Virginia Radio Station Broadcasting Chinese Propaganda (reuters.com)

An anonymous reader writes: An investigation by Reuters has uncovered a radio station located just outside Washington, D.C. that broadcasts dedicated Chinese propaganda to the U.S. capital and the surrounding area. In 2009, under new ownership, Virginia-based station WAGE erected new broadcast towers, amplifying its signal by ten times, and changed its call letters to WCRW, for "China Radio Washington." All WCRW programming shares a common theme, with newscasts that avoid any criticism of China and are critical of Beijing's political enemies; for example, a report on pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong last year did not explain why people were in the streets, and said only that the demonstrations had "failed without support." WCRW's American owners claim they have no input on content and are only rebroadcasting programming provided to them by a state-sponsored Chinese company to which they lease the airtime. U.S. law requires that anyone seeking to influence American policy or public opinion on behalf of a foreign government must register with the Department of Justice, but according to Reuters, government officials didn't even know WCRW existed until Reuters told them about it.

Comments

Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

"U.S. law requires that anyone seeking to influence American policy or public opinion on behalf of a foreign government must register with the Department of Justice, but according to Reuters, government officials didn't even know WCRW existed until Reuters told them about it."

Like anyone in Washington does their job.

Re:Well duh

[Nidi62]

"U.S. law requires that anyone seeking to influence American policy or public opinion on behalf of a foreign government must register with the Department of Justice, but according to Reuters, government officials didn't even know WCRW existed until Reuters told them about it."

Like anyone in Washington does their job.

They're too busy trying to influence American policy and public opinion on behalf of our own government.

Re:Well duh

[ShanghaiBill]

"U.S. law requires that anyone seeking to influence American policy or public opinion on behalf of a foreign government must register

How can this possibly be compatible with the US Constitution? Anyone should be free to say whatever they want.

Re:Well duh

[ganjadude]

The only reason i can remotely think of in this particular case is that the people are a middle man for the chinese government. The chinese government does not have constitutional rights in this country, therefore their talking heads dont.

dont know if that is correct, but its the only reasoning I can think of that makes sense.

Re:Well duh

[BitZtream]

You are not allowed to say anything you want whenever you want. Stop quoting the constitution like you've actually read it let alone like you understand it. At no point has that ever been the case. Ever.

Public speech IS controlled. And here, it's not prevention of said speech it's just registration ... You know ... Like so many other freedoms we have require some documents because some whacko does something to ruin it for the rest of us

Re: Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

It sounds like the big three network news who do not report anything negative about Obama in detail . Terrorists attack a us embassy in 9/11 before a presidential election and news casts don't challenge Obama officials that say it is not 9/11 related while Hillary the Hippocrates is emailing foreign allies that it was . Obama priest is aligned with a terrorist group that killed police officers , rtc

Re:Well duh

[__aaclcg7560]

You can say whatever you want whenever you want — as long as you're willing to accept the consequences. The people who screamed the loudest about the U.S. Constitution are the ones who don't want to accept the consequences for their "free" speech. Freedom always has a price tag. Most people are unwilling to pay for it.

Re:Well duh

[Coren22]

Sorry, no.

This speech is only regulated because it is a foreign government's speech. You don't have to register to speak, or else FRS radios, CBs, and Walkie-Talkies wouldn't exist.

Re:Well duh

[EvilSS]

"U.S. law requires that anyone seeking to influence American policy or public opinion on behalf of a foreign government must register

How can this possibly be compatible with the US Constitution? Anyone should be free to say whatever they want.

It's the "on behalf of a foreign government" part that makes it legal. We, like most countries, have laws in place to put checks on foreign political influence over our own government. Your personal beliefs and speech are protected but if you are essentially a citizen proxy for a foreign power that's a different situation.

Re:Well duh

[Spy Handler]

You are free to say whatever you want. However the gov't has unlimited moderation points and can put you at -1.

Re:Well duh

[ShanghaiBill]

The only reason i can remotely think of in this particular case is that the people are a middle man for the chinese government.

Sorry, my bad. I complete missed the modification to the first amendment. It has now been changed to read: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances, unless they are middlemen for the Chinese government.

I am so glad that the government censors are protecting me from speech that they may disagree with.

Re:Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

You yourself are free to set up your own radio station and propagandize in favor of whatever foreign government you please.

However, when you are actually working for that national government and saying exactly what they tell you to say, that's a different matter.

Re:Well duh

[ShanghaiBill]

some whacko does something to ruin it for the rest of us

What are you talking about? Which whacko "ruined" the 1st Amendment?

Re:Well duh

[ganjadude]

im not saying I agree with it, im just trying to figure it out as are you

Re:Well duh

[AK Marc]

"Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech"

Except for all the laws abridging the freedom of speech

Re:Well duh

[ShanghaiBill]

It's the "on behalf of a foreign government" part that makes it illegal.

I see. So when the 1st amendment says there shall be "no law" restricting the free exercise of speech, with part of "no law" allows this restriction?

Re:Well duh

[AK Marc]

"Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech"

Even that doesn't make sense. After all, we have people pushing here all the time that corporations have no rights, but you can't stop the people who make up corporations from exercising their rights. So China has no rights, but the Chinese people have rights, as well as the Americans advocating for them.

What's funny is that the same people pushing for corporate rights are the ones most against the people advocating Chinese interests having rights.

Re:Well duh

[VernonNemitz]

"possibly be compatible with the US Constitution" --The fundamental problem is that the US Constitution does not define "enemy". It defines "treason" in terms of "enemy", but it doesn't define "enemy". At this time Congress or the President has to officially declare some entity to be an enemy of the US, for the concept of "treason" to apply. It is not enough for that entity to declare the US to be an enemy --such a declaration is not automatically reciprocated. But perhaps it should be. Yet, even if it did, we can recognize that the concept of "enemy" has flavors. The lead article uses the phrase "Beijing's political enemies", which is a different thing than a "you must be destroyed" sort of enemy. Which still doesn't help, with respect to the US Constitution.

Re:Well duh

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

Lobbyists have to register, too. I don't know the constitutional justification, either, and that involves mostly domestic citizen speech.

Re:Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

The rest of the Constitution, where it gives the Federal government the right to regulate commerce (taking money to speak for somebody else) and relations with foreign nations (diplomacy), but hey, if you want to advocate for the Chinese out of the goodness of your heart, go right ahead!

Re:Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

some whacko does something to ruin it for the rest of us

What are you talking about? Which whacko "ruined" the 1st Amendment?

Which whackos (plural). They are members of the SCOTUS.

Re:Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

The first amendment clearly says "people". Are corporations people?

>What's funny is that the same people pushing for corporate rights are the ones most against the people advocating Chinese interests having rights.

Really? Serious libertarians are against the Chinese having rights? Could you point out some for us?

Re:Well duh

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

Possibly the power of the government to regulate trade with other nations?

Re:Well duh

[tnk1]

There is nothing about registering as a foreign lobbyist that is against the First Amendment. They won't get shut down, they just won't be able to pretend that they aren't rebroadcasting foreign propaganda.

In any event, foreign governments aren't protected by the First Amendment. And speech which represents a clear and present danger to the US can be censored, so it stands to reason that you would be allowed to determine who might constitute that danger and ensure that you could monitor them for that practice.

Now, if they do try and shut down that station, that might be a First Amendment issue, if the owner is a US citizen and it is not wartime.

Re:Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because the other side is wrong, doesn't make them crazy. Without changing any wording of the 1st Amendment, here's an alternative interpretation:

The U.S. Constitution restricts the powers of the U.S. government and enumerates rights of citizens (where the list of rights is explicitly not comprehensive, as there may be others). It would be even more silly to think that the Constitution somehow applies to those who were *not* part of its citizenry (not that people can't try, of course).

The key word here is CITIZENS. Feeding messages directly from foreign government propaganda machines doesn't count as protecting the 1st Amendment rights of CITIZENS. Now if actual Chinese-American citizens wanted to parrot what was being said from China, that would be a different story. Or if the American citizens that lease the time were the citizens directly expressing these messages, that would also be different. Instead, they are simply re-broadcasting speech supplied directly from non-citizens, by foreign non-citizen sources. Such people are not granted protections by the Constitution.

Re:Well duh

[tnk1]

The Constitution refers to "We the People of the United States..." There is no reference to the people of China. And the rights under the Constitution should not be asserted as to belong to anyone other than a US citizen.

Now, a corporation is not a citizen, but if it is made up of US citizens, then you have an issue where regulating a US corporation's speech may be preventing US citizens from expressing their opinion, which would be unconstitutional.

So the position you seem to think is odd makes perfect sense.

Of course, corporations having the ability to pretend to be a citizen, by dint of having citizens employed by it, may well be a problem, but that situation is on significantly more firm ground than letting foreigners spread propaganda without having to at least acknowledge their influence. After all, the corporations have their influence right out there in the open and we do make corporations register their donations. You can find out what the corporations are supporting, if you want to.

Re:Well duh

[tnk1]

Registration of a lobbyist or foreign power doesn't restrict them from having free speech. They can talk all they want. They just have to admit who they are speaking for.

Re:Well duh

[ShanghaiBill]

What's funny is that the same people pushing for corporate rights are the ones most against the people advocating Chinese interests having rights.

I don't think that is true at all. The person here speaking most forcefully for free speech for the Chinese is me. I have also spoken out forcefully for free speech for corporations. Restrictions on anyone's rights are a restriction on everyone's rights. Other than the "clear and present danger" exception for things like yelling fire in a theater, everyone, and every organization, should be free to say whatever they want. If you don't like it, the answer is not censorship, but MORE SPEECH explaining why you disagree.

Re:Well duh

[kheldan]

How can this possibly be compatible with the US Constitution? Anyone should be free to say whatever they want.

Would you point out for me where, precisely, it says, anywhere, that the U.S. government is going to send someone in to shut them down? All it says is 'they must register', which is perfectly reasonable, especially considering that China is not particularly friendly to the U.S., and whose interests are at odds with our own. Starting a petition that says 'ShanghaiBill is a worthless piece of crap human being and should be killed outright' is someone exercising their freedom of speech, but are you going to be comfortable with that when 10000 people sign it?

Re:Well duh

[rastos1]

Yay, I have a new sig.

Re:Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

There are no serious libertarians. It's a symptom of arrested development, and poor thinking in general.

Re:Well duh

[Brymouse]

The Constitution protects rights of the people and lists powers granted to the government by the people, not the other way around.

All people have inalienable rights, and the Constitution protects these rights. It does not grant any rights to the people.

Re:Well duh

[cogeek]

Corporations are people just as much as Unions are people. Once you take away the ability for Unions to spend the money they extort from their members on political campaigns, then you have a leg to stand on when arguing that Corporations should not be treated the same.

Re:Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

I think a radio station naming itself "China Radio Washington" is quite open about who they are speaking for.

Now if only some representatives could be as honest as the Chinese government and call themselves "big oil company representative" instead of "[insert party name here] representative", I think the world would be a better place.

Re:Well duh

[AK Marc]

"Congress shall make no law" has no exception for Chinese, as you assert.

And the rights under the Constitution should not be asserted as to belong to anyone other than a US citizen.

Some rights are guaranteed to citizens. Others to residents. And others to everyone (though, obviously not enforced everywhere). Read it. The people, citizens and such are worded differently in different sections with different meanings.

Re:Well duh

[Obfuscant]

Restrictions on anyone's rights are a restriction on everyone's rights.

Political campaign finance reform is a very large, very broad sword that is wielded with unexpected results.

Current rules require donors be identified for certain contributions. Most people think this is a good idea -- knowing that the Koch brothers are paying for an advertising campaign for certain candidates, for example.

The registration in this instance isn't prohibiting any speech, it just identifies the paid source of the speech.

Other than the "clear and present danger" exception for things like yelling fire in a theater, everyone, and every organization, should be free to say whatever they want.

Free as in beer, or free as in ? Is it unconstitutional that WCRW needs to pay licensing fees to the federal government in order to use the public airwaves to speak?

Re:Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

So kind of like RFE (Radio Free Europe for you youngsters) just China doing it a little different than the USA. Of course, if they had set up a situation in Cuba or Canada it would Br much the same as RFE. Just saying. Now git off my airwaves.

Re:Well duh

[youngone]

So the Chinese have gone about this the wrong way. They should have spent the money on some Congressmen or Senators to be their mouthpieces, because as we all know, politicians are happy to be anyone's whores.

Re:Well duh

[Qzukk]

I'd start with the one that decided that obscenity can be censored, and that what constitutes obscenity is decided on an as-needed basis by the government when it wants to censor something.

Re:Well duh

[Kyogreex]

Exactly. There is a marked difference between broadcasting Chinese propaganda because that's your choice, and broadcasting Chinese propaganda because you're acting as an agent of the Chinese state. I don't think the government should be stopping this, but I also don't think it's unreasonable to interpret it that way.

Re:Well duh

[AK Marc]

Is it unconstitutional that WCRW needs to pay licensing fees to the federal government in order to use the public airwaves to speak?

WCRW already paid for the radio license. Separate is the licence based on content.

Re:Well duh

[PRMan]

The part where our Constitution applies to our citizens.

If THEY wanted to share their own speech as American citizens on this issue, then that would be different. If they are just replaying foreigners' comments, then that's not their speech.

Re: Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

Clearly they are doing the bidding of a Chinese COMPANY as a US COMPANY... That's way different than a "government" influencing things. Corporations are people after all with a right to spend their money on whatever political speech they want. Surely a corporate owned newspaper service should know this??

Re:Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

Interestingly enough, that part of the constitution clearly doesn't exclude non-citizens. Where a particular right or privilege is intended for US citizens, the constitution will use the word "citizen". The word "people" is used when everyone is included. The reason this is not a first-amendment issue is that there are other parts of the constitution that generally make the executive branch responsible for all foreign relations (which is what this is).

Re:Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

If only they'd known to form a 501(c)(4) non-profit. Then they could have bought politicians and run a propaganda organization without disclosing the donors. I'm so glad we legislated such a wonderful means of anonymously influencing policy and buying political candidates.

Re:Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't post on Slashdot to say Slashdot has gone downhill and that you're going to go check out Reddit. I haven't been able to log into my /. account since.

Re:Well duh

[fnj]

The fundamental problem is that the US Constitution does not define "enemy". It defines "treason" in terms of "enemy", but it doesn't define "enemy"

Look at the exact passage. It is very simply worded.

Treason against the United States, shall consist ONLY in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

[emphasis added] It then goes on to very briefly state what is required to prove treason, given that acts have already been found as treasonable given the above, and limit the scope of the punishment, but that part is not at issue here.

It is clear that "enemy" is referring to those "levying war" against the US. Now, "levying war" against the US does not imply that the US has to be "levying war" back. Still less does it require that war has to be declared by either side, and yet even less does it imply that any agency has to somehow declare who the enemy is.

The final paragraph of FDR's address to the nation regarding the attack on Pearl Harbor, I believe you will find illuminating.

I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7th, 1941, a state of war HAS EXISTED between the United States and the Japanese empire.

[emphasis added] Note that war existed due to the attack, and not due to a declaration of war, which had not yet been made.

I don't believe there is any basis for confusion here. China is not levying war against the US; therefore they are not an enemy and there can be no question of anyone giving them aid and comfort as an enemy.

Please do not mistake "competing with", or even "acting nasty to", nor even "struggling against short of violent action" as "levying war against".

Re:Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

APK did. See above.

Re:Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

They are doing exactly that, saying what they want..not what you want

No that different from Fox News then
Or RT
Also there is the "I may not like what you say but i would die defending your right to say it" etc.. etc..

Re:Well duh

[Obfuscant]

WCRW already paid for the radio license.

Nonsequitor. It doesn't matter that they've already paid, the question was, is it constitutional that they have to pay? Last week, last month, last year, it was still a payment to be able to use the public airwaves to speak.

Separate is the licence based on content.

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. What "license based on content"? Not an FCC license, since that license isn't based on content. The registration of the person making the speech on behalf of a foreign government?Also not based on content, and it isn't a license.

Re:Well duh

[Obfuscant]

I think a radio station naming itself "China Radio Washington" is quite open about who they are speaking for.

Not really. At a basic level, it's either China or Washington (state or district?).

At a more serious level, naming oneself "China Radio" doesn't mean you are speaking on behalf of the government of China (either People's Republic of or just Republic of). In fact, the fact there are two "Chinas" really does point out the inability to assume who is being officially represented, if anyone.

Just from the name, you have no knowledge of who is paying for the speech, if anyone. And the laws don't care what the name of the group is, only that people acting on behalf of foreign governments register when they attempt to influence politicians.

Re:Well duh

[PopeRatzo]

The Constitution refers to "We the People of the United States..." There is no reference to the people of China. And the rights under the Constitution should not be asserted as to belong to anyone other than a US citizen.

There is also no reference in the Constitution to the government of Israel, or Fox News (owned by an Australian and a Saudi national). You don't see them getting busted for spreading propaganda. Hell, they don't even have to register as foreign lobbyists.

Re:Well duh

[PopeRatzo]

Corporations are people just as much as Unions are people.

If you think that, then you don't know the definition of "corporation" or "union".

A corporation is nothing but aggregated capital. It doesn't even have to be capital owned by a human being. It just has to be capital. Only capital and a document. Many corporations are owned by other corporations. The closest human being is several layers removed.

Whereas, a union is nothing more than workers who bargain collectively. There are no unions without people, but there are corporations without people.

See, this notion that somehow unions and corporations are morally equivalent was just a Heritage Foundation response to the public dissatisfaction with the Citizens United case. It was always just misdirection.

Re:Well duh

[KGIII]

Welcome to America, can I take your order please?

Don't worry, everything is super-sized for your enjoyment. I've never been a proponent for ignorance but I can sure see why it's blissful.

Re:Well duh

[KGIII]

Unless the broadcasters are cooperative, how do you prove they're doing it out of some sort of order from the Chinese government or because of their own, personal, beliefs? It seems like it CAN be too difficult to determine, accurately, and thus is rife for abuse - though I've absolutely no idea about case law, precedent, or of any other group doing this except for a case during WWII (the name is forgotten) where they shut the person down claiming that they were aiding and abetting the enemy - if I recall correctly. I also think that was print media? It's been a blurb on a couple of documentaries.

I don't see any really easily able to be digested information on this by way of Google. Perhaps my search queries are too broad or too limited, or simply incorrect. This is curious...

Re:Well duh

[Headw1nd]

Commercial speech and private speech have always been separate. As a citizen I can broadcast Chinese propaganda all I want, or pay others to do it, as a long as it's on my dime. That's my speech. However, when I take money from the Chinese to broadcast their content, I'm not protected by private speech laws. That's the government of China's speech, and they aren't guaranteed jack shit under the constitution.

Re:Well duh

[KGIII]

Hmm... You don't actually know any Libertarians, do you? You probably don't know what one is or what the word means... How about you tell me what you think it means to be a Libertarian, why that's bad, and what you think is better. Then, if you want, you can ask me - and I will take the time to answer.

Seriously, I'll answer any question (within reason) as best as I can and give you the opportunity to actually know what you speak of when you approach the subject in the future.

Re:Well duh

[KGIII]

Hmm... Corporations must have at least three member. They are a President, a Vice President, and a Treasurer. They are required for all forms of corporation (AFAIK), in the United States. Even wholly owned subsidiaries must have those at bare minimum. Not that that negates anything, I just figured that I'd clear that up.

Re:Well duh

[dryeo]

Where does the American Constitution say that the Constitution only applies to American citizens (not counting the political stuff like voting or occupying office)? Most of it refers to people.

Re:Well duh

[KGIII]

I've done some looking now. It doesn't appear that this is anything that can be revoked - they simply need to register. There's no outright fee associated with it, either. At least not from what Google tells me. Unfortunately, I'm not able to find much on this. It doesn't look like it's subject to revocation nor does it incur any additional fees. If I'm mistaken then I welcome correction but that's what some basic skimming has told me. In addition, there's not a bunch of information on this unless I'm missing something. I probably am.

This is not a statement about the value or relevance of the regulations. This is just an observation of, seemingly, what they are. At first blush, I'm inclined to dislike it on general principle. I've yet to give it enough thought or enough time to actually give a qualified opinion.

Re:Well duh

[KGIII]

An interesting note... In an earlier thread, I saw that APK quoted your signature. I do believe that signatures are not visible unless the user is logged in. APK has stated, numerous times, that they have no account. I'm unsure of what to make of it but I did find it amusing though I probably should have commented in that thread. Alas, I'm too lazy... Well, technically, it didn't cross my mind.

As stated, I have no idea what to make of it. I just noticed the comment that quoted your signature. Personally, I don't mind 'em but that's just me. I'm pretty easy to get along with, most of the time. ;-)

Re:Well duh

[KGIII]

Meh... Ask the Democrats? They started the "Free Speech Zones" back in the 1980s. And no, before you ask, I'm actually further to the left of any of the elected Democrats. Well, except maybe Bernie.

Re:Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

Coren22 caught lying about apk here and being shredded by apk for it is hilarious http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

Re:Well duh

[PopeRatzo]

Hmm... Corporations must have at least three member. They are a President, a Vice President, and a Treasurer.

Those are employees of the corporation, not the corporation itself. It's quite possible that none of the three share in the aggregated capital, so they can not be of the corporation.

Officers of a corporation are not the corporation. The registered agent of a corporation is not the corporation. You could say the shareholders ARE the corporation, but it's possible to have all the shares in a corporation owned by another corporation. In fact, it's not uncommon to have several layers of this type of structure.

There can be corporations without human beings.

Re:Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

Too lazy means you're a too high on horse heroin junkie craving it like a crazed vampire. Know anybody like that KGIII? We know you do. You're easy to get along with until you need that silver cane spike.

Re:Well duh

[tnk1]

If they're being paid to make the case of Israel or any other government, then they need to register like anyone else.

However, if they're parroting those lines on their own, because they believe in it, that's not the same thing.

If China wants to spread their propaganda the old fashioned way, then they need to buy a news network just like everyone else does.

Seriously, though. I'm not really happy with the ability of any of the media to argue their favorite side instead of being impartial, but everyone does it, from left to right. It's not just Fox News who makes their partisan case below a thin veneer of objectivity. If only there was an information source who was able to facts without editorial, but I suppose that's never going to happen.

Re:Well duh

[KGIII]

Absolutely, I was just making sure that we know that, at least nominally, humans are included in corporations - a corporation can not be a the individual that is the member. So Corporation A (while owning Corp B) can't have a president of Corp B be Corp A. Corp B must have a human in those three places. At least nominally. They must also be alive and breathing. At least for those three positions. :D

Re:Well duh

[KGIII]

*sniffles* No, I've never tried the large animal form of Fentanyl. It's even more powerful than the human form. They use it on large animals. I'm too lazy to look that up too.

What? You don't think I'd be ashamed or bothered by something I posted in public, do you Matrix007? I should hope not. If I were ashamed then I'd have not posted it. Sheesh... You're not the most logical of stalkers but, I guess, I'll have to take what I can get. Maybe, just maybe, if I'm really good - I can get a high quality stalker. I'm not sure what I'd do with one but I'd probably feed it and pet it. Or at least keep it amused.

Yes, yes I have used opiates. In fact, I'm doing so right this minute. Unfortunately, I'm back on the not so good stuff. I'm back on Suboxone. It keeps the cravings down but it's not the same. I truly have a fixation with the needle and with the whole process. It's a tough battle for me to fight and I do regret getting here but, well, there it is. That you're keeping track is a good motivation for me to keep using the Suboxone and avoid shooting up the Fentanyl. I've only been back on the subs for a little while but - if you want, I'll make sure to let you know when that changes. You, you can be a big help in my attempts to avoid the rig. Thanks!

See, you thought you had no value in life. Well, you do to me Matrix. Anyhow, during withdrawals I'd imagine I'm pretty easy to get along with then, too. I'm mostly sick and puking and blowing liquid out my ass. It's not pretty and I doubt there's much in the way of difficulty that I could offer.

Anyhow, nope... Not ashamed, not bothered, and certainly not going to hide. I own my deeds, for better or worse. I'm just, kind of, proud that I've managed to attract a stalker. I've never had one, until you. I just want you to know, I appreciate your efforts and that I am grateful you're keeping track of me. If you need any more information, just ask.

Re:Well duh

[ShanghaiBill]

The key word here is CITIZENS.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights ... So you are saying that these words are just lying, hypocritical bullshit, and were never intended to extend to "all men", but rather only citizens?

Re: Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

Any American can. Liberties granted in the Bill of Rights are granted to US Citizens. How could you miss that part?

Re:Well duh

[Dog-Cow]

Please provide your well-researched legal backing for the implicit claim that this law is non Constitutional. The specific fora in which speech may be made have been regulated from the beginning, even after the first amendment was ratified.

Re:Well duh

[Dog-Cow]

I hope someone exercises their Second Amendment right by putting a bullet through your skull.

What was that? You didn't realize that the Second Amendment doesn't read: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed unless it is used to shoot ShanghaiBill?

Re:Well duh

[Dog-Cow]

They admitted that they take a feed and broadcast it. It's not even their speech that is at issue.

Re:Well duh

[Dog-Cow]

If you don't know the difference between the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution, you should probably go back to China and have the Party kill you for your ignorance and idiocy.

Re:Well duh

[Dog-Cow]

Interestingly, the Constitution begins with the phrase We the people of the United States, thus establishing which "people" the document discusses.

Re:Well duh

[Dog-Cow]

The law does not apply to the Chinese, so even if every Constitutional scholar agreed with you (they don't), it would be irrelevant. Additionally, the speech is regulated, not abridged. All they have to do is register and they can spew whatever sewage they want (on the air).

Re:Well duh

[Dog-Cow]

Registration is not abridgment. The GP is a fucking idiot, and should be pilloried at every opportunity.

Re:Well duh

[Dog-Cow]

The very first words of the Constitution read: We the people of the United States.

Re:Well duh

[AmiMoJo]

If that were true it would seem like the government could just claim anyone they didn't like was a proxy for a foreign government.

This regulation seems to be based not on regulating free speech, but on regulating broadcasts. While you are free to say anything, you are not free to use the limited resources of available radio spectrum to broadcast whatever you like.

In the early days people didn't like the idea that people could send whatever messages they liked into their homes either, which is also fair enough because while you are free to say what you like, everyone else is free not to invite you in to say it. Before someone argues that the correct solution is for people who object to turn their houses into Faraday cages, the law generally requires the person taking action to be responsible. The ability to close your curtains does not making erecting a flashing, lewd billboard outside someone's window acceptable.

Re:Well duh

[Big Hairy Ian]

Surely the governments karma can't be that good!

Re:Well duh

[sabbede]

Because the Constitution protects the rights of American Citizens, not foreign governments; whose rights are far more limited, established and protected by a set of international treaties and conventions which do not include unfettered access to broadcast media?

And the law doesn't state that foreign governments can't speak to or be heard by the American people, it states that their intermediaries have to be registered as foreign agents with the Justice department, and that they cannot own more than 20% of a media outlet.

Re:Well duh

[BubbaDave]

"U.S. law requires that anyone seeking to influence American policy or public opinion on behalf of a foreign government must register

How can this possibly be compatible with the US Constitution? Anyone should be free to say whatever they want.

And they CAN say whatever they want. They just have to disclose that their purpose is to undermine the will of the people of the US.

Re:Well duh

[sabbede]

Agents of foreign governments are not party to the Constitution or its protections. Their rights are governed by international treaties and conventions. Individuals can come here and say what they will, but governments are a very different matter. How foreign powers interact with the American people is not a free speech issue, it's a foreign relations issue.

Re:Well duh

[khallow]

No. When they mean citizens, they say "citizens". When they mean arbitrary people, they say "people".

Re:Well duh

[khallow]

Even if your speech is a proxy for someone else's purposes, it is still your speech.

Re:Well duh

[CrimsonAvenger]

Other than the "clear and present danger" exception for things like yelling fire in a theater

Note that the whole "yelling fire in a crowded theatre" thing was actually "FALSELY yelling fire in a crowded theatre". The issue being the "falsely" part, not the yelling part.

Re:Well duh

[Coren22]

Interesting, so either he has an account, or the search engine he uses also shows the signature. There has been some rumors that APK uses a search engine to find any post mentioning APK, so perhaps my sig is being indexed somewhere, which would explain why all of a sudden the explosive amount of posts from him. I had gone a few weeks without the replies, now he is posting 4-15 times on every post of mine.

Maybe I should change my signature again just to rile him up some more.

Re:Well duh

[khallow]

However, when I take money from the Chinese to broadcast their content on my dime, I'm protected by private speech laws.

FIFY. If we were at a shooting war with China, you would have a case that this is treason, providing material support to an enemy of the US. Since it isn't, the absolute nature of the First Amendment holds sway.

Re:Well duh

[khallow]

A corporation is nothing but aggregated capital. It doesn't even have to be capital owned by a human being. It just has to be capital. Only capital and a document. Many corporations are owned by other corporations. The closest human being is several layers removed.

And you show you don't know what you are talking about. Here's a real definition:

A company or group of people authorized to act as a single entity (legally a person) and recognized as such in law.

Notice it says nothing about "capital" or how many layers you have to be separated from a living human.

See, this notion that somehow unions and corporations are morally equivalent

Unions are a proper subset of corporations by definition.

Re:Well duh

[KGIII]

I should think it has something to do with being done at their behest vs. doing it on your own behalf. One is speech. The other is working for a foreign government. I'm still not sure how I feel about this.

Re:Well duh

[PopeRatzo]

And you show you don't know what you are talking about. Here's a real definition

It's always worth reading the links before you post them, khallow:

A company or group of people

That's in the very first definition. "or group of people". When you see the word "or" it means it doesn't have to be a group of people.

Unions are a proper subset of corporations by definition.

No, they are not. A union does not have to be a corporation.

Re:Well duh

[david_thornley]

Yup. The people of the United States created a Constitution that grants many rights to non-citizens, among them being freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

Re:Well duh

[AK Marc]

So "Congress Shall Make No Law" means congress can make all the laws they want (so long as they are against the Chinese). You must be one of those Constitutional literalists.

The law restricts an American playing a recording on a US station. His ability to exercise that speech is infringed by a law requiring registration before he exercises his speech.

Re: Well duh

[LinuxLuver]

Then almost all American broadcasters would have to register their slavish allegiance to Israel.

Re:Well duh

[khallow]

You are completely missing the part about "authorized to act as a single entity (legally a person) and recognized as such in law". A union (at the vast majority which are legally recognized) happens to be a group of people with that property and hence, are a corporation - by definition.

Re:Well duh

[JazzLad]

If they agents of a foreign government, rebroadcasting at their behest, I think it can be shut down without free speech concerns.

On the other hand, if they are broadcasting a feed on their own accord (ie: their own speech) I think there's a clear-cut copyright infringement case against them that can be used to shut them down ...


;)

Re:Well duh

[KGIII]

Where there's a will, there's a way. I'd think that, without cooperation, it'd be tough to prove that they were doing it at the behest of a foreign government. At the same time, I bet failing to disclose such would be potentially a life-changing decision, and not in a good way.

Re: Well duh

[Anonymous Coward]

Fortunately for Americans, the constitution doesn't grant us those rights, but acknowledges the rights that are pre-existing in human beings. The constitution tells the government that it can't fuck with those rights *in* its area of jurisdiction: the United States.

Well, duh.

[Anonymous Coward]

"U.S. law requires that anyone seeking to influence American policy or public opinion on behalf of a foreign government must register with the Department of Justice, but according to Reuters, government officials didn't even know WCRW existed until Reuters told them about it."

No one in Washington does any real work.

Re:Well, duh.

[__aaclcg7560]

The article is talking about a private sector company not complying with the law to register with the government. Not about the Do Nothing Republicans in Congress.

Re:Well, duh.

[Anonymous Coward]

The article is talking about a private sector company not complying with the law

What a surprise.

Re:Well, duh.

[reboot246]

I think the government agency that didn't know anything about the RADIO station was the FCC. That's, uh, the FCC's job, and they weren't doing it. Last time I checked, the FCC was run by Democrats.

Re:Well, duh.

[__aaclcg7560]

Last time I checked, the FCC was run by Democrats.

That tend to be the case when there is a Democratic Administration in office.

Re:Well, duh.

[Coren22]

Not about the Do Nothing Republicans in Congress.

Partisan much? I keep hearing about how Obama will not negotiate with the Republicans, and how he will veto everything they put on his desk, and it makes me wonder what job he expected the President to perform if it wasn't to negotiate for what he wants and sign bills that the people want even if he doesn't.

Re:Well, duh.

[__aaclcg7560]

The House Republicans can't even negotiate with themselves because a vocal minority of 40 members putting ideology purity over practical compromise. That former Speaker John Boehner requires Democratic votes to get anything done is telling. You can thank Nancy Pelosi for delivering those votes.

Re:Well, duh.

[gstoddart]

Last time I checked, the FCC was run by Democrats.

Funny, last time I checked it was ran by lobbyists for the cable and wireless industry. Which tends to be the case no matter which fucking party is in power.

Pretty much these days government has been completely co-opted by corporate interests, and governments are merely tools to protect profits.

Re:Well, duh.

[Obfuscant]

I think the government agency that didn't know anything about the RADIO station was the FCC.

Don't be silly. The FCC knew about the station. It has an FCC issued authorization to build and operate the station. Check Wikipedia for info and links to the FCC database on them.

What the FCC didn't pay any attention to was the content of the station or who was paying for it. Do you want them to regulate what format and content your local radio stations can air? I don't think so.

That's, uh, the FCC's job, and they weren't doing it.

The FCCs job is to make sure they operate within the FCC regulations as to technical and other standards. They were doing that. Its the FEC and other agencies that deal with people acting on behalf of foreign agencies for political purposes.

Re:Well, duh.

[gtall]

You mean the Republicans who got their seats because they gerrymandered their districts. When that happens, any old dolt can get elected. There is a reason Obama got elected twice, you cannot easily gerrymander the Presidential contest. And heartily disapprove of Obama, mainly due to Biden's foreign policy of bend over and pray they don't stick it in too hard.

Re:Well, duh.

[Coren22]

You mean gerrymandering required by law? That gerrymandering that the Democrats forced on the Republicans?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Those districts that are being pointed out as gerrymandering in for instance North Carolina are being demanded by the voters rights act to allow the minority voters to have their own districts so as to prevent dilution.

I have seen many attempts to attack the Republicans for Gerrymandering, but when the Democrats passed a law requiring gerrymandering of districts to pack all the minority votes, what do you expect to happen?

The term gerrymander actually originates in Massachusetts, to describe what the Democrats did to the districts up there to prevent Republican voters from having power. It is a fine tradition continued today in Mass, Maryland, California, Florida, PA, and Illinois. Yet all the Democrats seem to be able to point to and claim gerrymandering is a single district in North Carolina. So, who is the worst at gerrymandering? Also, if Gerrymandering is so powerful for the Republicans, why was a Republican Governor elected in Maryland this past round when it is a state firmly in control of the Democrats?

http://pjmedia.com/zombie/2010...

so...

[ganjadude]

The government is not even monitoring the radio waves in/near the capitol? Thats what I took from reading this. that is not a very smart thing

Re:so...

[MountainLogic]

Yes, the FCC is monitoring radio waves in the capitol and the rest of the country, but is less likely to monitor the content broadcast on the radio waves unless here is a complaint.

Re:so...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, the FCC is monitoring radio waves in the capitol and the rest of the country, but is less likely to monitor the content broadcast on the radio waves unless here is a complaint.

And subverting American Liberty and Democracy probably isn't a valid FCC complaint... say fuck on the radio though and you could lose your license.

Re:so...

[jandrese]

The FCC operates on a complaint driven model. They don't tend to notice until someone writes a letter. They don't have the budget to hire airwave cops to drive around looking for violations all over the country. As far as the FCC was concerned this was just another properly licensed radio station until someone complained.

Re:so...

[radarskiy]

It's radio... no one else is listening either.

Re:so...

[ArchieBunker]

You can be sure if anyone said "fuck" on the air the FCC would notice.

Re:so...

[gman003]

Is broadcasting propaganda even illegal? Sure,maybe ISIS propaganda would count as "inciting violence" but just repeating the official Chinese government lines doesn't exactly do that. We're not at war with them, and it's not "material aid", so it definitely doesn't count as treason. It's rather distasteful but I actually don't see a reason to ban it, if all they're doing is repeating Chinese lies. (Lying is, after all, not intrinsically illegal)

Really, it doesn't sound too different in kind than Radio Free Europe. The lies are perhaps more blatant but I don't doubt RFE has spouted pro-American bullshit.

Re:so...

[Anonymous Coward]

On the internet, not only is it not illegal but encouraged. Perhaps even mandatory.

Re:so...

[Big Hairy Ian]

The government is not even monitoring the radio waves in/near the capitol? Thats what I took from reading this. that is not a very smart thing

They're too busy reading your email

You're doing it wrong

[Tablizer]

Dummies, if you want to influence Washington, you don't put up radio stations, you bribe politicians directly. The Supreme Court made doing so legal.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[ShanghaiBill]

you bribe politicians directly. The Supreme Court made doing so legal.

No they didn't. The Citizens United decision prohibited the government from restricting donations to independent PACs, not directly to politicians. If you oppose Citizens United, you should explain why based on the facts. Misrepresenting it as something it is not, does not help your cause.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

"Misrepresenting it as something it is not, does not help your cause." True enough.

"independent PACs" omitting mention that this requirement is impossible to enforce or even monitor ignores the real reason CU is such a disaster.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[Fire_Wraith]

In layman's terms, they're still required to do the "wink wink, nudge nudge" part, and per Citizens United, that means that because there is no direct transfer of funds, or quid pro quo, then that makes everything alright.

The problem is that it's very easy to disguise certain levels of collusion that isn't supposed to happen, and given the ridiculous/ludicrous levels of money being tossed around, it strains credulity for everyone except the Supreme Court apparently to say there isn't something dirty going on.

Let me put it another way. If Billionaire Bob decides to donate $50 million to the "Fund Attack Ads Against Candidate Alice's Opponents" PAC, do we really think that means Alice won't notice, or that it's not really a donation to Alice because FAAACAO PAC is a theoretically independent organization that just happens to be run by Alice's longtime best friend, who she totally never talks to about anything election related? Unless Eve happens to overhear them talking and tells the press about them colluding, but by then the election is probably long over, and the FEC has been pretty toothless of late... but that's another complaint.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[mrchaotica]

Misrepresenting it as something it is not, does not help your cause.

Pot, meet Kettle. "Independent PACs," my ass!

They only look "independent" because the candidate doesn't control them... just pay no attention to the man behind the curtain who's controlling both the PACs and the candidate.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[fustakrakich]

independent PACs

I don't believe there is such a thing. Besides, offering a bribe should be no big deal. Taking the bribe should be heavily sanctioned.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[ShanghaiBill]

"Independent PACs," my ass!

Rick Perry was backed by PACs with millions of dollars in the bank. Yet he had to drop out, because he had no direct access to that money to pay his staff. So, yes, they are independent, and often push views that are uncomfortable to candidates.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

Dummies, if you want to influence Washington, you don't put up radio stations, you bribe politicians directly. The Supreme Court made doing so legal.

Well, to be fair, at least it's Americans bribing Americans. If it were Chinese bribing Americans that would be something else entirely.... They are assholes... but at least they are OUR assholes...

Re:You're doing it wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

No they didn't. The Citizens United decision prohibited the government from restricting donations to independent PACs, not directly to politicians. If you oppose Citizens United, you should explain why based on the facts.

I oppose Citizens United based on the fact that independent PACs are not required to disclose their sources of funding.

It could be $10 from each of a million grassroots citizens, or it could be one CEO (a foreign national, no less) giving $10,000,000, and we (the public) have absolutely no way of finding out.

Now an independent PAC, funded entirely by a completely unknown amount of foreign money, can run as many positive or negative political ads as they want.

If that's not buying an election, then I don't know what could be.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

independent PACs

I don't believe there is such a thing. Besides, offering a bribe should be no big deal. Taking the bribe should be heavily sanctioned.

Offering a bribe to a public servant, or otherwise seeking to subvert them, should be illegal & punishable.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[Coren22]

I oppose Anonymous Coward based on the fact that ACs are not required to disclose their sources of funding.

Does it make any sense when you change the target a touch? PACs are companies, why would they be required to disclose their sources of funding?

Re:You're doing it wrong

[fustakrakich]

Why? It only matters if they take the money and are subverted, and even then it is the taker's fault.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

Zoom out a bit. Ignore the acronyms and procedures, and just look at the net-effects.

The will of the rich wins over the will of the many-but-poor whenever they are in disparity. The gyrations through which those in power must go in order to make this happen are irrelevant. The bottom line is the same. Money is political power.

And why shouldn't it be? Money is how we influence anyone to do our will. Want someone to build a house for you? Pay them. Want someone to grow food for you? Pay them. Want someone to pass a law for you? Pay them.

This enrages the have-nots, because it makes them feel powerless. The fact is, for the most part, they are powerless. On rare occasions sufficient numbers of them will rally together for a single political cause, but even then their political effectiveness still winds up being a function of their collective wealth.

The other side of this rage is....people don't want to part with their money in order to effect political change. So they go on and on about how that isn't how things should be, and how their social obligation ends with them casting a vote. But the bottom line is, they aren't willing to make any real sacrifices for their political cause, and as such they don't get results.

Clear your mind of judgments about how you think things ought to be, and you will see that this is true.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

Rick Perry had to drop out because he ran out of friends to appoint to high places, and he couldn't convince enough people that more appointments would be forthcoming if he made it to the Presidency.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, to be fair, at least it's Americans bribing Americans. If it were Chinese bribing Americans that would be something else entirely.... They are assholes... but at least they are OUR assholes...

Not exactly, a 501.c.4 isn't required to disclose funding sources at all, they could pretty easily take Chinese money and directly buy politicians or an election with it. It just costs a lot.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[BitZtream]

They aren't trying to influence politicians. Politicians don't actually spend very much time anywhere NEAR DC if they can avoid it. Congress critters get in and leave ASAP, better be at home on the ranch.

These broadcasts are trying to influence the general public ... into not thinking China is a bunch of douche bags.

This sort of propaganda is notoriously effective, especially when it tells people something they want to hear.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

Because our elections aren't a commercial enterprise up for sale. Or rather, they shouldn't be, and to suggest so is incredibly anti-democratic.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[Cytotoxic]

Let me put it an other "another way".

Let's suppose Fire_Wraith really thinks Jeb Bush sucks a donkey. So he wants to let everyone know that a vote for Jeb is one step toward the end of civilization. Under the constitution and federal election laws, Fire_Wraith can go out to the town square and scream at the top of his lungs on the topic all he wants. He can even publish ads in the newspaper and on TV. Or put up a web page. As much of his time and treasure as he'd like to spend on the issue, he can spend.

In this way it is just like any other issue Fire_Wraith cares about. He could be advocating for parental rights for Transgender divorcees, or anything else his heart desires. The FEC only takes note when he's dealing with a federal election in some way - and he can't coordinate his activities with those campaigns without calling it a contribution and being regulated.

Now, here's the other shoe to drop: What if I think Fire_Wraith is the smartest guy ever and I'm totally on his side. I want to join in his efforts. So I offer to pay for half of his advertizing and help write the ad copy. I'm doing the same thing that he was doing before. So is he. Only now we are doing it together.

Pre Citizen's United we suddenly were running afoul of federal law. Just because we were pooling our resources for common cause.

Even today Fire_Wraith and I would run into difficulties because of campaign laws. It happens all the time, all around the country and it has nothing to do with corporate oligarchies. Let's say instead of Bush, Fire_Wraith and I were worried about something happening in our town and we got together with a bunch of people from the neighborhood to do something about it. We put our heads and wallets together and get a bunch of yard signs printed up. Ooops. We just violated campaign finance laws. We are now a PAC and have to get ourselves all legal and regulated and stuff. So even though we were only able to scrape together $382.78 for the yard signs (and coffee and donuts for the meeting), we are required to file complicated paperwork and collect information for the regulators on all of our contributors and all of our expenditures. Even though this would cost way more than we are spending on our actual political activities, and even though we could barely muster the energy to get the yard signs deployed.

This is what campaign finance laws look like in the real world. Often a group like ours would skate under the radar and not be bothered by regulators. Unless, of course, somebody got their undies in a bunch and decided to do something about it. The example above is based on a real story - I think it was Colorado a few years back. Some neighborhood group was opposed to something the city was doing and tried to oppose it by pooling their resources. The powers on the other side used the levers of government to silence them - audits and subpoenas and prosecutors all drowned the group, costing them many, many times what they were planning to spend on stopping their government.

This can reach extremes when your political opponents happen to work for government as prosecutors or regulators. In this case a prosecutor used his power to silence (and bankrupt) someone who was raising money for the opposing party. Someone who ultimately was found to be operating perfectly legally, but was harassed and silenced for 5 years, using campaign finance laws.

There's a lot to worry about here, not just on the "corporations are evil" front.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[Cytotoxic]

Probably not the pols.... but probably directly targeting the bureaucracy and all of the NGO's and lobbyists sucking at the government teat in Washington. A little good will might go a long way. And if that good will happens to work at the department of commerce or the state department, well, so much the better.

There's a reason the USA came up with Voice of America after all. And it wasn't to change the hearts and minds of politicians and dictators around the world.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[gtall]

What needs to happen is that the PACs get their tax exempt status taken away. They are not "in it for the public good". They are in it for crass political and financial reasons.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

Seeking to subvert them is seeking to subvert the process of governance which harms everyone.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[Fire_Wraith]

It's certainly not a simple thing, and yes, if I had a perfect solution to campaign finance laws, I'd probably be taking them somewhere other than Slashdot. :)

That said, the core problem is what you outline in that first paragraph - the fact that you equate shouting on a soapbox in the town square, which anyone can conceivably do (especially since the modern town square is electronic), with spending money. It is this "Money = Speech" notion that is proving so toxic. Money is not speech, money is an amplifier for speech. It lets you shout a lot louder than the other guy, even to the point of drowning him out. Let's say I'm against MegaCorp fracking in my town. I get out there at the county fair and set up on the corner to tell people all about what a bad idea I think it is. Meanwhile, MegaCorp has hired 100 people with megaphones to drown me out, while handing out free food, beer, and t-shirts at the MegaCorp sponsored concert, and did I mention they're sponsoring the fair too and have their logo and pro-fracking slogans plastered everywhere?

Now, that's just an extreme example - but it's very easy to see the difference that money can make. It's one thing if you have people freely coming together to talk about stuff. It's another when you start injecting large amounts of money into that equation.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[fustakrakich]

Only if it is subverted.

Eeeehhhh

[truck_soccer]

They're just prepping us for our Chinese-speaking future.

Re:Eeeehhhh

[willworkforbeer]

They're just prepping us for our Chinese-speaking future.

The only problem with those overlords is you just feel like being subjugated again an hour later.

Re: Eeeehhhh

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean japanies? Japan owns more American debt than china.

Re: Eeeehhhh

[Anonymous Coward]

The US Treasury says otherwise. China, for the last several years, has typically been the largest holder of US debt.

Re: Eeeehhhh

[HornWumpus]

The social security trust fund is, by far, the largest holder of US debt.

China is the largest foreign government holder of US debt.

In other words: 'We're fucked...'

Re: Eeeehhhh

[Anonymous Coward]

You're both wrong.

Social Security actually owns the most, with a $2.7T share. (2.7 teradollars is a lot, but torn dollars aren't worth much.)

Here's a nice article that breaks it down for you.

Face it, old people own you. You can either join them, or you can die trying.

Re: Eeeehhhh

[Dahan]

China, for the last several years, has typically been the largest holder of US debt.

They're the largest foreign holder of US debt. But about 2/3rds of US debt is owned by domestic entities--and of domestic holders, Social Security owns the most, at about 16%. How does the US government own its own debt? Who knows? But in any case, China is a couple steps down the list; it owns about 7% of US debt.

Nor did anyone else.

[tylersoze]

Government officials didn't even know WCRW existed until Reuters told them about it. Nor did anyone else, it's a terrestrial radio station for god sakes.

Re:Nor did anyone else.

[Anonymous Coward]

Worst than that it's an AM station. Propaganda radio stations like Voice of America during the cold war and Tokyo Rose during WW2 worked (arguably) because there was a lack of entertainment options available and people were willing to tune in even if they hated the people running the station. There are no lack of radio options in America today (in fact, it's almost impossible to get a license in most places without buying one from an existing station).

Re:Nor did anyone else.

[dollar99]

And it's an AM station for that matter.

Re:Nor did anyone else.

[Anonymous Coward]

Who other than old people still listen to the radio, AM or otherwise?

Re:Nor did anyone else.

[jandrese]

Right wing nutcases thrive on AM radio. The format helps filter out anybody with opposing viewpoints or unfortunate access to factual information.

Re:Nor did anyone else.

[dryeo]

Who other than old people still listen to the radio, AM or otherwise?

People without high speed internet and no TV reception for a start. Occasionally I even listen to the AM traffic station, usually to find out why the traffic has stopped.

Re:Nor did anyone else.

[CrimsonAvenger]

The format helps filter out anybody with opposing viewpoints or unfortunate access to factual information.

I'll bite - how?

Seriously, what is there about AM radio that filters out opposing viewpoints?

Or are you jst trying to suggest the the Left is too stupid to use AM?

Re:Nor did anyone else.

[jandrese]

I'm saying that those kind of people never touch the AM/FM switch on their radio, if they even listen to radio anymore. It's reputation as a place for preaching and whackos keeps them out.

It's the same way you can send messages to people but avoid having the lion's share of the youth see it by simply publishing in the newspaper and not putting it in the online edition. Young people wonder why they should get their hands dirty reading day old news and op-eds from the out of touch.

Sounds a lot like NBC, CBS and ABC.

[r-diddly]

- avoids any criticism of [the US] - CHECK
- critical of [Washington's] political enemies - CHECK
- for example, a report on pro-democracy protests in [New York and nationwide] [in 2011] did not explain why people were in the streets, and said only that the demonstrations had "failed without support"

On the other hand, one key difference is that the Chinese propagandists claim they're just passing along government propaganda, whereas the American ones deny they are.

Re:Sounds a lot like NBC, CBS and ABC.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're gonna list an example and give it a date, provide a link too.

Re:Sounds a lot like NBC, CBS and ABC.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't totally disagree, but really, you have to admit that Chinese propaganda takes it to a different level. If you don't think so, then I doubt you've actually heard/read much of it.

Also, I wonder how RT fits into this picture. Do they have to report to Washington as a foreign governmental agency?

Re:Sounds a lot like NBC, CBS and ABC.

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't worry, the Chinese will get better at this too. The best propaganda doesn't sound like propaganda to its audience, and they might not quite have the right measure of Americans yet, but they learn fast.

Re:Sounds a lot like NBC, CBS and ABC.

[BitZtream]

Hate to break it to you, but I'd say those demonstrations failed and the support was a bunch of spoiled brats to lazy to get off their ass and work who camped out with north face jackets and tents while they proceeded to basically show how they had no business being treated like anything other than the 5 year olds they were acting like.

It was a joke.

Re:Sounds a lot like NBC, CBS and ABC.

[Anonymous Coward]

Try broadcasting those NBC, CBS etc near China's border, you'll get a nuclear war threat at the very least.

Haha

[Anonymous Coward]

Mao Down

Re:Haha

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been thinking that "Chairman Mao" would be a great name for a cat, especially one that goes "maow" (sorta like "meow" but just one syllable) all the time.

Also good: "Mousey Tongue". For obvious reasons.

New Zealand Govt says in writing it doesn't care

[Anonymous Coward]

This post from a NZ blogger shows a correspondence trail culminates in the Government saying make a complaint about the content if it bothers you.
https://kmccready.wordpress.co...

Re:New Zealand Govt says in writing it doesn't car

[Anonymous Coward]

NZ is one of the Five Eyes countries. Their focus (see what I'm doing there) totally ignores the importance of soft power. https://www.foreignaffairs.com...
It's a bit like the USA dumbing down it's Middle East expertise by removing Arabic speakers and experts from the State Department.

Well that explains the other anomoly

[stevez67]

The sudden rise in the D.C. of take out orders for Mandarin cuisine since 2009.

This just in

[Etherwalk]

Oh sure, and everyone was shocked to discover Voice of Russia radio stations happen to trend pro-Putin.

In the real world, Napoleon was the greatest general in the world not because he won every battle, but because he bought every newspaper. Please remember that almost every news story you read is propaganda of one sort or another--we've developed a whole ecosystem of it.

Sigismundas

[Anonymous Coward]

China is learning from Russia though one station is negligible amount. In many countries Russian stations and internet trolls particularly are a real problem, killing any productive discussion and infesting everything with "the only truth".

How you distinguish Real Americans from the fakers

[0xdeadbeef]

Is the station owned by an American? Did they pay their FCC licensing fees?

If so, then who cares? Free speech, bitches. Anyone who has a problem with this doesn't deserve to live here.

Similar to VOA/Radio Free Europe?

[ErichTheRed]

This sounds like a twist on the old international broadcaster model -- Radio Free Europe and VOA are still running long after the cold war, and they used to pump information to countries behind the Iron Curtain. The difference is that China is buying up transmitter facilities in the target countries as opposed to blasting shortwave from a remote location.

Realistically, I doubt this will have much local effect. It's not 1965 anymore, and there are much more effective ways of distributing propaganda. It just sounds like the Party is trying to cover all their bases and sees an easy way to do so.

That said, in my opinion, stuff like this is why China will probably win long-term. They have authoritarian control combined with a semi-market economy and a huge population advantage. There's no such thing as a government shutdown because a group doesn't agree with state policy. And, an authoritarian regime is able to do whatever is necessary to achieve its goals.

Re:Similar to VOA/Radio Free Europe?

[jandrese]

Willingness to partake in somewhat expensive and likely ignored propaganda is a winning long term strategy? Or it is just because they don't broadcast their political power struggles to the world?

Re:Similar to VOA/Radio Free Europe?

[mjwx]

Realistically, I doubt this will have much local effect. It's not 1965 anymore, and there are much more effective ways of distributing propaganda. It just sounds like the Party is trying to cover all their bases and sees an easy way to do so.

This sounds more like old fashioned political posturing. The Chinese government knows that their propaganda (which is designed for the Chinese psyche and attitude) will have no effect what so ever on Americans. Especially Americans in Washington. Its just a message from the Chinese Government saying that Washington is not outside their reach. The US is doing exactly the same thing by sending Destroyers to sail past China's new islands or Russia sending an old bomber to buzz a US aircraft carrier.

Simple political dickwaving.

Re:Similar to VOA/Radio Free Europe?

[dbIII]

And, an authoritarian regime is able to do whatever is necessary to achieve its goals.

Yes but the downside, as seen with Mao, is that they are free to do just about anything even if it is a very stupid idea that kills millions of it's own citizens. That example keeps them thinking about their choices to an extent but there is far less correcting feedback like what happens in a Democracy.

Re:Similar to VOA/Radio Free Europe?

[RubberDogBone]

You hit closer than you might have realized: in the 80s, foreign state broadcasters had a practice of leasing time on shortwave relay stations located in the US and Canada with the express purpose of reaching North American listeners.

Some shortwave churches bought and operated stations under religious licenses but used leased time to actually make some money off it. There were also businesses expressly operated as relay stations just like the one in Virginia. Okeechobee Florida was a popular site for this, and at least one of the relays is apparently still operating: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Prior to being operated as WRMI, it was named WYFR and broadcast relays from Taiwan and others. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Note before people ask: Yes it has US call letters but it broadcasts on shortwave, not AM, FM or TV bands.

As for the Chinese population issue, the situation is not what it seems. Due to the one-child policies, China has a severe problem with lack of children, rapidly aging adults, and a big problem with lack of women for men to marry. It is estimated as many as 34 million Chinese men will not be able to find wives, and the women are like women in many other countries (US, Japan, Israel, UK, Germany, etc) where "staying home and having kids" is not necessarily appealing or financially feasible. So for the couples who do marry, they are not having enough children to maintain the population. You need 2.1 kids per family to maintain populations. China is having 1.something. Taken all together along with the "graying" of the existing generation as they age, and the population of China may halve in the next 50-100 years.

This is a serious problem.

So What?

[Anonymous Coward]

Radio China International has been doing the same thing for years, buying air time on Shortwave stations based in the U.S. to rebroadcast its English shortwave content. What really bothers me are all of the so called "religious" stations in the U.S. that claim that their broadcasts are not aimed at or intended for the continental U.S., but the times that they broadcast the direction that the signals are broadcast in say otherwise.

Re:So What?

[blue trane]

The only radio station I could get while out in Northwest Nevada for a few days was KCFJ out of Alturas, CA. The China Radio International parts were pretty pro-China, on the new islands in the South China Sea for example. Reminds me of how RT (the "Putin channel") is so strongly pro-Russian on the Syrian bombings. KCFJ aired some Chinese language lessons, I had fun out in the high Nv desert practicing Chinese again.

Pot, Kettle, Black

[misophist]

How is this any different than the broadcasts that Voice of America does all over the world? If these broadcasts are objectionable, then the government should jam them. Oh, but we get so upset when other countries jam VOA......

Re:Pot, Kettle, Black

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the difference is that VOA stations identify themselves as VOA, whereas these shows don't identify themselves as CRI, preferring to use the local station names despite Chinese ownership and state sponsored content.

Re:Pot, Kettle, Black

[HiThere]

What did those call letters stand for again?

Re:Pot, Kettle, Black

[OverlordQ]

How is this any different than the broadcasts that Voice of America does all over the world?

VOA also broadcasts FROM the US.

We the sheeple.

[Anonymous Coward]

Would be good to have a website that gauged (with examples for their criteria and reasoning) all the biases and clear editorial intents of various media sources:

NBC - Democratic Party 110%
Fox - Republican Party 89%
CNN - Democratic Party 77%
ABC - Mostly Democratic Party 62%
WCRW - Chinese Communist Party 110%
New York Times - NSA/Pentagon/Democratic Party 22%/22%/87%

Re:We the sheeple.

[squiggleslash]

NBC is the company that launched the Tea Party - Rick Santelli's speech on CNBC is commonly considered the precursor to its launch. I'd hardly give them a 110% Democratic rating. Even MSNBC, when it was the supposed liberal answer to Fox News, devoted its entire mornings to Joe Scarborough.

As for the others, CNN jumps on pretty much every minor scandal related to a Democrat, and if ABC has a dedicated news channel it's not one anyone watches.

False equivalency is false

[Anonymous Coward]

"Pro-democracy protests in the USA" is incoherent.
Despite our faults, American citizens still have the vote, as well as the Bill of Rights.
We have much room to improve, but comparing us to China is moronic.

Re:False equivalency is false

[marxmarv]

Also, which country recently repealed its ban on propaganda targeted at its own people and ruled that "news" publishers can confabulate all they like?

Pathetic Exceptionalism is pathetic. Go cry to mommy or something, but keep it out of here.

Re:False equivalency is false

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, people in Soviet Russia voted too, with a much higher voter turnout. The bill of rights is great, but only if those rights are actually respected. I'm just saying that it sounds like you're taking our democracy for granted. Just having voting and bills is not quite enough on its own.

Come On, Don't Be Dense

[Frosty Piss]

Yes, the FCC is monitoring radio waves in the capitol and the rest of the country, but is less likely to monitor the content broadcast on the radio waves unless here is a complaint.

Well then, what's up with the NSA and the CIA?

Perhaps they already knew about it and were monitoring the station for clandestine messaging? Just because the Department of Justice "says" they didn't know about these people doesn't meant that's a true statement.

Re:Come On, Don't Be Dense

[Coren22]

Both the NSA and CIA have in their charter that they are for foreign intelligence. The NSA is also tasked with protecting domestic communications (of the government, not the citizens...)

Re:Come On, Don't Be Dense

[Frosty Piss]

Both the NSA and CIA have in their charter that they are for foreign intelligence.

Yes, but you know from Snowden and other sources that it is not true.

"uncovered" = turned on the radio?

[Anonymous Coward]

"FM radio" is a free music and content streaming service that many vehicles in America are able to play.

This does not apply to buses, skateboards, and fixies.

Israel's lobby never registered either

[Anonymous Coward]

"U.S. law requires that anyone seeking to influence American policy or public opinion on behalf of a foreign government must register with the Department of Justice"

Americans have been trying for decades to get Israel's lobby to register as a foreign agent.

Details of the sordid story are at
http://www.prnewswire.com/news...

Owned by US Citizens?

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

If the station is owned by US Citizens, it is their first amendment right. That much was granted by our constitution.

The Roberts Supreme Court has ruled they are eligible for far more than that. The owners, if they are US Citizens, will /should be able to make unlimited campaign contributions and also able to seek relief from any US Law that imposes substantial burden on their practice of religion.

Re:Owned by US Citizens?

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

It is all legal folks. Let us just say some US Citizens decide to bottle the sewage from Washington DC and decide to market it. Some outlandish business plan. But hey! some one could do it. Let us say some Chinese SOE (state owned enterprise) thinks it would have a huge market in China, and order several hundred million dollars worth of bottled sewage from this company. The owners of this company, all legal US Citizens, flush with cash made by this deal, after paying all due taxes, are free to spend it anyway they want. Since money is speech, and campaign contribution is just speech you can't restrict it, as per Citizen's United decision. In fact when Obama said foreign governments can influence US elections because of this decision in a state of the union speech, Justice Alito was seen mouthing "It is not true".

Further in the Hobby Lobby decision, a closely held company was endowed with religious rights too! So we need to make sure our laws do not impose undue burden in their practice of Confucianism or Buddhism or even Communism because, Communism is a religion for the Chinese.

So welcome to the Brave New World guys. Our government has been shrunk small enough to be drowned in a bathtub. And someone just did it. Hip Hip Hurray!

Re:Owned by US Citizens?

[Required Snark]

Yes, and with the Robert's court Citizen's United decision it is 100% certain that foreign governments are now making significant campaign contributions to US politicians. And just like other powerful and corrupt special interest groups, they get what they pay for. Can you say TPP?

If the Feds can't figure out that Chinese propaganda is being broadcast on the airwaves, what are the chances that they will find out that money from China is being illegally channeled into US political funding?

The Chinese, and pretty much anybody with an axe to grind, has easy pickings when it comes to find an existing faction that can be used to advance their interests. Take the US Import/Export Bank. Closing it down means less overseas business for US companies, and that business has got to go somewhere. So who's side are the hard right wingers really on?

The right is where there are a lot of opportunities for this strategy. Disabling regulations, which is what the Republicans live for, makes it easy to exploit our weaknesses. For example, the US Chamber of Commerce has successfully defeated all attempts to enact cybersecurity legislation. Obama has acted unilaterally using executive orders to impose some standards, but that is far less effective then legislation.

If you look at the Office of Management and Budget hack of security clearances, it wasn't in the OMB, it was at a civilian contractor. So if there had been meaningful laws in place, it might have keep this disaster from happening. I think that supporting some of the legislative agenda of the Camber of Commerce, and other right pressure groups, could have huge payouts for the Chinese and others, say India and Russia. Think H1B visas.

And the Roberts court had made this as easy as cake. All it takes is a front organization, like the owners of the radio station. Hell, it might even be legal, given how useless the US law has become on dealing with campaign financing.

SNIPER TIME!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Pull out the long barrels and let's have us some fun with these owners and their property everyone. YAAAA HOO. DEAD RED!

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Yeah right

[marxmarv]

More likely, they've known about it all this time and are using this as a bargaining chip for something else entirely, like, say, having an aircraft carrier not far from the Syrian proxy war. You simply can't trust any of the corporate media to not primarily represent its own interests.

Easy Solution

[kaatochacha]

Convince the station owners to sell to that guy that bought the drug company and raised all the prices 2000 percent. Then let him charge for the propoganda. Profit!

Only in the Northeast...

[Anonymous Coward]

...Would be people be stupid enough to believe any of their shit.

Who cares about a non-binding vote?

[marxmarv]

Stop worshipping dead people and oligarchs and be a citizen for once in your life. Your Exceptionalism is pathetic (in more than one sense) and self-deluded.

same ol' same ol'.

[harvey the nerd]

Apparently it is difficult for them to separate Chinese communist propaganda and lies from the normal content coming out of DC.

Re:same ol' same ol'.

[PRMan]

Burn...

Re:same ol' same ol'.

[KGIII]

Sure... Says the guy with the name PR Man. ;-) And, oddly, just below your post was someone with the name "gman!"

Lemme adjust my tin foil hat a little.

Avoid Surveillance

[Anonymous Coward]

So to avoid U.S. government surveillance, Americans should stop using the telephone and start using radio frequencies?

Nope

[s.petry]

The FCC makes money by fining people when they slip, not by putting them out of business. The FCC does not "notice" either, they field complaints from people and verify complaints after the fact. Which should tell you why Radio Stations record everything.. they have to by law.

That is not to defend the FCC or Chinese broadcasting. I figure it remained on the air because exposing it may cause people to question the US propaganda machine.

Coren22's desperation & lies

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

Is that YOUR fake site for MORE LIES Coren22?

Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

---

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

APK

P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

This doesn't sound like news

[idontgno]

This sounds like the setup for a quest line in Fallout 3.

We silence our own people but allow this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny how America is becoming so one sided in who has rights and who does not. Yet I guess a Country like China takes advantage of that freedom.
Well, at least I am not forced to listen to such dribble.

Can't be working that well, then

[wonkey_monkey]

An investigation by Reuters has uncovered a radio station located just outside Washington, D.C. that broadcasts dedicated Chinese propaganda to the U.S. capital and the surrounding area.

If it takes an investigation by Reuters before anyone's even aware of your radio station, you're not doing a very good job.

Re:Can't be working that well, then

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean, its on the AM band. Who the fuck actually listens to AM anymore let alone FM?

Re:Can't be working that well, then

[DewDude]

I live near this station. I've been aware it was a CRI affiliate for over year now. It was pretty obvious...several web-pages stated so.

The Country of the Free

[Anonymous Coward]

where you are not free to have or speak certain political opinions.

All Stores Sell Chinese Goods.

[zenlessyank]

Seems physical goods are more influence than some radio waves......

Case in point:

[Anonymous Coward]

The scandal involving former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert paying off of a blackmailer and the resulting criminal case is largely unreported and under-investigated by traditional media.

Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

&

How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

---

"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

FACT:

Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

---

Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

---

Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

You told me you learn from guides?

I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

+ WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

You did all that? No!

(& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

APK

P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Refreshing

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't seem to have the idea of PC down yet.

Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

Is that YOUR fake site for MORE LIES Coren22?

Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

---

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

APK

P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

Re: How you distinguish Real Americans from the fa

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, and yes. The funny part is that the Chinese apparently lease the airtime. Would we be as upset if they were advertising Chinese products? If not, that's an excellent example of distinguishing by content, something that our first amendment doesn't like much.

whatever

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like a job for Black Ops.

Oh, my poor brain

[Anonymous Coward]

Scary to think that those little yellow bastards are planting anti-falun gong vitriol in my fragile little mind. Whatever shall i do, what with RT making me feel so happy with Putin invading the Ukraine and the MSM licking Hillary's boots and all. We must put an end to this free speech thingy. Bad. bad.

Laugh

[koan]

government officials didn't even know WCRW existed until Reuters told them about it.

I guess all our security is focused on the Internet and phone system.

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

Is that YOUR fake site for MORE LIES Coren22?

Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

---

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

APK

P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

&

How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

---

"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

FACT:

Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

---

Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

---

Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

You told me you learn from guides?

I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

+ WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

You did all that? No!

(& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

APK

P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apkb

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

CCTV China

[Anonymous Coward]

We have CCTV of china in country cable TV and never hear them promoting communism but they promove tourism to china.

Re:CCTV China

[DewDude]

I think we have two CCTV channels broadcast over-the-air. I've never seriously watched them becuase they're part of a 5-channel multiplex and look really bad.

That same broadcaster also carries NHK World, Bon, RT, France24 News, TeleSUR, Ukraine Today, and VTC10. It's actually 12 digital channels carried by two broadcasters.

Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

Is that YOUR fake site for MORE LIES Coren22?

Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

---

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

APK

P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

&

How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

---

"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

FACT:

Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

---

Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

---

Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

You told me you learn from guides?

I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

+ WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

You did all that? No!

(& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

APK

P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

Is that YOUR fake site for more lies Coren22?

Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

---

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

APK

P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

&

How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

---

"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

FACT:

Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

---

Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

---

Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

You told me you learn from guides?

I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

+ WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

You did all that? No!

(& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

APK

P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

Hardly new

[RubberDogBone]

There is a long history on the shortwave radio bands where stations setup for religious or cultural purposes ended up leasing air time to foreign broadcasters. Back in the late 1980s. there were several relay stations (i.e. paid stations just like this one in D.C.) in Canada and a large one in Okeechobee Florida. Among others, Radio Taiwan aka The Voice of "Free" China", Radio Japan, DW from Germany, the BBC World Service and others used them to target North American listeners.

Nobody raised an eyebrow.

Re:Hardly new

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a long history on the shortwave radio bands where stations setup for religious or cultural purposes ended up leasing air time to foreign broadcasters. Back in the late 1980s. there were several relay stations (i.e. paid stations just like this one in D.C.) in Canada and a large one in Okeechobee Florida. Among others, Radio Taiwan aka The Voice of "Free" China", Radio Japan, DW from Germany, the BBC World Service and others used them to target North American listeners.

Nobody raised an eyebrow.

Maybe they registered?

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

Is that your fake site for more lies Coren22?

Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

---

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

APK

P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

&

How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

---

"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

FACT:

Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

---

Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

---

Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

You told me you learn from guides?

I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

+ WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

You did all that? No!

(& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

APK

P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

Is that your fake site for more lies Coren22?

Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

---

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

APK

P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

&

How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

---

"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

FACT:

Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

---

Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

---

Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

You told me you learn from guides?

I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

+ WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

You did all that? No!

(& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

APK

P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

Watch the Repulicans cry about NBC.

[Anonymous Coward]

For asking softball, but still not soft enough for them (asking what their actual policies are, and QUOTING them back the statements the politicans made earlier? FOR SHAME!!!!!) and they whine and whinge about how badly they were treated and you see the same damn thing done for the republicans (else you don't get access, therefore you don't get the news headline scoop).

See the media refuse to let Lessig in on the deal, and removing 90% of Bernie Sanders' speech, just to ensure that Hilary doesn't get outshone and lose the lead spot.

So cry me a frigging river here.

Your media is a government whore.

This only changes which government.

And this one has the saving grace to be small, and not have national coverage.

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Reciprocity

[Anonymous Coward]

In fairness, american media is equally one-sided (see the completely imaginary reports on 4 russian missiles that allegedly fell in Iran) and equally seeks to broadcast in ever growing number of countries, without any regard to local laws.

Just to be fair, if not balanced.

Re:Reciprocity

[Anonymous Coward]

(see the completely imaginary reports on 4 russian missiles that allegedly fell in Iran)

Why do you believe that to be imaginary?

Evil ploy to brainwash America... over radio???

[Anonymous Coward]

Who was the Chinese mastermind who came up with ... RADIO? Dr. Evil? Yessss... those decadent Americans just sit and listen all day to radio, the weak underbelly of the young and impressionable. Or, I could see how you could think that if somebody froze you in the 60's.

Civ solution

[Anonymous Coward]

NUKE CHINA!

I'll be damned if they're going to get away with culture flipping one of our cities. This means war.

(My wife told me she would never vote for me as President, she's has seen how I play Civ.)

If it's anything like CCTV English...

[Goonie]

...it ain't going to achieve much. China has an official English-language TV channel, which screens in at least some parts of China, is carried on satellites and is streamed online. It is unwatchably dull.

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Copying Rupert Murdoch

[goombah99]

Rupert Murdoch's propaganda outlets do much the same in multiple countries.

Re:Copying Rupert Murdoch

[Anonymous Coward]

Rupert Murdoch's propaganda outlets do much the same in multiple countries.

Poor little progressive doesn't like they other side of the debate to get out.

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Doesn't affect me ('ancient CHINESE secret')

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: I UNLIMITEDLY post as an ac & can run trolls from any 'master' dry along w/ my indomitable will + w/ the ultimate weapon I use vs. trolls - truth & undisputable concrete undeniable + verifiable FACTS!

Mod me down all day, run dry of those "downmod points" boys... I'll just post again, & burn you and those out, easily.

* :)

(How I do so is MY 'ancient CHINESE secret' (for those of you old enough to remember that laundry detergent commercial)).

APK

P.S.=> One day, I'll give EVERY SINGLE AC here the secret of how I do it - but today's NOT that day though - see every dog has his day, but the NIGHTS are mine boys... apk

Re:Doesn't affect me ('ancient CHINESE secret')

[Anonymous Coward]

You... like boys at night??

Re:Doesn't affect me ('ancient CHINESE secret')

[Anonymous Coward]

No, I'd say apk is straight. You're projecting. You looking for a date? Sounds it. Apk's not on the menu. Find another dish.

Classical, to country, to pop, to propaganda?

[Anonymous Coward]

This all seems very strange, from a British perspective. Here, if you set up a radio station for Rock music, or Talk content, or Country & Western music, then that's what you have to play, otherwise you have to go back to the authorities and ask for a new license.

I guess it fits with the American way of doing things that the only thing you need to fill the airwaves with whatever you want is money, regardless of what is actually wanted or needed ;)

Re:Classical, to country, to pop, to propaganda?

[DewDude]

The FCC does not license stations for content; they merely license the station. So there is no concept of a station being "set-up" for anything here; the license is literally just that, the license to operate.

It has always been that way though. A radio station can flip it's format/affiliation at any time without having to change license. Sometimes when a station "reinvents" itself; they request new call letters...but that still isn't tied to anything like what they're set-up for.

The FCC licenses broadcast facilities and assigns frequencies; that's it. IF they started to limit the content by a license...there would be a lot of people getting angry. Also, saying it's about money is false. Some broadcast stations do solely broker time; but there's nothing that says a radio station *has* to make money. I know of one station that's currently making no money...it's also looking for a buyer. There are also restrictions on how time can be brokered.

At the same time, most people over here think the BBC is actually the government entity that controls broadcast; and a lot of people feel all your media is actually government-run. I mean, I know it's not...I did take some time to study the broadcasting system over there (the lack of call letters bothers me).

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

Is that your fake site for more lies Coren22?

Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

---

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

APK

P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

&

How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

---

"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

FACT:

Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

---

Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

---

Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

You told me you learn from guides?

I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

+ WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

You did all that? No!

(& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

APK

P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

Is that your fake site for more lies Coren22?

Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

---

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

APK

P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

&

How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

---

"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

FACT:

Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

---

Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

---

Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

You told me you learn from guides?

I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

+ WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

You did all that? No!

(& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

APK

P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

KGIII, gotta be who you (& I) flat busted... a

[Anonymous Coward]

Coren22! LOL, I like your style (passive aggressive) & I had an account for 1 post to John Carmack (1st post I ever made here as "AlecStaar" iirc?), never EVER used it again so you know.

* Come on man - you're the "mathematics genius", & this is "2+2" level thinking... who else would be 'butthurt' by your 'pa' style post? Coren22... Occam's Razor man.

APK

P.S.=> You know, I've seen that shit RUIN a lot of folks. Many are dead from my past. It's now an epidemic & in rentals I get QUITE A LOT the past year or so?

Man... tons of folks are junkies (I have to rid myself of them fast though usually UNLESS they're proven in recovery... that means the person has rediscovered their goals & dreams instead of dreaming life away on a narcotic & that they're HUMAN again, not worse than animals fighting over a piece of meat)/

Hey - so, whatever "keeps you well" minus a spike's fine by me & don't fall off the wagon of humanity for an illusion and the use of something that's its OWN PUNISHMENT!

Hey.. you MAY not be able to find another "clean" in you again if you do!

(... & think about not so much yourself, but those that LOVE YOU man (it helps keep you on the straight & narrow - selfish won't)... good luck on that & thanks (again) AND STAY WELL (on methodone, suboxone, or whatever - Yes, I have enough familiarity to know 'second hand' what it does but I'll never know it really & I DON'T WANT TO, scares the shit out of me - Hotel California/Roach Motel style))... apk

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

Is that your fake site for more lies Coren22?

Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

---

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

APK

P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

&

How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

---

"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

FACT:

Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

---

Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

---

Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

You told me you learn from guides?

I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

+ WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

You did all that? No!

(& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

APK

P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

Is that your fake site for more lies Coren22?

Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

---

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

APK

P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

&

How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

---

"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

FACT:

Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

---

Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

---

Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

You told me you learn from guides?

I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

+ WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

You did all that? No!

(& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

APK

P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

Re: How you distinguish Real Americans from the fa

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, and yes. The funny part is that the Chinese apparently lease the airtime. Would we be as upset if they were advertising Chinese products? If not, that's an excellent example of distinguishing by content, something that our first amendment doesn't like much.

If it was being paid for by the Beijing then presumably it would still fall afoul of this as its on source not content.

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

Is that your fake site for more lies Coren22?

Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

---

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

APK

P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

&

How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

---

"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

FACT:

Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

---

Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

---

Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

You told me you learn from guides?

I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

+ WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

You did all that? No!

(& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

APK

P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

Is that your fake site for more lies Coren22?

Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

---

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

APK

P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

&

How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

---

"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

FACT:

Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

---

Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

---

Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

You told me you learn from guides?

I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

+ WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

You did all that? No!

(& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

APK

P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

Is that your fake site for more lies Coren22?

Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

---

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

APK

P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

&

How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

---

"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

FACT:

Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

---

Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

---

Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

You told me you learn from guides?

I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

+ WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

You did all that? No!

(& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

APK

P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

Is that your fake site for more lies Coren22?

Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

---

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

APK

P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

&

How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

---

"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

FACT:

Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

---

Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

---

Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

You told me you learn from guides?

I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

+ WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

You did all that? No!

(& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

APK

P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

Is that your fake site for more lies Coren22?

Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

---

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

APK

P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

&

How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

---

"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

FACT:

Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

---

Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

---

Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

You told me you learn from guides?

I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

+ WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

You did all that? No!

(& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

APK

P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

&

How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

---

"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

FACT:

Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

---

Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

---

Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

You told me you learn from guides?

I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

+ WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

You did all that? No!

(& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

APK

P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

Doesn't affect me ('ancient CHINESE secret')

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: I UNLIMITEDLY post as an ac & can run trolls from any 'master' dry along w/ my indomitable will + w/ the ultimate weapon I use vs. trolls - truth & undisputable concrete undeniable + verifiable FACTS!

Mod me down all day, run dry of those "downmod points" boys... I'll just post again, & burn you and those out, easily.

* :)

(How I do so is MY 'ancient CHINESE secret' (for those of you old enough to remember that laundry detergent commercial)).

APK

P.S.=> One day, I'll give EVERY SINGLE AC here the secret of how I do it & there's 2 ways that are F A S T, not TOR slow & they're TOTALLY LEGIT - but today's NOT that day though - see every dog has his day, but the NIGHTS are mine boys... apk

KGIII it's THIS simple... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

He posted what I quoted here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and the simpleton Coren22 doesn't even realize it -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

LMAO!

* You've also called people like him stupid (one that give me guff about hosts and as you can see from Coren22's rampant sockpuppet downmod festival (over 45 of them by now, "Gosh, golly GEE - where DOES he get so many modpoints in 2 days I wonder?" (not))... he evidences it clearly.

APK

P.S.=> The dolt acts like it doesn't bother him but occasionally he HAS to react blowing it badly as always -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when his pea-brain goes "pop" and he's made out a FOOL -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... so it gives that away too, but WHAT DOES MOST OF ALL?? All the downmods!

Even my replies to you for Pete's sake.

He's a sneak weasel punk, nothing more... "talking behind my back" via his 'signature' (butthurt or what?) - lol, it makes me laugh... that's NOT A MAN kg3, it's a slimy little weasel that gossips like an old lady or jilted bitch in Coren22!

Astounding: He claims to work & yet posts here ALL DAY LONG, so do you see why I doubt his credibility about his allegedly being an (let's see) MCSE (paper one @ best, that's an industry joke for ages), Systems Engineer + Security pro - ok:

Take a peek @ that dolt Coren22's mistakes, libel, lies and more in MY posts I put up after his, and ask yourself a question - think he's telling the truth? I don't... a REAL MCSE isn't that stupid, & doesn't make that many blatant technical mistakes + he is BY NO MEANS a 'security pro' (he's mere talk but can't back it up & runs when he's asked to - no problem, his mistakes prove he's not & considering he HASN'T DONE SHIT of any note too? Well, you see where I am coming from - I'll break him for it, watch, he'll crack)

... apk

Hey, it's just capitalism at work...

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't see why people are up in arms about this. Citizen United meant you can buy political and social influence. Everyone has been fine with that in DC. /S

Coren22 proven a TROLL (NSA/GCHQ?)

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject - OR didn't you say:

"Maybe I should change my signature again just to rile him up some more." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday November 03, 2015 @10:07AM (#50855451) FROM http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

behind my back (I can't see sigs) & KGIII noted it:

"In an earlier thread, I saw that APK quoted your signature" - by KGIII (973947) on Monday November 02, 2015 @10:22PM (#50852845) FROM http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

Which I SHUT DOWN due to your lies about me on AD + DNS (GPO too from my security guides I see you've read, that are geared to single stand alone machines NOT networked ones but I advise vs. using external DNS with AD there too, here) -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

---

* You're a disgusting LIAR & burying yourself!

---

DEFENSE INDUSTRY? Coren22 from http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

"Theory" here - you working for the NSA/GCHQ now?

They tend to "recruit from within"!

They're KNOWN to attack SECURITY software (like mine) https://theintercept.com/2015/...

(If so THEY PICKED BADLY using YOU as a lapdog - (not theory ->) you're brain-damaged w/ Aspergers as you admit- "the sins of the father" = visited on his kids too)

Dumb - folks like me help SECURE folks via wares like mine - folks in NSA/GCHQ are spying on us is NOT helping folks in the US!

This "theory" of mine wouldn't surprise me 1 bit - considering GCHQ hacked /. https://www.techdirt.com/artic...

Not after proof I put up (IF you're their crony tell your "handlers" they're busting on the WRONG guy for "character assasination" - I help do the RIGHT thing, not the wrong one spying on US folks! I protect 'em)

Wouldn't be a 1st: I've had PROFESSIONAL trolls try it (Cito) & advertisers' cronies (AndyMadigan & RayMorris) do it on /. - I dusted + busted 'em.

APK

P.S.=> You've bring it on yourself (signatures? Punk! I've shown you're technically inept & I doubt you're MCSE, SystemEngineer, & Security - my posts show otherwise)... apk

Coren22 proven a LYING punk

[Anonymous Coward]

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

&

How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

---

"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

FACT:

Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

---

Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

---

Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

You told me you learn from guides?

I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

+ WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

You did all that? No!

(& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

APK

P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

Is that your fake site for more lies Coren22?

Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

---

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

APK

P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)