Not sending "conditional gets" won't prevent my proposed method from working since that method involves an item/url that is marked as cacheable that causes the loading of another item/url that is marked as noncacheable.
When the browser first loads the cacheable item, it will get a unique cacheable item which points to a unique noncacheable item. Thereafter if it is "properly behaved" it will keep loading the same unique noncacheable item everytime it is pointed to the cacheable item.
The trick of course is to get around the "F5 refresh" problem - because if the browser is forced to fully refresh the cacheable item it could get a different unique string. But of course, in most cases the user is the one who requests that, so by that time you should have identified the browser (by IP and other characteristics) and thus the page being forced to serve up the "cacheable item" should serve the same id to that browser.
The difference in energy costs is a significant factor in why a tropical jungle, a temperate forest and the Antarctic look so different.
If you have low energy costs (and other resource costs) you end up with a diverse ecosystem filled with weird creatures (e.g. peacocks) that wouldn't survive in less lenient places.
Cut the amount of sunlight to a jungle and you'd start to see a lot of stuff die off. May not be immediate of course.
Cut the supply of cheap fuel/energy and a similar thing will happen.
A lot of things have their parts made in various places, then sent to some far away point to be assembled and packaged, and then there's the various transport stages to the final buyer.
If transportation costs were very high, there would not be huge farms far from the consumers - since distributing the produce would cost too much.
But do a search on "Timing attacks on Web privacy".
ALSO, I don't think you even need to use timing attacks because a browser that caches that has stuff cached will behave differently from a browser that caches but doesn't have stuff cached. Pretty obvious isn't it?
There is no way around that except to use a browser that doesn't cache at all - which will affect browsing performance. For slightly less privacy you can use a browser that always starts in the same state for each browsing session.
AND even if you use such a browser, if you have a distinctive browsing pattern and fingerprint, people could still identify you.
e.g. you use a noncaching, no-js browser, with a fake User-Agent (says it's IE but behaves like Firefox), and you start browsing with a particular site first at a certain time followed by another site etc - or you load a particular bunch of sites in the morning (opened in tabs). Could get quite distinctive;).
But there are far more important things that people should be worried about. What their government is doing for instance.
There was an even older published idea that involved caching of images and timing stuff - I can't find the link at the moment - but it did get mention on a fairly mainstream tech site I think.
But anyway, I'm not sure why this is such a big deal - this is pretty old and obvious stuff. In general terms if the browser has stuff cached it will behave differently from a browser that doesn't have stuff cached.
Just a bit of thinking and you can come up with many ways to distinguish between the different browsers that visit a bunch of pages.
You could send a cacheable page/file/URL to each user (always the same URL), which causes another page/file/url to load (with a unique URL) that's marked as not cacheable. And then you link to the first cacheable URL in all your pages.
I believe most browsers support frames and other stuff. I don't think Javascript and CSS are required at all.
BTW, there are also some naughty things you can do with tinyurl type sites, given that various sites are often blocked or restricted but the tinyurl sites aren't.
Anyway, if you're paranoid just browse using a virtual machine ("browser appliance" VM?) and rollback after each session. If enough people are using the same _identical_ virtual machine image to browse, then it gets pretty hard to distinguish amongst them...
That's funny. They should have been aware of these issues from the very beginning. It's not like PHP was the first language ever. Why didn't they just learn from other people's mistakes?
PHP3- use addslashes/magic_quotes. PHP4 - use PEAR DB. PHP5 use PDO. PHP6? Forget it - use Python or even Perl;).
Next thing you know MySQL5 and MySQL6 will be deprecating/removing a bunch of braindeadness as well;).
"magic quotes" was, is and will forever be a terrible idea.
It is one of the many PHP misfeatures that make it easy for programmers to do the WRONG THING.
The correct way to do things is to filter/quote inputs to your program accordingly so that your program can handle them correctly.
Then you filter/quote outputs from your program to other programs accordingly so that those programs can handle the outputs correctly.
If you don't do that you will end up with corrupted or misinterpreted data or worse.
The correct filtering/quoting for an Oracle database is different from that for MySQL, and is different for a web browser, and for syslog.
Magic quotes combines all the quoting with one "easy" "fix", and because of this sort of wrong-minded thinking, plenty of sites are littered with spurious backslashes in their content.
There are plenty of other things PHP does wrong, and a lot of those are PHPisms - the things that make PHP PHP. By the time they fix those, PHP ends up not like PHP. Go look at the "backtracking" changes from PHP3 to PHP5.
You might as well skip all that crap and go with some other programming language - like python, perl, ruby.
BTW the same goes for MySQL, look at the changes from MySQL3 to MySQL5. MySQL3 = "Oh you don't really need transactions at all". MySQL4, "use transactions if you don't need speed". MySQL5 "oh yeah quietly corrupting data by default is a bad idea after all".
With PHP/MySQL 3 to 5, if you leave the defaults on, lots of things break, because the old way of doing things was a bad idea e.g. register_globals=on.
With Postgresql, the direction and principles have remained pretty much the same over the years- just getting better and better. So if you have written a program for postgresql 6.5, you can pretty much upgrade to 8.1 and your app will usually work by _default_ and work faster too.
Or because XCP just made it and didn't distribute it so they are innocent in the eyes of the law? And Sony didn't make it but distributed it so they too are innocent in the eyes of the law?
Ah, the benefits of outsourcing.
"Who will rid me of these turbulent copyright infringers"...
Unauthorized access and modification of computer systems?
Does that mean if I spread malware/trojans using CDs I don't risk any jail time?
Or it's only because a big company is involved that's why nobody is going to jail, whereas silly amateurs vandalizing stuff get in big trouble?
My suggestion to all you "hackers" out there, if you want to hack millions of computers and get away with it- work for Sony.
The spyware people seem to be getting away with it too. But it seems that Sony is a safer bet - guilty of everything lots of publicity, but nothing much happens to the people responsible.
Well it's actually $X * N richer and $X poorer for each of the N. Is one copy excessive greed?
Personally I believe restrictions on copying are becoming more and more harmful.
Imagine if there were advanced technology to create any arbitrary food given a "blueprint". And practically everyone had one of these devices at hand.
And I come up with an extremely good cheesecake "blueprint". Why should people be prevented from copying and using it? They shouldn't be able to claim it's their design if they copied it though - because that would be lying.
Of course currently scarcity of resources is still an issue, but if we are not careful artificial scarcity due to monopolies could end up being the main problem rather than real scarcity.
I think we must always be careful about artificial scarcities. Seems the current justifications for many artificial scarcities are "right to make profit" (which is ridiculous - no such thing), or "it's the same as property" (which is a lie).
Sure we don't allow people to forge money - there are many good reasons for that. But if you look at those _retroactive_ copyright laws, DMCA etc, I'm starting to see more and more disadvantages than benefits to everyone for the long term.
Maybe one day I'm going to come up with some cool stuff and as part of the license, I'll require people to legally work towards reducing the strength of copyright and EULAs;).
Lastly: Deuteronomy 23:24-25 If you enter your neighbor's vineyard, you may eat all the grapes you want, but do not put any in your basket. If you enter your neighbor's grainfield, you may pick kernels with your hands, but you must not put a sickle to his standing grain.
Even today many farmers practice something like this. They are humble enough to know the harvest is never entirely due to their own labour.
What I don't like about GM food is the DISHONESTY and the EXTREME GREED.
Everyone keeps saying that GM food is about feeding the starving.
That is a LIE. GM food is about making the rich richer.
The corps are pushing for GM foods because they allow corporations to create monopolies, whereas breeds and hybrids resulting from natural or conventional breeding processes are much harder to monopolize legally.
With such dishonesty and greed behind this "game plan", the _long_term_ results aren't likely to be good for the average person.
They'd "Sony rootkit" your wheat and rice or "Monsanto Genuine Advantage" your corn if they could. And soon maybe they might be able to.
Heck, the short term results haven't been that fantastic either, but they keep lying to the ignorant public about the benefits and their real motives.
Starving? There are more overweight and obese people than starving people in the world.
THERE IS PLENTY OF FOOD TO GO AROUND!
People are starving not because we're not using enough GM stuff.
They are starving because of a few very greedy and evil people. You ship tons of food to some famine-ridden country in Africa, next thing you know, the army seizes all of it and sells it, and the people still starve.
Or Sudan, you air drop food supplies to various areas, and people trying to collect the food get shot at by other people.
And as far as I know this GM stuff sure isn't a brilliant idea from generous nongreedy people. So anyone who thinks GM food will reduce the proportions of starving people around the world significantly is naive.
I claim the real goal of GM foods is to make the rich few richer, and not to feed the starving.
The evidence is plain to see - just look at how Monsanto etc view their GM crops or "Intellectual Property".
Feeding the starving isn't very profitable, y'know.
Making rich fat people keep wanting to eat even more is profitable.
[1] Excerpt: "Girma Begashaw, the IMF representative in Malawi, strenuously denied the IMF had done anything of the sort, saying that it had been a consultant hired by the EU who had urged Malawi to sell its reserves."
As for prohibitions against copying, one should consider the scalability.
If everyone was prohibited from using each others ideas without permission, it won't scale well if you have many billions or even trillions of people. Unless you assume that it is typical that only a very few of the billions are creative enough to have new ideas.
If I came up with a unique thought first, others should not be prohibited from thinking it, they shouldn't falsely claim they are first or the only ones because that would be lying.
I would have thought that civilized nations would have plenty of ways of keeping inventive people alive and reasonably contented even if they don't get to have monopolies over everything. And the "expanding markets and thousands of new types of jobs" would be good enough.
In fact I think it may actually be all the excessive greed that's causing it to not be good enough.
It's like the starving in Africa - not due to there not being enough food, but evil and greedy leaders. There are more overweight and obese people in the world than starving people - so there's more than enough food to go around.
Well in theory it could be possible for 3 CPUs to take up spots at the 3 corners of the square and the cache to take up one huge spot at the 4th corner.
But that would mean a very different design/layout for a 3 CPU chip vs a 1 CPU chip.
Maybe they will start doing stuff like that when 1 CPU chips become rare.
Why should the rest of the world care? The US citizens and Gov don't seem to be bothered about dealing with the root causes of 9/11.
They went an attacked _Iraq_ instead, and the US Gov used (and continues to use) 9/11 as an opportunity to make the USA and the rest of the world a worse place.
for everyone's sake impeach Bush first and deal with the Diebold crap.
For winxp you have to switch to the classic mode. Because that new-style menu stuff gets in the way of it.
I've used that stuff ever since win 95 till win2k and the new winxp menu scheme breaks it.
I'm not sure what benefit the win-xp style menu provides. I suppose it's nice if you like the colours;).
I sure don't know what real benefit to the user vista would provide. Pity it'll spread just because it'll be preinstalled. Not through any real merit of its own.
He used to say in his website: http://web.archive.org/web/20050211124330/rfjason. com/contact/ Privacy Policy: You are sending me direct contact information that is sensitive. I protect your privacy in the following ways: (1) I will never sell, rent, or give away your address to any outside party, ever; (2) I will never send you any unrequested e-mail, besides e-mail in the regular course of business; and (3) Your information is stored behind network address translation and a software firewall.
Because who will really want to "be friends" with "Jason Fortuny" after this?
This is a breach of trust.
Who would ever want to be his significant other? You might get embarassing videos or pics of you posted on the net "just because".
His co-workers better be careful around him. He might make your laugh/fart/sneeze etc a downloadable ringtone or something and make fun of you just because he thought it was cool.
So if it's really him, I think it was a bad move for him too.
It's fine to not pay more tax than you owe, it is illegal and unwise to not pay tax you owe. You seem to be suggesting doing the latter especially since you suggest lying about your income.
I'd recommend not messing about with the Tax Dept. If the Gov can't get you on anything, they get you on tax.
They could walk up to you and say you owe hundreds of thousands (or even more!) for unpaid taxes for the past X years. They could say Mr San Marcos, how can you afford your houses and cars with your declared income? We think you owe us P. Please pay that plus the fines or go to jail.
After all you are going to want to spend the money eventually. Don't tell me you are planning to amass millions and die without using any of it (that sounds even more foolish).
If you don't want to pay high taxes, do it legally - there are plenty of countries with low tax rates. And plenty of rich people who have figured out how to use (abuse?) the various systems (I heard the Germans had this film industry tax scheme thingy).
Look at the number of crooks Govs jail for tax evasion often because there wasn't enough evidence to jail them for their other crimes.
With the way I did it, it shows up on the start menu and can still be used with the mouse, and users are more likely to be able to figure out the keyboard sequences.
So the keyboard sequence is: press winkey then press 1 then 1 again for explore desktop, and winkey, 1, A for explore floppy drive.
And it's fairly easy to add tools (short cuts to stuff) to my tools folder and rename them so they have their own "unique" key sequence.
With kde or gnome, it's pretty stupid every thing starts with K or G, so you have to rename everything (plus when you have lots of tasks you just see a K or a G in the title. doh).
Slashdot Mirror
The USA should outsource their elections to India :).
Not sending "conditional gets" won't prevent my proposed method from working since that method involves an item/url that is marked as cacheable that causes the loading of another item/url that is marked as noncacheable.
When the browser first loads the cacheable item, it will get a unique cacheable item which points to a unique noncacheable item.
Thereafter if it is "properly behaved" it will keep loading the same unique noncacheable item everytime it is pointed to the cacheable item.
The trick of course is to get around the "F5 refresh" problem - because if the browser is forced to fully refresh the cacheable item it could get a different unique string. But of course, in most cases the user is the one who requests that, so by that time you should have identified the browser (by IP and other characteristics) and thus the page being forced to serve up the "cacheable item" should serve the same id to that browser.
Maybe they use Toshiba batteries ;)
The difference in energy costs is a significant factor in why a tropical jungle, a temperate forest and the Antarctic look so different.
If you have low energy costs (and other resource costs) you end up with a diverse ecosystem filled with weird creatures (e.g. peacocks) that wouldn't survive in less lenient places.
Cut the amount of sunlight to a jungle and you'd start to see a lot of stuff die off. May not be immediate of course.
Cut the supply of cheap fuel/energy and a similar thing will happen.
A lot of things have their parts made in various places, then sent to some far away point to be assembled and packaged, and then there's the various transport stages to the final buyer.
If transportation costs were very high, there would not be huge farms far from the consumers - since distributing the produce would cost too much.
It'll be useless.
;).
But do a search on "Timing attacks on Web privacy".
ALSO, I don't think you even need to use timing attacks because a browser that caches that has stuff cached will behave differently from a browser that caches but doesn't have stuff cached. Pretty obvious isn't it?
There is no way around that except to use a browser that doesn't cache at all - which will affect browsing performance. For slightly less privacy you can use a browser that always starts in the same state for each browsing session.
AND even if you use such a browser, if you have a distinctive browsing pattern and fingerprint, people could still identify you.
e.g. you use a noncaching, no-js browser, with a fake User-Agent (says it's IE but behaves like Firefox), and you start browsing with a particular site first at a certain time followed by another site etc - or you load a particular bunch of sites in the morning (opened in tabs). Could get quite distinctive
But there are far more important things that people should be worried about. What their government is doing for instance.
There was an even older published idea that involved caching of images and timing stuff - I can't find the link at the moment - but it did get mention on a fairly mainstream tech site I think.
But anyway, I'm not sure why this is such a big deal - this is pretty old and obvious stuff. In general terms if the browser has stuff cached it will behave differently from a browser that doesn't have stuff cached.
Just a bit of thinking and you can come up with many ways to distinguish between the different browsers that visit a bunch of pages.
You could send a cacheable page/file/URL to each user (always the same URL), which causes another page/file/url to load (with a unique URL) that's marked as not cacheable. And then you link to the first cacheable URL in all your pages.
I believe most browsers support frames and other stuff. I don't think Javascript and CSS are required at all.
BTW, there are also some naughty things you can do with tinyurl type sites, given that various sites are often blocked or restricted but the tinyurl sites aren't.
Anyway, if you're paranoid just browse using a virtual machine ("browser appliance" VM?) and rollback after each session. If enough people are using the same _identical_ virtual machine image to browse, then it gets pretty hard to distinguish amongst them...
quote: "Big ball of mud" doesn't even begin to describe it.
Well how about *?
That's funny. They should have been aware of these issues from the very beginning. It's not like PHP was the first language ever. Why didn't they just learn from other people's mistakes?
;).
;).
PHP3- use addslashes/magic_quotes. PHP4 - use PEAR DB. PHP5 use PDO. PHP6? Forget it - use Python or even Perl
Next thing you know MySQL5 and MySQL6 will be deprecating/removing a bunch of braindeadness as well
PHP and MySQL...
"magic quotes" was, is and will forever be a terrible idea.
It is one of the many PHP misfeatures that make it easy for programmers to do the WRONG THING.
The correct way to do things is to filter/quote inputs to your program accordingly so that your program can handle them correctly.
Then you filter/quote outputs from your program to other programs accordingly so that those programs can handle the outputs correctly.
If you don't do that you will end up with corrupted or misinterpreted data or worse.
The correct filtering/quoting for an Oracle database is different from that for MySQL, and is different for a web browser, and for syslog.
Magic quotes combines all the quoting with one "easy" "fix", and because of this sort of wrong-minded thinking, plenty of sites are littered with spurious backslashes in their content.
There are plenty of other things PHP does wrong, and a lot of those are PHPisms - the things that make PHP PHP. By the time they fix those, PHP ends up not like PHP. Go look at the "backtracking" changes from PHP3 to PHP5.
You might as well skip all that crap and go with some other programming language - like python, perl, ruby.
BTW the same goes for MySQL, look at the changes from MySQL3 to MySQL5. MySQL3 = "Oh you don't really need transactions at all". MySQL4, "use transactions if you don't need speed". MySQL5 "oh yeah quietly corrupting data by default is a bad idea after all".
With PHP/MySQL 3 to 5, if you leave the defaults on, lots of things break, because the old way of doing things was a bad idea e.g. register_globals=on.
With Postgresql, the direction and principles have remained pretty much the same over the years- just getting better and better. So if you have written a program for postgresql 6.5, you can pretty much upgrade to 8.1 and your app will usually work by _default_ and work faster too.
OK so who in XCP is going to jail?
Or because XCP just made it and didn't distribute it so they are innocent in the eyes of the law?
And Sony didn't make it but distributed it so they too are innocent in the eyes of the law?
Ah, the benefits of outsourcing.
"Who will rid me of these turbulent copyright infringers"...
Unauthorized access and modification of computer systems?
Does that mean if I spread malware/trojans using CDs I don't risk any jail time?
Or it's only because a big company is involved that's why nobody is going to jail, whereas silly amateurs vandalizing stuff get in big trouble?
My suggestion to all you "hackers" out there, if you want to hack millions of computers and get away with it- work for Sony.
The spyware people seem to be getting away with it too. But it seems that Sony is a safer bet - guilty of everything lots of publicity, but nothing much happens to the people responsible.
Well it's actually $X * N richer and $X poorer for each of the N. Is one copy excessive greed?
;).
Personally I believe restrictions on copying are becoming more and more harmful.
Imagine if there were advanced technology to create any arbitrary food given a "blueprint". And practically everyone had one of these devices at hand.
And I come up with an extremely good cheesecake "blueprint". Why should people be prevented from copying and using it? They shouldn't be able to claim it's their design if they copied it though - because that would be lying.
Of course currently scarcity of resources is still an issue, but if we are not careful artificial scarcity due to monopolies could end up being the main problem rather than real scarcity.
I think we must always be careful about artificial scarcities. Seems the current justifications for many artificial scarcities are "right to make profit" (which is ridiculous - no such thing), or "it's the same as property" (which is a lie).
Sure we don't allow people to forge money - there are many good reasons for that. But if you look at those _retroactive_ copyright laws, DMCA etc, I'm starting to see more and more disadvantages than benefits to everyone for the long term.
Maybe one day I'm going to come up with some cool stuff and as part of the license, I'll require people to legally work towards reducing the strength of copyright and EULAs
Lastly: Deuteronomy 23:24-25
If you enter your neighbor's vineyard, you may eat all the grapes you want, but do not put any in your basket. If you enter your neighbor's grainfield, you may pick kernels with your hands, but you must not put a sickle to his standing grain.
Even today many farmers practice something like this. They are humble enough to know the harvest is never entirely due to their own labour.
What I don't like about GM food is the DISHONESTY and the EXTREME GREED.
Everyone keeps saying that GM food is about feeding the starving.
That is a LIE. GM food is about making the rich richer.
The corps are pushing for GM foods because they allow corporations to create monopolies, whereas breeds and hybrids resulting from natural or conventional breeding processes are much harder to monopolize legally.
With such dishonesty and greed behind this "game plan", the _long_term_ results aren't likely to be good for the average person.
They'd "Sony rootkit" your wheat and rice or "Monsanto Genuine Advantage" your corn if they could. And soon maybe they might be able to.
Heck, the short term results haven't been that fantastic either, but they keep lying to the ignorant public about the benefits and their real motives.
Starving? There are more overweight and obese people than starving people in the world.
THERE IS PLENTY OF FOOD TO GO AROUND!
People are starving not because we're not using enough GM stuff.
They are starving because of a few very greedy and evil people. You ship tons of food to some famine-ridden country in Africa, next thing you know, the army seizes all of it and sells it, and the people still starve.
Or things are screwed up by corruption, incompetence, ignorance, and yet more greed. Take Malawi for an example: http://www.worldpress.org/Africa/703.cfm [1]
Or Sudan, you air drop food supplies to various areas, and people trying to collect the food get shot at by other people.
And as far as I know this GM stuff sure isn't a brilliant idea from generous nongreedy people. So anyone who thinks GM food will reduce the proportions of starving people around the world significantly is naive.
I claim the real goal of GM foods is to make the rich few richer, and not to feed the starving.
The evidence is plain to see - just look at how Monsanto etc view their GM crops or "Intellectual Property".
Feeding the starving isn't very profitable, y'know.
Making rich fat people keep wanting to eat even more is profitable.
[1] Excerpt:
"Girma Begashaw, the IMF representative in Malawi, strenuously denied the IMF had done anything of the sort, saying that it had been a consultant hired by the EU who had urged Malawi to sell its reserves."
Because this is excessive greed.
As for prohibitions against copying, one should consider the scalability.
If everyone was prohibited from using each others ideas without permission, it won't scale well if you have many billions or even trillions of people. Unless you assume that it is typical that only a very few of the billions are creative enough to have new ideas.
If I came up with a unique thought first, others should not be prohibited from thinking it, they shouldn't falsely claim they are first or the only ones because that would be lying.
I would have thought that civilized nations would have plenty of ways of keeping inventive people alive and reasonably contented even if they don't get to have monopolies over everything. And the "expanding markets and thousands of new types of jobs" would be good enough.
In fact I think it may actually be all the excessive greed that's causing it to not be good enough.
It's like the starving in Africa - not due to there not being enough food, but evil and greedy leaders. There are more overweight and obese people in the world than starving people - so there's more than enough food to go around.
Well in theory it could be possible for 3 CPUs to take up spots at the 3 corners of the square and the cache to take up one huge spot at the 4th corner.
But that would mean a very different design/layout for a 3 CPU chip vs a 1 CPU chip.
Maybe they will start doing stuff like that when 1 CPU chips become rare.
Why should the rest of the world care? The US citizens and Gov don't seem to be bothered about dealing with the root causes of 9/11.
They went an attacked _Iraq_ instead, and the US Gov used (and continues to use) 9/11 as an opportunity to make the USA and the rest of the world a worse place.
for everyone's sake impeach Bush first and deal with the Diebold crap.
With his second wife? Doh.
;)
Maybe he was saving up for a third
Ouch! Did you ever get back the money? Or at least get it to where you intended it to be going?
Govs maintain their monopoly on violence with the military and the police (the ones that want to last anyway).
And they also have the Tax department. While they don't normally have nukes and live munitions, that big red rubber stamp packs a punch.
That's why I disagreed with that post about lying about income, "keeping quiet" etc.
For winxp you have to switch to the classic mode. Because that new-style menu stuff gets in the way of it.
;).
I've used that stuff ever since win 95 till win2k and the new winxp menu scheme breaks it.
I'm not sure what benefit the win-xp style menu provides. I suppose it's nice if you like the colours
I sure don't know what real benefit to the user vista would provide. Pity it'll spread just because it'll be preinstalled. Not through any real merit of its own.
He used to say in his website: http://web.archive.org/web/20050211124330/rfjason. com/contact/
;)
Privacy Policy:
You are sending me direct contact information that is sensitive. I protect your privacy in the following ways:
(1) I will never sell, rent, or give away your address to any outside party, ever;
(2) I will never send you any unrequested e-mail, besides e-mail in the regular course of business; and
(3) Your information is stored behind network address translation and a software firewall.
But now he doesn't.
Because who will really want to "be friends" with "Jason Fortuny" after this?
This is a breach of trust.
Who would ever want to be his significant other? You might get embarassing videos or pics of you posted on the net "just because".
His co-workers better be careful around him. He might make your laugh/fart/sneeze etc a downloadable ringtone or something and make fun of you just because he thought it was cool.
So if it's really him, I think it was a bad move for him too.
It's fine to not pay more tax than you owe, it is illegal and unwise to not pay tax you owe. You seem to be suggesting doing the latter especially since you suggest lying about your income.
I'd recommend not messing about with the Tax Dept. If the Gov can't get you on anything, they get you on tax.
They could walk up to you and say you owe hundreds of thousands (or even more!) for unpaid taxes for the past X years. They could say Mr San Marcos, how can you afford your houses and cars with your declared income? We think you owe us P. Please pay that plus the fines or go to jail.
After all you are going to want to spend the money eventually. Don't tell me you are planning to amass millions and die without using any of it (that sounds even more foolish).
If you don't want to pay high taxes, do it legally - there are plenty of countries with low tax rates. And plenty of rich people who have figured out how to use (abuse?) the various systems (I heard the Germans had this film industry tax scheme thingy).
Look at the number of crooks Govs jail for tax evasion often because there wasn't enough evidence to jail them for their other crimes.
With the way I did it, it shows up on the start menu and can still be used with the mouse, and users are more likely to be able to figure out the keyboard sequences.
So the keyboard sequence is: press winkey then press 1 then 1 again for explore desktop, and winkey, 1, A for explore floppy drive.
And it's fairly easy to add tools (short cuts to stuff) to my tools folder and rename them so they have their own "unique" key sequence.
With kde or gnome, it's pretty stupid every thing starts with K or G, so you have to rename everything (plus when you have lots of tasks you just see a K or a G in the title. doh).
Shooting won't work well. Melting definitely works.
Use a blowtorch.
Lava is a good place to dump em, but could be a bit inconvenient.