Is the source material compatible with high definition? If it wasn't recorded at those resolutions or widescreen, it might be difficult to make them into HD without reshooting the movies. Are the original films even available?
I drive a $35k Tundra, it isn't so expensive. At 0% APR, it costs me $577.77 a month.
I would tend to compare the Tesla to an Avalon Hybrid, which bases out at about $41k, so for double the price, you get a car that out performs the Avalon, and uses no gas. I am not sure it is worth the trade off.
Is reading too much to ask? You ask the question, read the freaking answer. Yes, you claimed that DNS wasn't needed by trying to say that it uses more resources to run than a hosts file.
Wow, you have really lost your mind over this, it is lovely to see I am getting to you finally, you are starting to correct some of the issues, though you did still ignore much of my responses yet again. I guess I shouldn't expect too much from you.
Miguel Tejada was suspended for 105 games for failing to renew his Adderall exemption. He has ADHD and legitimately takes Adderall, but because it is on the banned substance list, and his exemption expired, he has a huge suspension.
So, you are claiming that a fetus is not a human being? Genetics would tend to disprove that point of view. I was explaining the POV of those "nutso "pro-life" murderous thugs" to you. You are the one who is redefining things, not I. A human being is a human being, it doesn't matter if it is before the first trimester. From the point of view of those "nutso pro-life murderous thugs", people who are performing abortions are committing murder.
I see nothing to indicate that he has done any code review, he even says that Malware Bytes has no affiliation with your software, and he is hosting it himself. Why would I believe the rest of your claim when there is no evidence for it?
As I said in my post, you can't claim that your software is safe just because you say it is. Point to somewhere with Steve Burn of Malwarebytes saying he has done a code review of your software.
Privilege escalation: This comes down to a combination of our software being marked as malware, and your refusal to submit to a security evaluation/source code review of your software. Your software could frankly be doing anything, and since there are so many ways to get around program tracing, there is no way to trust what your software is doing. The risks of man in the middle attacks utilizing entries buried inside the hosts files or incorrectly updated from your upstream providers, to malware loading and root kit installation. Your software could be doing anything with those privileges, and as they are needed on every host file update, why risk it when there are so many better ways to block this malware instead?
Marked as malware: You can have as many people defending your product as you like, as long as you refuse to submit to a code review and security evaluation, it is all theoretical anyways. One person claiming your product is malware is enough to turn millions off of your product, and it is still out there.
DNS: You have stated that you use a DNS. But that hosts files are so much better because they use less resources. If you are already using those resources by running a DNS server, why not just put the entries there? You have repeatedly stated this, and the lack of logic in the statement is part of the AD DNS comment. The other part was that you told me that you believe distributing hosts files through group policy is better than loading them in DNS because DNS uses more resources. Following that logically, you must think the DNS server in AD (only way group policy applies) does not exist since you are considering the resources it uses as anything other than a sunk cost of running AD. You also bizarrely think that loading 10,000 hosts files scattered over a domain is better than loading the same entries into the AD DNS server one time, and somehow uses less resources. On top of all of this, your hosts file causes name resolution problems so bad, that if you don't hard code all of your favorite sites, your computer would be practically unusable. Because of the way DNS name resolution works, it is considerably faster to enter your 2 million (or whatever) entries into DNS and letting it handle the resolution than to have Windows try and run through a hosts file repeatedly, as Windows hosts file name resolution is absolutely abysmal.
Slashdot Mirror
It has been a long time since I have had someone so infatuated with me as this. Thanks for all the attention, but no, I won't be your boyfriend.
Yeah, because I was asking myself if it hurt when I had my ass handed to me? No, I clicked the wrong reply to, it was meant to be directly to you.
But what would we do without a whiny Anakin?
Is the source material compatible with high definition? If it wasn't recorded at those resolutions or widescreen, it might be difficult to make them into HD without reshooting the movies. Are the original films even available?
You are my hero. How did you resist the burning poop gag though?
I drive a $35k Tundra, it isn't so expensive. At 0% APR, it costs me $577.77 a month.
I would tend to compare the Tesla to an Avalon Hybrid, which bases out at about $41k, so for double the price, you get a car that out performs the Avalon, and uses no gas. I am not sure it is worth the trade off.
Except as I have repeatedly said, I have one account and don't post AC, so stop projecting that I am agreeing with myself like you do.
If they came out with one in the $40k range, I would buy one, but at $100k, who can afford one?
So responding to the question three times is running away...I see...you are deranged aren't you?
What, are you going to try and sit on me?
The smell might knock me out, but it is highly unlikely you could. You would probably hide behind your mom.
http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
Is reading too much to ask? You ask the question, read the freaking answer. Yes, you claimed that DNS wasn't needed by trying to say that it uses more resources to run than a hosts file.
I'm not the AC, but I'll bite.
Come at me bro.
http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
Why do you keep asking me to repeat myself? Do you have short term memory loss?
That is easy, no.
Wow, you have really lost your mind over this, it is lovely to see I am getting to you finally, you are starting to correct some of the issues, though you did still ignore much of my responses yet again. I guess I shouldn't expect too much from you.
Perhaps it was modded down because it has nothing to do with stingray use by police?
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_...
Miguel Tejada was suspended for 105 games for failing to renew his Adderall exemption. He has ADHD and legitimately takes Adderall, but because it is on the banned substance list, and his exemption expired, he has a huge suspension.
How do we know the pork or salmon doesn't contain unicorn meat? Why are they lying to us by not labeling the product "does not contain unicorn meat"?
http://www.merriam-webster.com...
So, you are claiming that a fetus is not a human being? Genetics would tend to disprove that point of view. I was explaining the POV of those "nutso "pro-life" murderous thugs" to you. You are the one who is redefining things, not I. A human being is a human being, it doesn't matter if it is before the first trimester. From the point of view of those "nutso pro-life murderous thugs", people who are performing abortions are committing murder.
It is always possible they confused red phosphorous with red mercury...
I have transparent aluminum on my watch and my phone!
Mr. Steven Burn of Malwarebytes' hpHosts has REVIEWED MY CODE & HAS A COPY (he wouldn't host it otherwise)!
http://forum.hosts-file.net/vi...
I see nothing to indicate that he has done any code review, he even says that Malware Bytes has no affiliation with your software, and he is hosting it himself. Why would I believe the rest of your claim when there is no evidence for it?
As I said in my post, you can't claim that your software is safe just because you say it is. Point to somewhere with Steve Burn of Malwarebytes saying he has done a code review of your software.
Privilege escalation: This comes down to a combination of our software being marked as malware, and your refusal to submit to a security evaluation/source code review of your software. Your software could frankly be doing anything, and since there are so many ways to get around program tracing, there is no way to trust what your software is doing. The risks of man in the middle attacks utilizing entries buried inside the hosts files or incorrectly updated from your upstream providers, to malware loading and root kit installation. Your software could be doing anything with those privileges, and as they are needed on every host file update, why risk it when there are so many better ways to block this malware instead?
Marked as malware: You can have as many people defending your product as you like, as long as you refuse to submit to a code review and security evaluation, it is all theoretical anyways. One person claiming your product is malware is enough to turn millions off of your product, and it is still out there.
Anything else you would like me to address?
DNS: You have stated that you use a DNS. But that hosts files are so much better because they use less resources. If you are already using those resources by running a DNS server, why not just put the entries there? You have repeatedly stated this, and the lack of logic in the statement is part of the AD DNS comment. The other part was that you told me that you believe distributing hosts files through group policy is better than loading them in DNS because DNS uses more resources. Following that logically, you must think the DNS server in AD (only way group policy applies) does not exist since you are considering the resources it uses as anything other than a sunk cost of running AD. You also bizarrely think that loading 10,000 hosts files scattered over a domain is better than loading the same entries into the AD DNS server one time, and somehow uses less resources. On top of all of this, your hosts file causes name resolution problems so bad, that if you don't hard code all of your favorite sites, your computer would be practically unusable. Because of the way DNS name resolution works, it is considerably faster to enter your 2 million (or whatever) entries into DNS and letting it handle the resolution than to have Windows try and run through a hosts file repeatedly, as Windows hosts file name resolution is absolutely abysmal.