Can anyone tell me why this shouldn't move people over to Mac, Linux, etc.?
I know about malware that can be spread using MS Office, from infected PC to Mac to fresh PC, in the same manner the woman spread the Rage virus in the film '28 Weeks Later'. The Mac itself doesn't get affected by the virus / worm / trojan, even if it has it inside. Besides, I'm using NeoOffice at home without using macros so [raspberry]!![/raspberry]
I know about proof-of-concept 'viruses'. Someone says "you could, hypothetically, use this loophole to write malware" on a Monday, and the hole is usually closed on the Tuesday. It's like hearing that an infected batch of meat in Thailand could infect the world and...ah, they destroyed the shipment. Carry on...
To me, it's just infuriating. Seeing people deliberately buying products that have gaping flaws, flaws that have been 'features' of the OS for years, and then spending all that time and money and effort to collectively try and polish the turd (as they defiantly defend their bad decisions, which is a bad decision in itself)? I've never understood it...but then again, I've never found myself staying in a destructive relationship / bought anything expensive based on advertising instead of Consumer Reports reviews / voted for anyone based on looks, lawn-signs, catch-phrases / found myself asking 'friends' or family to repay the thousands of dollars they've owed me over the past x years either.
Yes, I guess I'm calling a lot of people sheep, or gullible, or uninformed. In other news, the sun rose in the East this morning, details and analysis at 11...
Here's my thinking, please pull it apart. Computer fraud is a cash cow for organized crime. It's worth billions. If any one criminal group could cash into the untapped 5%(?) Mac sector, that would be worth an incredible amount of exclusive money. So you'd have thought there would have been a great push to own this Mac portion of the computer fraud market especially because Mac owners, and I'm one of them, have been lulled into a sense of security with the lack of OS X - related reports of identity theft. I'm like a country yokel in the big city for the first time. Never had to worry about concealing a wallet, so I have a big roll of fifties sticking out of my back pocket. DAMMIT, MUG ME! Yet my money is still secure after all these years.
I'm a practical and pragmatic person. And, taking KRS One's idea of being "criminally minded" to heart, I figure that someone would have cracked a way to get all this extra income off us Mac users using the same techniques in the PC world if they could, because 5% of a billion dollars is still fifty million bucks (if the same ratio of Mac users fall for it the way PC users do).
The fact that it hasn't happened yet, for an OS that has been out since 2001, tells me either that the criminals don't like easy money, or it's not easy at all.
So again, at the risk of a flame-war: can anyone tell me why this shouldn't move people over to Mac, Linux, etc.?
Just like those cracy Wiccans our fellow poster talked about earlier. What have Wiccans ever done to anyone, that's what I want to know? Too pre-Xtian or something? Next thing you kow, people will be calling other people "pyramid builders" or "Stonehenge worshipping elites".
It's just name-calling. Insults and sound-bites.
And not saying "I believe in x, y, and z", but saying "hey, just because the politicians exclusively on one side of the aisle that want to be President pander to this, doesn't mean they actually BELIEVE it" instead, will irritate anyone from the Liberal Left (why can't you mean what you say and say what you think and think what you want?) to the Religious Right (why can't we have a candidate that doesn't promise us the moon on a stick and then ignores our values?) and everywhere inbetween.
Oh excellent. Just before you said "I'm neither, by the way" (when addressing the issue of being either Democrat or Republican), you had a nice Ann Coulter moment.
Much like many people confuse "Democrats" with, say, "Communists" or "Wiccans" or something else that suggests you're painting with the wrong-sized brush.
Care to throw the word "traitor" in there too? Oh, of course, YOU'RE not saying that. It's all those OTHER people...
Just like it's those other people, and not you, that talk about "MoveOn.org's more rabid loons" and a "party's platform bought and paid for by George Soros".
I bet we won't find any [f]right wingers repeating your words, using MoveOn loons as a catchphrase.
ScentCone - if you're going to be impartial, be impartial. But don't pretend to be impartial, and then be passive-aggressive as you attack anything to the left of where you are (translation: not Iraq), and all the while claim impartiality as you used easily-identifiable and well-used think-tank-inspired smears. At the least, it makes me think you're not able to have the conscience of your self-voiced Talk Radio-esque convictions. At the most, it makes people think Republicans are ashamed to be identified for their beliefs.
My view: if you're ashamed of anything you believe in, why believe it? Seems like an increasing number of people are beginning to think the same way in America too.
I believe your next move will either be to smear me for either insulting you or going off-topic (picking apart one part of one sentence), or attempt to over-compensate with empty soothing words (while insisting that it was just a misunderstanding, but obviously I was the one misunderstood).
Dinosaur Spokesman: We had a good what, hundred, two hundred million year run? How long you human critters been around? Two mil? Odds on making it to three?
---
Mammalian spokessloth/person/elephant: We've been crawling around this rock, or swinging in the trees, for over 200 million years already. And we don't let a little thing like hot iridium dust get in the way between us and world domination.
[thumbs hairy snouts at fossils] So nyer. [/thumbs hairy snouts at fossils]
For those of you that didn't catch the story in the UK press, or in the US thanks to Newsweek and The New Yorker, you can read about the story in Wiki.
Summary: British man (and possibly the piano-playing wife too), invented a touching history of his wife's past (involving invented people, churches, university departments and meetings) so he could pass off classical music recordings by other people as his wife's playing. Some of the tracks were sped up or slowed down slightly (0.02% was one number cited in the New Yorker article), but the scam was discovered when one of 'her' CDs, sent to a music buff in the States, showed as another piano player's work in Gracenote / CDDB.
One facet of the story that interested me was the way that reviewers were swayed by Usenet opinion after she became well known in classical music circles. Works by other pianists that were shrugged off as being technically stilted and lifeless were (when re-reviewed by the same person a few years later, but this time under Hatto's name) suddenly praised to the extreme. The music came with nuances and layers that were formerly not there.
I'm not saying there isn't a definable distinction between an OK piano player and a maestro (there is, just as there's a discernable difference between guitar players of different skill levels)...but there's a level above the objective, and that's where a lot of these self-proclaimed 'experts' spend a lot of their time. Just as I can't detect hints of winter and a dash of eggnog in a wine, or tell you which work of 'art' (elephant dung hammered to a Virgin Mary painting versus a house filled to the top with concrete) I probably couldn't detect the difference in sound between a really good music system and a really good (but much more pricey) music system. Even if I tried. And I seriously doubt that anyone else could to any objective degree.
Isn't this all a bit "Schrodinger's Cat"? These virii are half-written, half not written, and we only get to know which one it is if we open the video clip of Anna Kournikova...
Would the esteemed learning establishment care to debate if we will be living on the moon, wearing shiny suits, eating meal pills, flying around with our prsonal jet-packs? I for one want to know...or at least have someone hypothesize if such a thing may be possible.
Slashdot Mirror
I was afraid to use the word Interpol because I thought some of you young hipsters would have started posting random lyric snippets from the band.
...does this make my heart look fat?
Can anyone tell me why this shouldn't move people over to Mac, Linux, etc.?
...ah, they destroyed the shipment. Carry on...
...but then again, I've never found myself staying in a destructive relationship / bought anything expensive based on advertising instead of Consumer Reports reviews / voted for anyone based on looks, lawn-signs, catch-phrases / found myself asking 'friends' or family to repay the thousands of dollars they've owed me over the past x years either.
I know about malware that can be spread using MS Office, from infected PC to Mac to fresh PC, in the same manner the woman spread the Rage virus in the film '28 Weeks Later'. The Mac itself doesn't get affected by the virus / worm / trojan, even if it has it inside. Besides, I'm using NeoOffice at home without using macros so [raspberry]!![/raspberry]
I know about proof-of-concept 'viruses'. Someone says "you could, hypothetically, use this loophole to write malware" on a Monday, and the hole is usually closed on the Tuesday. It's like hearing that an infected batch of meat in Thailand could infect the world and
To me, it's just infuriating. Seeing people deliberately buying products that have gaping flaws, flaws that have been 'features' of the OS for years, and then spending all that time and money and effort to collectively try and polish the turd (as they defiantly defend their bad decisions, which is a bad decision in itself)? I've never understood it
Yes, I guess I'm calling a lot of people sheep, or gullible, or uninformed. In other news, the sun rose in the East this morning, details and analysis at 11...
Here's my thinking, please pull it apart. Computer fraud is a cash cow for organized crime. It's worth billions. If any one criminal group could cash into the untapped 5%(?) Mac sector, that would be worth an incredible amount of exclusive money. So you'd have thought there would have been a great push to own this Mac portion of the computer fraud market especially because Mac owners, and I'm one of them, have been lulled into a sense of security with the lack of OS X - related reports of identity theft. I'm like a country yokel in the big city for the first time. Never had to worry about concealing a wallet, so I have a big roll of fifties sticking out of my back pocket. DAMMIT, MUG ME! Yet my money is still secure after all these years.
I'm a practical and pragmatic person. And, taking KRS One's idea of being "criminally minded" to heart, I figure that someone would have cracked a way to get all this extra income off us Mac users using the same techniques in the PC world if they could, because 5% of a billion dollars is still fifty million bucks (if the same ratio of Mac users fall for it the way PC users do).
The fact that it hasn't happened yet, for an OS that has been out since 2001, tells me either that the criminals don't like easy money, or it's not easy at all.
So again, at the risk of a flame-war: can anyone tell me why this shouldn't move people over to Mac, Linux, etc.?
Just like those cracy Wiccans our fellow poster talked about earlier. What have Wiccans ever done to anyone, that's what I want to know? Too pre-Xtian or something? Next thing you kow, people will be calling other people "pyramid builders" or "Stonehenge worshipping elites".
It's just name-calling. Insults and sound-bites.
And not saying "I believe in x, y, and z", but saying "hey, just because the politicians exclusively on one side of the aisle that want to be President pander to this, doesn't mean they actually BELIEVE it" instead, will irritate anyone from the Liberal Left (why can't you mean what you say and say what you think and think what you want?) to the Religious Right (why can't we have a candidate that doesn't promise us the moon on a stick and then ignores our values?) and everywhere inbetween.
Care to throw the word "traitor" in there too? Oh, of course, YOU'RE not saying that. It's all those OTHER people...
Just like it's those other people, and not you, that talk about "MoveOn.org's more rabid loons" and a "party's platform bought and paid for by George Soros".
I bet we won't find any [f]right wingers repeating your words, using MoveOn loons as a catchphrase.
Or Soros, bought and paid for in the context that Soros bought and paid for a political party either.
Whooopsie.
ScentCone - if you're going to be impartial, be impartial. But don't pretend to be impartial, and then be passive-aggressive as you attack anything to the left of where you are (translation: not Iraq), and all the while claim impartiality as you used easily-identifiable and well-used think-tank-inspired smears. At the least, it makes me think you're not able to have the conscience of your self-voiced Talk Radio-esque convictions. At the most, it makes people think Republicans are ashamed to be identified for their beliefs.
My view: if you're ashamed of anything you believe in, why believe it? Seems like an increasing number of people are beginning to think the same way in America too.
I believe your next move will either be to smear me for either insulting you or going off-topic (picking apart one part of one sentence), or attempt to over-compensate with empty soothing words (while insisting that it was just a misunderstanding, but obviously I was the one misunderstood).
For those of you that didn't catch the story in the UK press, or in the US thanks to Newsweek and The New Yorker, you can read about the story in Wiki.
...but there's a level above the objective, and that's where a lot of these self-proclaimed 'experts' spend a lot of their time. Just as I can't detect hints of winter and a dash of eggnog in a wine, or tell you which work of 'art' (elephant dung hammered to a Virgin Mary painting versus a house filled to the top with concrete) I probably couldn't detect the difference in sound between a really good music system and a really good (but much more pricey) music system. Even if I tried. And I seriously doubt that anyone else could to any objective degree.
Summary: British man (and possibly the piano-playing wife too), invented a touching history of his wife's past (involving invented people, churches, university departments and meetings) so he could pass off classical music recordings by other people as his wife's playing. Some of the tracks were sped up or slowed down slightly (0.02% was one number cited in the New Yorker article), but the scam was discovered when one of 'her' CDs, sent to a music buff in the States, showed as another piano player's work in Gracenote / CDDB.
One facet of the story that interested me was the way that reviewers were swayed by Usenet opinion after she became well known in classical music circles. Works by other pianists that were shrugged off as being technically stilted and lifeless were (when re-reviewed by the same person a few years later, but this time under Hatto's name) suddenly praised to the extreme. The music came with nuances and layers that were formerly not there.
I'm not saying there isn't a definable distinction between an OK piano player and a maestro (there is, just as there's a discernable difference between guitar players of different skill levels)
Isn't this all a bit "Schrodinger's Cat"? These virii are half-written, half not written, and we only get to know which one it is if we open the video clip of Anna Kournikova...
...or at least have someone hypothesize if such a thing may be possible.
Would the esteemed learning establishment care to debate if we will be living on the moon, wearing shiny suits, eating meal pills, flying around with our prsonal jet-packs? I for one want to know
Hmmmm.