yet another ad hominem attack on your part directed my way, yet again instead of you disproving the points of apk's I posted in favor of HOSTS files (thanks for being so easy for me to make a fool out of you by the way with your own continued "arstechnica patented screwups", lol, like earlier and this one below next compounding your errors here yet further):
"Your ad hominem attacks show what a moron you are." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 25, @12:37PM (#33370460)
OMG, LMAO: Calling me names now? Again: That's an ad-hominem attack and invalid in logical debate.
(You're illogical. I have no respect for those who have no respect for logic. Not only do you toss names now, but you also did earlier as well).
However, this below next??
It really "takes the cake" and makes me realize you have roughly the intellect of a carrot (or rather "10 below plantlife" IQ):
"Why did you have to go off topic instead of answering my technical point? " - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 25, @12:37PM (#33370460)
Speak for yourself, stay on topic, and I will again ask you the same question I did before, so answer it please instead of trying "reverse psychology" (not) on your part, since you are not a shrink to begin with you're not good at it, get that fact thru your head...
AGAIN: why did you avoid attacking apk's 10 points in favor of HOSTS files here -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1755714&cid=33353946
(Hmmm?)
WE KNOW WHY: YOU'RE TOO UNEDUCATED AND UNSKILLED ON THE TOPIC HERE, HOSTS FILES AND THE IP STACK, TO DO SO ON YOUR PART!
----
As to to the rest of your post?
---
1.) Do you have a PHD in Psychiatry?? No??? Didn't think so.
2.) Have you performed a formal examination of myself in a professional environs???? No.
3.) Do you have a license to dispense your "prognosis" there, "doctor"????? No.
---
That's libeling myself on your part, as to your comments on my mental state you know, since you lack the credentials and evidences above.
(Which only further shows you are just another "slashdot sidewalk psychoanalyst wannabe quack" is all. Poor tactics that along with your name tossing and going off topic only show you to be yet another defeated troll on the ropes because of his own mistakes, lol!)
LMAO - We all know the answer to that last set of
FAIL. I said explain how your HOSTS file prevents it.
He answered your points, and the economics of a website getting paid prevents it, and also bandwidth they pay for being burnt up serving ads stops it. He stated it and I will quote it for you below and you said he failed?
I already said they'd burn up their own bandwidth serving up their own banners at arstechnica, and funny - why aren't they doing what you said then you "wannabe genius"?
First, LOL, I will tell you why, beyond the fact they'd scorch their own bandwidth doing so.
Secondly, I'd like to see any agency OR SPONSOR trust a single website to serve up their ads for them rather than they themselves.
(They generally won't and don't do that for a couple reasons - to keep view counts/hits of ad banner honest and to make sure the content is current and consistent as THE SPONSOR SEES FIT, not the website showing banners).
Man, you really do NOT know what the hell you are talking about, do you?
He's correct about you in that last sentence.
It's you who refused to or are unable to disprove the 10 points he put up in favor of HOSTS files vs. adblock or dns servers also.
Face it, you lose clown.
You can also stop posting as ac clown53421 to try to defend yourself here.
You failed badly and admitted to using ac replies in your other posts and you try to troll others by replying as ac rather than your registered user account. You fool no one.
Yes, I am also a registered user here who has noted your methods and I am posting as ac to avoid being trolled by the lowly likes of yourself. In order to avoid being trolled by you, I have to use your methods to avoid being trolled by a loser like you.