Wow, so not only do you post a copy and paste reply to me, but when I remark that you did, you post a reply with a link to that same copy and pasted reply? Then most of the post is a copy and paste of your tired, old line about Linux that's already been addressed multiple times. Sad, sad, sad.
Uh, yeah. But you're still not addressing the fact that, in the great-grandparent post, you're either pretending to be someone else, or you're talking about yourself in the third person and referring to yourself as more than one person.
1) Why do I need to? I still don't understand how we reached the point where I have to jump through that hoop for you. It's ridiculous.
2) I've said it before and I'll say it again, no OS and no security setup is invincible. I never made any claims about the security superiority of Linux over Windows (except to note that security was not historically a high priority for Microsoft in its mainstream Operating Systems). You seem to be projecting arguments you've had with other people onto me.
3) Never been banned from any online forum, sorry. I'm not always prepared to hand out my real name because there are a lot of kooks out there. As for you not hiding behind assumed guises. HA! You've already done it several times in this thread. You're crazy if you think that people can't see through it when you post and pretend to be some other person defending you. Cybordeath was obviously you, for example. When you post short answers without your usual structure, it's a little harder to spot you right away, even when you keep it short, but it's obviously you in this post. Where you stalked me to another thread to post an anonymous, venomous reply to one of my posts. Sad.
4) To be very clear. You did not think of it first, no need to trust me on this. You would have to be grade A, certifiably insane to think that you were the first person to think of such an obvious idea, unless you're really a lot, lot older than I thought. When the feature first appeared in Microsoft SQL Server is not the benchmark for when the idea was first developed.
5) You certainly strongly implied that you planned to sue. You definitely said you'd bring lawyers into it. I've seen e-mail exchanges with you people have put online where you pull the same kind of nonsense.
Still not a very deep explanation of what you did for EEC Systems software. "flexible parameterization of drivers utilized in their initialization" doesn't actually say anything very specific. But whatever.
As for putting frequently accessed data into ramdisks, of course it works. It's been done for years. If you have enough RAM and you can identify what you should spend it on. It's not as if you invented the idea. Are you saying that the work you did was in identifying which data to cache to ram to speed up database access?
As for the older/younger thing. No, my bad, that was a typo. Actually, I started typing "If you are about 15 years older than me,", then thought better of how to structure the sentence. I should have erased and rewritten, rather than just changing two words. In any case, that part from my post should have read:
I think you have your timeline wrong. If I am about 15 years younger than you, then I was well out of diapers when that software came out. Also, the opinions of cantankerous old men everywhere aside, being born before someone else isn't an accomplishment.
As for Arstechnica, and pretty much every forum I could find where you've posted, even if you had a small number of allies (and pretty much every ally still seemed to want to distance themselves from you), seemed to be overwhelmingly against you. In this thread, you talk about how you were kicked from majorgeeks.com despite the fact that a part owner was an ex-friend of yours. Then you mention how you were banned from ntcompatible.com by another friend (unless it was the same friend, you were unclear). I was amazed to actually see the word "sorry" come from you in that post and an admission you actually made a mistake. I didn't think you were capable of it. Kudos to you for that. Still, you ought to consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, the reason so many people turn on you has something to do with the way you act.
As I've stated before, we seem to be peers. I have nothing to prove to you in order to be permitted to speak. And no, I'm not your senior in age. There was a typo, but the very next sentence after the one with the error should make it clear that was a typo.
Your first link consists of you posting an insane number of off-topic posts to the comments section of an article about memory optimizers. Something in there about someone pretending to be someone else who had endorsed one your products withdrawing his endorsment in a forum. An actual link to the the post where they impersonated him would be preferable. Or was that link actually it and you expect me to slog through 435 pages of comments, mostly by you? I think I'll pass, thanks.
Your second link is about how the co-founder of CA systems was apparently embezzling. Great. Was he one of your enemies too? If not, what does that article have to do with anything? How does this supposedly discredit your actual enemy? Also, why should I care? You don't have just a few people who despise you with cause. It seems like nearly everyone you have any interaction with ends up that way with enough exposure.
Regarding the rest of your post... I didn't demand any of that stuff from you to begin with, I just questioned the parts that were questionable after you posted them. The rest of your nonsense we've already discussed.
Speak for yourself, writing books in YOUR MULITIPLE OFF TOPIC ILLOGICAL ADHOMINEM ATTACK BASED so-called "replies" of yours, lol!
You write books practically, and in MULTIPLE replies (off topic illogical adhominem attack based ones no less), so please: "Pot calling the kettle black" now, are we? LOL!
I do write fairly long posts sometimes. In this thread, it's mostly because I'm actually trying to address most of the things said in the parent post. I don't, however, write multiple replies to a single post (unless I need to make a correction or addition, in which case I clearly state that) and I haven't anywhere in this entire thread. It may appear that way if you don't know how Slashdot displays threads. Basically, the thread view flattens out after a certain number of posts in the thread and becomes a flattened view and it can become hard to tell what follows what. You can actually tell, however, you just need to do the legwork. You can open each of my posts in this thread directly, then hit the parent link at the bottom and see that each one is a child of one of your posts.
You end up saying nothing on topic, just more evasions of proving things you are asked to (which you demanded of myself mind you and I provided it, because i have those things, you do not and you never will)
The only thing on topic in this article is discussion of the possible implications of certain features in UEFI to the ability of end-users to boot their OS of choice. When you first posted, you were essentially off topic. You made a token mention of the issue, but only so that you could spam a bunch of Secunia links supposedly proving that Linux was insecure. I spent an unreasonable amount of time proving to you that each and every one of those security vulnerabilities was invalid, mostly because you couldn't be bothered to spend the time actually reading the pages you were linking to. The rest of this thread has been even more pointless. I eventually started to wonder just how crazy you were and searched around for you and discovered that you're infamous. You've been banned practically everywhere that they have a system for it and even people who don't hate you only seem to be able to not hate you by distancing themselves. I hope for your sake that your personality affliction only affects your online correspondence and doesn't extend to your real-life, face to face behaviour.
Your insistence that I demanded that you list your resume is bizarre. I never demanded that of you. Having seen it doesn't change my opinion of you. That opinion was formed by your behaviour. You could be a janitor or a rocket surgeon for all I care and I'd still have the same opinion of you because of your actions.
You make me laugh with your illogical off topic adhominem attacks in some attempt to try to "discredit me" but finding your sources are invalid and CRIMINAL even (CA, and Jeremy Reimer/Jay Little/Arstechnica, to name a couple I shot down easily
Alexander, you discredit yourself. Again, and again, and again, and again. In this thread on Slashdot and in just about everything else I can find anywhere that you've posted on. My "sources" aren't any particular person. Even when I linked to that blog post about your application being incorrectly blacklisted as malware and you threatening to sue, it was specifically your behaviour there I was showing. On all those links, pretty much everyone could see how awful you were being. In some of them, people who actually considered you a friend wondered aloud why you were acting that way. Why do all of those people have the same opinion of you, even when seeing you post for the first time? Are all of those people (and non-people since you seem to be also listing an entire company and a website) "invalid and CRIMINAL"?
What's with the constant claims of having achieved some sort of victory? It seems like just about every time you reply to anything you have have to post that you "sh
You've never accomplished anything in the computer sciences of any decent note, and you NEVER will (or you would have by now), but I have...
But, assuming your accomplishments are as grand as you make them out to be (you haven't really listed anything that isn't pretty much typical work for some sectors of the IT field), you haven't actually listed anything from more than 15 years ago. If my estimate of you being 15 years older than me seems to be more or less correct. So, that means that I haven't yet reached the age where you started your glorious career of accomplishment. So, therefore, isn't there hope for poor little me to someday measure up to your glory and magnificence?;)
Since you asked specifically on this?
I also increased the speed and efficiency of SuperCache-NT, & applied ideas for database work on SuperDisk-NT, since you asked, that led to how well EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com did @ Microsoft Tech-Ed 2 yrs. in a row in the hardest category there - SQLServer Performance Enhancement (both myself & John Enck of Windows IT Pro magazine (then Windows NT mag) "hit upon" this idea back in the mid 1990's & extolled it on EEC Systems' website in fact)...
Ok. You increased the speed and efficiency of SuperCache-NT, but specifically how? You have to understand that, for a disk-caching program whose goal is to speed up the system, saying that you increased the speed of the software is ambiguous. Sure, it was a long time ago, but you have to remember some details. Now, you've expanded a little on your original description by saying that you "applied ideas for database work" to the software, but that's still pretty ambiguous. What ideas did you apply? It's all sounding very generic
That's examples of things I was doing while you were still in diapers, and only a fraction of what I could put out here mind you... whereas you? You have ZERO... lol!
I think you have your timeline wrong. If I am about 15 years older than you, then I was well out of diapers when that software came out. Also, the opinions of cantankerous old men everywhere aside, being born before someone else isn't an accomplishment.
(By the way - I never EVER posted @ Arstechnica as "Cybordeath", no need to do that much...
Oh please. Cybordeath shows up right after you are banned and starts posting specifically about you and your disputes. His posting style is altered from yours without all the bolding and capitalizing and not so much stuff in quotes and not as much extra punctuation, etc., but everything else about the way he expresses himself is extremely similar to you. There's pretty much universal concensus on the forum that Cybordeath is you. It seems pretty unlikely that you'd have such a rabid fan, obsessed with carrying on your feuds who didn't chime in before you were banned, but signs on right after. Sorry Clark Kent, the glasses aren't fooling anyone.
Also, you've posted a few times in this thread in support of yourself, while pretending to be someone else, and you've followed me to another thread to post multiple times from a small comment I made and not signed your posts there. Based on that evidence, I'd have to say that my (and everyone else's) theory on the identity of Cybordeath is probably pretty solid.
P.S.=> Please - Give us a break, you f'ing "ne'er-do-well" talker with not a DAMN THING to show for yourself by way of comparison to just a tiny FRACTION of what I could put out... apk
Give what a break? Replying to you? I wish I could. It wastes too much time. But it's somehow addicting. I can't help myself. Every time you say something ridiculous, I just have to try to get you to understand the real world. I know you never will, but I just can't help myself.
Good gravy Alexander, grow up already. You can't just keep making up fantasies of what the other person is saying in your head and then attack those. If you have a problem with what someone is saying, then debate that specifically. I said the Soviet Union was technically state capitalist and then showed that Lenin thought so to. That's all there is to it. I made no statement on the values of either system.
Now, following me around so you can post a disagreement to everything I say is a bit childish don't you think. So is trying to drag me down to your level (which I have to admit you seem to be very good at). Also, though it's nice to see you not using your normal crazy post structure, it would be even nicer if you'd get an account, or at least sign your posts. I'm not sure why you don't have an account. Slashdot pretty much never bans anyone, they just rely on the moderation system.
Yes, because every other post here has a full bibliography at the end. And, no, I'm not an expert, just someone who has taken history classes. That's really all the qualification you need to make a statement like that. As for Lenin not being an expert, you do know that he was essentially the founder of the Soviet Union, right? Implicit in me calling him an expert was that he was an expert in the system that the Soviet Union adopted because he was the prime mover. His theory on communism was that you achieved it by transitioning to state capitalism, then you maintained that fundamental system while politically transforming it into true communism. I didn't say that it was a workable theory. The Soviets didn't get it to work.
You're essentially putting words in my mouth talking about how communism doesn't work in the real world or that I'm feeding you a line of **** or that communism is better than other forms of government. I don't think pure communism is any more workable in the real world than pure free market capitalism. All I was doing was pointing out that the Soviet Union was only communist by way of lip service. As for perfect forms of government or economics, no-one is an expert in those because we've never had one, and they probably don't exist (provided they have normal people as their constituent parts and not robots or something).
As for how corrupt Russia is, yes, everyone knows that. Bearing in mind that it's probably gotten worse since the end of the Soviet Union, but was still pretty bad even then. Of course, there are plenty of countries that's true of and, by most accounts, Tsarist Russia was just as bad.
I'm sorry I don't have a proper bibliography and set of footnotes here for you, but, as we've both said, I'm no expert. This is still, ultimately, just my opinion sprinkled with a few references to pretty concretely known facts. So, learn to relax about it, you don't have to worry that the Soviets are going to take over the US and that you'll have to show your papers and be searched just to travel around your own country.
You also failed to omit that Jeremy Reimer and his friend Jay Little pursued me to troll me at Windows IT Pro magazine's forums, and got THEIR ASSES KICKED on the fact that Exchange Servers can be "unfrozen" by memory optimizers
"Failed to omit" would mean that I included it, which I didn't. I don't even know if it's true, and your view on reality has proven to be just a little skewed. A link would be nice. By the way, tech-oriented forums can be a bit of a small world. I know you probably think that the world revolves around you and that anyone you run into somewhere other than you expect them must be stalking you, but it is quite possible, and probable, that they didn't pursue you, but merely saw you posting there too. I don't know if you've noticed, but your posts are all over the place. You post a lot. Really a lot.
Once again, we also see that you believe that everyone who doesn't like you is in cahoots. It's clearly more complicated than that. You're a uniter, not a divider. You bring people together harmony. Oh, and in mutual dislike of you.
As for someone being banned from Ars Technica for his reaction to you, I can see it. You bring out the worst in people. People who know me would be surprised at how nasty I've gotten on this thread. Actually, I've noticed that I've been in a foul mood all week. I think you might have something to do with that. I really wish this thread would end. The problem is, I can't just stop posting. I think I naturally find it rude not to reply to someone when they take the time and effort to reply to you. In this case, I think it's turned into a pathology.
On Thor SCHMUCK?
Ha - (unlike other sources) refused to remove a program of mine (that was down graded to ZERO THREAT LEVELS later mind you by CA) from a list he kept!
I found out later HE IS THE ONE WHO SUBMITTED IT TO CA, & he could not prove any malicious intent in its code (funny CA didn't list PING, because it could issue a "ping of death" OR Spybot Search & Destroy which alters a HOSTS file (a criteria of theirs no less)).
Yeah, a security researcher erring on the side of caution, what a shock. You do realize that if ping were a new utility that suddenly came out, rather than a decades old utility, it probably would be branded a threat by security researchers until they could verify it. The kinds of things that system utilities do are often quite similar to the kinds of things security threats do. What happened to your utility happens all the time. Usually working in good faith with the people doing the research clears things up quickly. Your over the top behaviour, however, surely delayed things. For that matter, your behaviour probably threw up a bunch of red flags.
Incidentally, trying to implicate someone very distant from the CEO of a company in the CEOs scandal just because you consider them a personal enemy is sad.
Wow, a "THIRD" (see what I did there? Capitalized, bolded and in quotes) APK supporter... Wait a minute, it's just APK again.
Get a grip. This thread has been off-topic since you started it. You didn't have anything real to say about UEFI, you just came in to spam the place with some links to out of date Secunia advisories about Linux.
Wow, suddenly two APK supporters in the same thread. Using his sentence style, bizarre quotes around words that have no need for quotes and tired old rhetoric. Wait a second... Could it be. Why it's Alexander Kowalski again, pretending to be a fan of himself.
Ok, this is truly sad. Not only did you post four replies to my reply, but you're trying to pretend that you're not Alexander Peter Kowalski here, but rather some other AC posting in support of him. You do understand that we're posting in a thread attached to an article that's long off the Slashdot front page. That means that it's very unlikely anyone is reading this and so very unlikely anyone else would comment. If anyone is reading this, by all means, chime in. Not that there's anything to chime in about. APK has clearly had issues for a long time, and I'm obviously a bit crazy myself to keep replying to him.
I suppose it's possible that it's possible that APK types these messages, but then has his cat press the submit button for him so that, in his eyes, he's not lying when he claims that it's not him posting. Maybe he has a family member do it. I find it a bit unlikely he'd have any children around to do it for him, though, but maybe a sibling or something.
And yes, I do post "multiple times", just not multiple times in reply to the same post, unless I have something to add that I forgot the first time, which is pretty rare. Also, when I do that, I generally do it as a reply to my own post, rather than another reply to the parent post. That way, with the way Slashdot currently handles threading, it's potentially less confusing to follow. I'm pretty certain I haven't double replied to any of your posts on this thread. If you look at each of my posts and click on "parent" at the bottom, you'll see that it jumps to one of your posts. To be fair to you, the flattened threading that Slashdot presents after the thread has gotten too deep can make it confusing to realize this.
The rest of your post isn't saying anything new. It's just the same, tired line from you.
The 15 year age gap is based on guesswork based on things you've said here and there about when you graduated college. But you completely failed to address why it is that you demand that I have more public accomplishments than you, and that they all be at a younger age than the earliest accomplishment on your list. Why is that a prerequisite to talk to you?
I should also note that I've developed applications as well, but they've been internal things for companies I've worked for, not packaged software sold in stores. Most programmers work is never seen by the public at all as most software written is for internal use. Having software you worked on being reviewed by a magazine is hardly the gold standard for what makes a good programmer.
Could you elaborate more on what exactly you did for this Superdisk-NT software? You mention increasing the speed of the software 40%. I assume you mean you increased the speed of the core functionality of the software, rather than just decreasing the programs loading time or something like that. What details can you give on how that 40% speed increase is calculated. Does it mean making the program operate the same, but use 40% less CPU time, or does it mean adding 40% to the average speed boost that the program grants to disk access?
I've sent an e-mail to superspeed's pr dept to try to reach Eric Dickman since you didn't provide any contact info. I imagine it will take time to get a reply. Can you tell me what year he offered you a job. Was it 2003 2003 or 1999. I sometimes get confused about the precise year of things that happened years ago as well.
You wrote:
LEARN TO READ "ne'er-do-well":
"For Ultradefrag64, it looks like you contributed an icon" - by tragedy (27079) on Saturday November 12, @03:14AM (#38033346)
Special thanks for good suggestions (in alphabetical order):
Alexander Peter Kowalski - Process priority control (not implemented yet).
and the second link is to you contributing an icon, which wasn't accepted for the program as far as I can tell. Since what I wrote (and you clipped off halfway) was actually:
For Ultradefrag64, it looks like you contributed an icon that does not seem to have been accepted (it was a pretty nice icon, but might have been considered too derivative of other Windows icons, or it might just not have scaled down well to their size requirement) and suggested that they use a particular Windows API. In the credits, they thanked you for your suggestions. It was nice of you to contribute, but it's far from a towering achievement.
Unless there's some additional thing you did for that project that's contained in that link, then it looks like I'm not the one who needs to learn how to read.
As for my question about what was in those other magazine articles you quoted, I'm not saying you're lying about it, I'm saying that I don't have any access to those articles, so I don't know what's in them. So, why don't you just tell me? What applications of yours did they talk about in those magazines and what did they say (no need to quote in full, just a general overview).
Regarding your postscript. Are you trying to imply that I create additional accounts to jump into the conversation, pretending to be someone else, and support myself? Where exactly are you getting any indication I do this? Your imagination
It's one of those basic things you learn in history class you learn and that you expect that most people have heard already. I was just interjecting a quick comment into the conversation, I wasn't really looking to publish a treatise. In any case, the actual name of the political system doesn't really matter, what generally matters is if the people in charge of directing things do their jobs well and manage resources effectively. Hardly any of them ever do regardless of what political system they're in.
Good grief. Could you stop splitting the thread by multi-posting already?! I know you have trouble restraining yourself from copy and paste spam, but please exert yourself.
LOL! Quite literally. Your two links have nothing to do with that Thor guy, whose last name you can't get right. I also find it hilarious that you put in that bit about someone supposedly impersonating you and, right in it, claim that two of your detractors are the same person, when the section you've copied and pasted is obviously from some previous post where you were pretending to be a second person. The way you suddenly drop into referring to yourself in the third person kind of gives it away. Were you posting as Cybordeath at the time? Or some other alias?
My sources are virtually every discussion thread you've posted in pretty much ever. Do you think there's just some huge conspiracy against you? Isn't it just possible that all these people hate you because you barge in, blaring loudly, and act like a total jerk. And not just like the typical forum jerks that we end up thinking of as eccentric members of the family. You're more like the cloudcuckooland maniac living in the creepy abandoned looking house up the street who routinely runs around shouting and banging trash can lids at 2:00 am, then gets territorial and fires his shotgun at people who come around to complain the next day. Something like that anyway.
Seriously, why do _you_ think nearly everyone on the Internet who knows you hates you and even those who think of you as a friend at first distance themselves more and more as time goes on? Think about this. Have you ever truly apologized for anything, ever? You strike me as the sort who is virtually incapable of it and, even if you're forced to somehow, you frame it in such a way that it's not really an apology such as: "I'm sorry that you think that..."
P.S. You can't just declare victory and have it be so. You sound like a small child when you do that.
Of course Linux isn't a mainstream OS on the desktop. I never claimed anything remotely like that. Your statement about Linux doesn't change the fact that the NT series wasn't mainstream until XP.
What do my accomplishments in the world have to do with anything we've been talking about? Your creepily obsessive need to compare yourself favorably to everyone is something that everyone who has read any of your trolling can spot easily. You create extra accounts to post from in support of yourself to talk about how great you are and how awful your detractors are. That's just pathetic. Now you feel that, because I've discovered just what you are, you have to try to make me out to be something lesser than your self-publicized greatness. You're crazy. Actually, I've begun to suspect that you might have some sort of medication issue. I've seen people act kind of like you in reaction to drugs like Paxil. Although, maybe some sort of amphetamine makes a better explanation.
Anyway, I am quite a bit younger than you, so I don't have as much time in the field. I don't have any big public accomplishments to point to. I've helped build two tech startups and been a jack of all trades. My last job title at the most recent one is senior network adminstrator (the senior in the title wasn't really deserved, it was just because when we started I was the only network administrator). The actual duties of that job are everything from network administration to client support to light application programming to lugging racks around and slicing my fingers up on poorly finished edges. I've made very minor contributions to a few free software projects (mostly in documentation) and that's about it. I'm not in academia. I don't have a big list of publications. Like most people, I do my job as well as I can, and work to learn new things and improve myself.
You don't seem to understand the logical paradox in crowing about being older than me, while simultaneously lambasting me for supposedly being less accomplished. You see, if you're mocking me for being in diapers when you were accomplishing supposed great things, that means you're comparing yourself against a baby and saying that you're terrific because you can do more than a baby. You demand that I show that I've done more than you, earlier than you. That's basically you setting the bar high for me and low for you. If the age difference between us is that big (from what I could tell, it's at least 15 years), then your list of accomplishments below, which starts in 1997, starts when you were at the very least a year or two older than I am now and probably more. That just underscores how crazy your argument is.
As for Ozymandias, I'm guessing that you haven't actually read the poem or you wouldn't be using that quote here. Here is the wikipedia page for the poem, which has a copy of it on the right. If you read the poem, it does actually describe you in many ways. The sneer on the face of the broken statue. The arrogant self-aggrandizement delivered oblivious to the fact that all the reader can see of the claimed great works are a barren wasteland. So, the quote works well for you, but I don't think that's how you intended it. The words themselves are a wonderful example of irony. Ozymandias intends for the reader to despair because they will never achieve his state of glory and power but, instead, if the reader despairs it's because they realize that even their own glory will wither and fade and be forgotten.
The windows NT magazine article you mention seems to be available online here. They don't mention you at all, just the software. They say it has serious bugs that locked up a system in one case so it could only be repaired with another copy of NT installed on a different partition. They also do say that, in some circumstances, it increased disk performance by about 10%, although it could also
According to Lenin. He was an expert. His position was that communism could only be achieved transitionally and that state capitalism was one of the transition phases. So, the USSR adopted state capitalism and then stalled out and stayed essentially under that system for the rest of its existence. You can just do a google search for Lenin and "state capitalism" to find all kinds of references. Here's one to get you started.
Come on. 2000 was never particularly widely used. Only in business environments. The driver support was lacking for too much consumer-level hardware, for one thing. And of course, as you pointed out, games are important to mainstream acceptance, and 2000 didn't have the support from games companies. NT was even less mainstream. XP was the first mainstream NT derivative.
Anyway. I was interested in whether or not you were actually a career troll, or if it was just this one article you were posting on and you were having a bad week or something. So, I looked for you via google. It seems that you're pretty much a career troll. At least, it looks to me like just about everyone, just about everywhere you post thinks so. You can call this an Ad Hominem attack if you want, but an Ad Hominem attack isn't always a logical fallacy. When it bears on your character and your actual ability to engage in rational debate it's perfectly valid. An example would be someone who insists that the moon landings were faked because rocketry is impossible and refuses to even look at the mountain of evidence that thousands of rockets have been launched or to look through a telescope at the artificial satellites. In such a case, calling the person crazy might technically be an Ad Hominem attack, but it's not a logical fallacy.
So, anyway, some great links related to you: This one about a situation where you threatened to sue over a piece of software of yours being identified as malware. It seems to me you could have worked with them to resolve the issue amicably, but you couldn't help yourself.
This insane thread that you posted to for years. My favorite quote from it is: "Great Scott! APK's numerous and highly repetitious responses read like examples from a freshman textbook on logical fallacy and deceptive rhetoric." I think that poster had you pegged perfectly.
This exchange which was absolutely hilarious. That one really was worth a LOL!
This has a list of some of your ars technica posts. You seem to have been hated there right from the start for good reason. The fact that you seem to have believed that C++ was dying, but that Delphi was the future is hilarious. It's also really funny when you post under a different alias pretending to be some random person supporting you. It's so blatantly obvious that it's you, even when you use a handle like Cybordeath. I'm a bit disturbed by some of the racism, homophobia and misogyny in some of your posts, by the way. Your temper seems to have calmed a bit over the years. Your fundamental troll nature seems to be coming through even more as you age, however.
So, basically, you're a very well known troll, which is an accomplishment, I suppose. Getting sucked into long flame wars with you doesn't seem wise, and it looks like any discussion with you pretty much has to turn into a flame war.
Technically, they were "State Capitalist", which is a form of capitalism, just not free-market capitalism (which has not existed in any developed economy ever).
My frustration is mainly with you. I am a little frustrated with myself for having bothered to reply to you at all. Mostly, though, I'm frustrated with dealing with a troll who's obviously barely capable of even reading the other person's post before replying with a formulaic post. Also, whatever you may think in your warped mind, your inability to admit you made a mistake when it's clearly pointed out to you isn't some sort of victory. It's pathetic.
That's pretty much all I have to say. You say nothing new or interesting in this post, nor do you in the post you linked to. You're not worth any detailed reply.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, so not only do you post a copy and paste reply to me, but when I remark that you did, you post a reply with a link to that same copy and pasted reply? Then most of the post is a copy and paste of your tired, old line about Linux that's already been addressed multiple times. Sad, sad, sad.
Uh, yeah. But you're still not addressing the fact that, in the great-grandparent post, you're either pretending to be someone else, or you're talking about yourself in the third person and referring to yourself as more than one person.
1) Why do I need to? I still don't understand how we reached the point where I have to jump through that hoop for you. It's ridiculous.
2) I've said it before and I'll say it again, no OS and no security setup is invincible. I never made any claims about the security superiority of Linux over Windows (except to note that security was not historically a high priority for Microsoft in its mainstream Operating Systems). You seem to be projecting arguments you've had with other people onto me.
3) Never been banned from any online forum, sorry. I'm not always prepared to hand out my real name because there are a lot of kooks out there. As for you not hiding behind assumed guises. HA! You've already done it several times in this thread. You're crazy if you think that people can't see through it when you post and pretend to be some other person defending you. Cybordeath was obviously you, for example. When you post short answers without your usual structure, it's a little harder to spot you right away, even when you keep it short, but it's obviously you in this post. Where you stalked me to another thread to post an anonymous, venomous reply to one of my posts. Sad.
4) To be very clear. You did not think of it first, no need to trust me on this. You would have to be grade A, certifiably insane to think that you were the first person to think of such an obvious idea, unless you're really a lot, lot older than I thought. When the feature first appeared in Microsoft SQL Server is not the benchmark for when the idea was first developed.
5) You certainly strongly implied that you planned to sue. You definitely said you'd bring lawyers into it. I've seen e-mail exchanges with you people have put online where you pull the same kind of nonsense.
Still not a very deep explanation of what you did for EEC Systems software. "flexible parameterization of drivers utilized in their initialization" doesn't actually say anything very specific. But whatever.
As for putting frequently accessed data into ramdisks, of course it works. It's been done for years. If you have enough RAM and you can identify what you should spend it on. It's not as if you invented the idea. Are you saying that the work you did was in identifying which data to cache to ram to speed up database access?
As for the older/younger thing. No, my bad, that was a typo. Actually, I started typing "If you are about 15 years older than me,", then thought better of how to structure the sentence. I should have erased and rewritten, rather than just changing two words. In any case, that part from my post should have read:
I think you have your timeline wrong. If I am about 15 years younger than you, then I was well out of diapers when that software came out. Also, the opinions of cantankerous old men everywhere aside, being born before someone else isn't an accomplishment.
As for Arstechnica, and pretty much every forum I could find where you've posted, even if you had a small number of allies (and pretty much every ally still seemed to want to distance themselves from you), seemed to be overwhelmingly against you. In this thread, you talk about how you were kicked from majorgeeks.com despite the fact that a part owner was an ex-friend of yours. Then you mention how you were banned from ntcompatible.com by another friend (unless it was the same friend, you were unclear). I was amazed to actually see the word "sorry" come from you in that post and an admission you actually made a mistake. I didn't think you were capable of it. Kudos to you for that. Still, you ought to consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, the reason so many people turn on you has something to do with the way you act.
As I've stated before, we seem to be peers. I have nothing to prove to you in order to be permitted to speak. And no, I'm not your senior in age. There was a typo, but the very next sentence after the one with the error should make it clear that was a typo.
Your first link consists of you posting an insane number of off-topic posts to the comments section of an article about memory optimizers. Something in there about someone pretending to be someone else who had endorsed one your products withdrawing his endorsment in a forum. An actual link to the the post where they impersonated him would be preferable. Or was that link actually it and you expect me to slog through 435 pages of comments, mostly by you? I think I'll pass, thanks.
Your second link is about how the co-founder of CA systems was apparently embezzling. Great. Was he one of your enemies too? If not, what does that article have to do with anything? How does this supposedly discredit your actual enemy? Also, why should I care? You don't have just a few people who despise you with cause. It seems like nearly everyone you have any interaction with ends up that way with enough exposure.
Regarding the rest of your post... I didn't demand any of that stuff from you to begin with, I just questioned the parts that were questionable after you posted them. The rest of your nonsense we've already discussed.
Pure copy and paste reply. Nothing to see here.
Uh yeah. Talking about yourself in the third person like that and referring to yourself as a plural doesn't strike me as too healthy.
Speak for yourself, writing books in YOUR MULITIPLE OFF TOPIC ILLOGICAL ADHOMINEM ATTACK BASED so-called "replies" of yours, lol!
You write books practically, and in MULTIPLE replies (off topic illogical adhominem attack based ones no less), so please: "Pot calling the kettle black" now, are we? LOL!
I do write fairly long posts sometimes. In this thread, it's mostly because I'm actually trying to address most of the things said in the parent post. I don't, however, write multiple replies to a single post (unless I need to make a correction or addition, in which case I clearly state that) and I haven't anywhere in this entire thread. It may appear that way if you don't know how Slashdot displays threads. Basically, the thread view flattens out after a certain number of posts in the thread and becomes a flattened view and it can become hard to tell what follows what. You can actually tell, however, you just need to do the legwork. You can open each of my posts in this thread directly, then hit the parent link at the bottom and see that each one is a child of one of your posts.
You end up saying nothing on topic, just more evasions of proving things you are asked to (which you demanded of myself mind you and I provided it, because i have those things, you do not and you never will)
The only thing on topic in this article is discussion of the possible implications of certain features in UEFI to the ability of end-users to boot their OS of choice. When you first posted, you were essentially off topic. You made a token mention of the issue, but only so that you could spam a bunch of Secunia links supposedly proving that Linux was insecure. I spent an unreasonable amount of time proving to you that each and every one of those security vulnerabilities was invalid, mostly because you couldn't be bothered to spend the time actually reading the pages you were linking to. The rest of this thread has been even more pointless. I eventually started to wonder just how crazy you were and searched around for you and discovered that you're infamous. You've been banned practically everywhere that they have a system for it and even people who don't hate you only seem to be able to not hate you by distancing themselves. I hope for your sake that your personality affliction only affects your online correspondence and doesn't extend to your real-life, face to face behaviour.
Your insistence that I demanded that you list your resume is bizarre. I never demanded that of you. Having seen it doesn't change my opinion of you. That opinion was formed by your behaviour. You could be a janitor or a rocket surgeon for all I care and I'd still have the same opinion of you because of your actions.
You make me laugh with your illogical off topic adhominem attacks in some attempt to try to "discredit me" but finding your sources are invalid and CRIMINAL even (CA, and Jeremy Reimer/Jay Little/Arstechnica, to name a couple I shot down easily
Alexander, you discredit yourself. Again, and again, and again, and again. In this thread on Slashdot and in just about everything else I can find anywhere that you've posted on. My "sources" aren't any particular person. Even when I linked to that blog post about your application being incorrectly blacklisted as malware and you threatening to sue, it was specifically your behaviour there I was showing. On all those links, pretty much everyone could see how awful you were being. In some of them, people who actually considered you a friend wondered aloud why you were acting that way. Why do all of those people have the same opinion of you, even when seeing you post for the first time? Are all of those people (and non-people since you seem to be also listing an entire company and a website) "invalid and CRIMINAL"?
What's with the constant claims of having achieved some sort of victory? It seems like just about every time you reply to anything you have have to post that you "sh
You've never accomplished anything in the computer sciences of any decent note, and you NEVER will (or you would have by now), but I have...
But, assuming your accomplishments are as grand as you make them out to be (you haven't really listed anything that isn't pretty much typical work for some sectors of the IT field), you haven't actually listed anything from more than 15 years ago. If my estimate of you being 15 years older than me seems to be more or less correct. So, that means that I haven't yet reached the age where you started your glorious career of accomplishment. So, therefore, isn't there hope for poor little me to someday measure up to your glory and magnificence? ;)
Since you asked specifically on this?
I also increased the speed and efficiency of SuperCache-NT, & applied ideas for database work on SuperDisk-NT, since you asked, that led to how well EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com did @ Microsoft Tech-Ed 2 yrs. in a row in the hardest category there - SQLServer Performance Enhancement (both myself & John Enck of Windows IT Pro magazine (then Windows NT mag) "hit upon" this idea back in the mid 1990's & extolled it on EEC Systems' website in fact)...
Ok. You increased the speed and efficiency of SuperCache-NT, but specifically how? You have to understand that, for a disk-caching program whose goal is to speed up the system, saying that you increased the speed of the software is ambiguous. Sure, it was a long time ago, but you have to remember some details. Now, you've expanded a little on your original description by saying that you "applied ideas for database work" to the software, but that's still pretty ambiguous. What ideas did you apply? It's all sounding very generic
That's examples of things I was doing while you were still in diapers, and only a fraction of what I could put out here mind you... whereas you? You have ZERO... lol!
I think you have your timeline wrong. If I am about 15 years older than you, then I was well out of diapers when that software came out. Also, the opinions of cantankerous old men everywhere aside, being born before someone else isn't an accomplishment.
(By the way - I never EVER posted @ Arstechnica as "Cybordeath", no need to do that much...
Oh please. Cybordeath shows up right after you are banned and starts posting specifically about you and your disputes. His posting style is altered from yours without all the bolding and capitalizing and not so much stuff in quotes and not as much extra punctuation, etc., but everything else about the way he expresses himself is extremely similar to you. There's pretty much universal concensus on the forum that Cybordeath is you. It seems pretty unlikely that you'd have such a rabid fan, obsessed with carrying on your feuds who didn't chime in before you were banned, but signs on right after. Sorry Clark Kent, the glasses aren't fooling anyone.
Also, you've posted a few times in this thread in support of yourself, while pretending to be someone else, and you've followed me to another thread to post multiple times from a small comment I made and not signed your posts there. Based on that evidence, I'd have to say that my (and everyone else's) theory on the identity of Cybordeath is probably pretty solid.
P.S.=> Please - Give us a break, you f'ing "ne'er-do-well" talker with not a DAMN THING to show for yourself by way of comparison to just a tiny FRACTION of what I could put out... apk
Give what a break? Replying to you? I wish I could. It wastes too much time. But it's somehow addicting. I can't help myself. Every time you say something ridiculous, I just have to try to get you to understand the real world. I know you never will, but I just can't help myself.
Good gravy Alexander, grow up already. You can't just keep making up fantasies of what the other person is saying in your head and then attack those. If you have a problem with what someone is saying, then debate that specifically. I said the Soviet Union was technically state capitalist and then showed that Lenin thought so to. That's all there is to it. I made no statement on the values of either system.
Now, following me around so you can post a disagreement to everything I say is a bit childish don't you think. So is trying to drag me down to your level (which I have to admit you seem to be very good at). Also, though it's nice to see you not using your normal crazy post structure, it would be even nicer if you'd get an account, or at least sign your posts. I'm not sure why you don't have an account. Slashdot pretty much never bans anyone, they just rely on the moderation system.
Yes, because every other post here has a full bibliography at the end. And, no, I'm not an expert, just someone who has taken history classes. That's really all the qualification you need to make a statement like that. As for Lenin not being an expert, you do know that he was essentially the founder of the Soviet Union, right? Implicit in me calling him an expert was that he was an expert in the system that the Soviet Union adopted because he was the prime mover. His theory on communism was that you achieved it by transitioning to state capitalism, then you maintained that fundamental system while politically transforming it into true communism. I didn't say that it was a workable theory. The Soviets didn't get it to work.
You're essentially putting words in my mouth talking about how communism doesn't work in the real world or that I'm feeding you a line of **** or that communism is better than other forms of government. I don't think pure communism is any more workable in the real world than pure free market capitalism. All I was doing was pointing out that the Soviet Union was only communist by way of lip service. As for perfect forms of government or economics, no-one is an expert in those because we've never had one, and they probably don't exist (provided they have normal people as their constituent parts and not robots or something).
As for how corrupt Russia is, yes, everyone knows that. Bearing in mind that it's probably gotten worse since the end of the Soviet Union, but was still pretty bad even then. Of course, there are plenty of countries that's true of and, by most accounts, Tsarist Russia was just as bad.
I'm sorry I don't have a proper bibliography and set of footnotes here for you, but, as we've both said, I'm no expert. This is still, ultimately, just my opinion sprinkled with a few references to pretty concretely known facts. So, learn to relax about it, you don't have to worry that the Soviets are going to take over the US and that you'll have to show your papers and be searched just to travel around your own country.
You also failed to omit that Jeremy Reimer and his friend Jay Little pursued me to troll me at Windows IT Pro magazine's forums, and got THEIR ASSES KICKED on the fact that Exchange Servers can be "unfrozen" by memory optimizers
"Failed to omit" would mean that I included it, which I didn't. I don't even know if it's true, and your view on reality has proven to be just a little skewed. A link would be nice. By the way, tech-oriented forums can be a bit of a small world. I know you probably think that the world revolves around you and that anyone you run into somewhere other than you expect them must be stalking you, but it is quite possible, and probable, that they didn't pursue you, but merely saw you posting there too. I don't know if you've noticed, but your posts are all over the place. You post a lot. Really a lot.
Once again, we also see that you believe that everyone who doesn't like you is in cahoots. It's clearly more complicated than that. You're a uniter, not a divider. You bring people together harmony. Oh, and in mutual dislike of you.
As for someone being banned from Ars Technica for his reaction to you, I can see it. You bring out the worst in people. People who know me would be surprised at how nasty I've gotten on this thread. Actually, I've noticed that I've been in a foul mood all week. I think you might have something to do with that. I really wish this thread would end. The problem is, I can't just stop posting. I think I naturally find it rude not to reply to someone when they take the time and effort to reply to you. In this case, I think it's turned into a pathology.
On Thor SCHMUCK?
Ha - (unlike other sources) refused to remove a program of mine (that was down graded to ZERO THREAT LEVELS later mind you by CA) from a list he kept!
I found out later HE IS THE ONE WHO SUBMITTED IT TO CA, & he could not prove any malicious intent in its code (funny CA didn't list PING, because it could issue a "ping of death" OR Spybot Search & Destroy which alters a HOSTS file (a criteria of theirs no less)).
Yeah, a security researcher erring on the side of caution, what a shock. You do realize that if ping were a new utility that suddenly came out, rather than a decades old utility, it probably would be branded a threat by security researchers until they could verify it. The kinds of things that system utilities do are often quite similar to the kinds of things security threats do. What happened to your utility happens all the time. Usually working in good faith with the people doing the research clears things up quickly. Your over the top behaviour, however, surely delayed things. For that matter, your behaviour probably threw up a bunch of red flags.
Incidentally, trying to implicate someone very distant from the CEO of a company in the CEOs scandal just because you consider them a personal enemy is sad.
Wow, a "THIRD" (see what I did there? Capitalized, bolded and in quotes) APK supporter... Wait a minute, it's just APK again.
Get a grip. This thread has been off-topic since you started it. You didn't have anything real to say about UEFI, you just came in to spam the place with some links to out of date Secunia advisories about Linux.
Wow, suddenly two APK supporters in the same thread. Using his sentence style, bizarre quotes around words that have no need for quotes and tired old rhetoric. Wait a second... Could it be. Why it's Alexander Kowalski again, pretending to be a fan of himself.
Ok, this is truly sad. Not only did you post four replies to my reply, but you're trying to pretend that you're not Alexander Peter Kowalski here, but rather some other AC posting in support of him. You do understand that we're posting in a thread attached to an article that's long off the Slashdot front page. That means that it's very unlikely anyone is reading this and so very unlikely anyone else would comment. If anyone is reading this, by all means, chime in. Not that there's anything to chime in about. APK has clearly had issues for a long time, and I'm obviously a bit crazy myself to keep replying to him.
I suppose it's possible that it's possible that APK types these messages, but then has his cat press the submit button for him so that, in his eyes, he's not lying when he claims that it's not him posting. Maybe he has a family member do it. I find it a bit unlikely he'd have any children around to do it for him, though, but maybe a sibling or something.
And yes, I do post "multiple times", just not multiple times in reply to the same post, unless I have something to add that I forgot the first time, which is pretty rare. Also, when I do that, I generally do it as a reply to my own post, rather than another reply to the parent post. That way, with the way Slashdot currently handles threading, it's potentially less confusing to follow. I'm pretty certain I haven't double replied to any of your posts on this thread. If you look at each of my posts and click on "parent" at the bottom, you'll see that it jumps to one of your posts. To be fair to you, the flattened threading that Slashdot presents after the thread has gotten too deep can make it confusing to realize this.
The rest of your post isn't saying anything new. It's just the same, tired line from you.
The 15 year age gap is based on guesswork based on things you've said here and there about when you graduated college. But you completely failed to address why it is that you demand that I have more public accomplishments than you, and that they all be at a younger age than the earliest accomplishment on your list. Why is that a prerequisite to talk to you?
I should also note that I've developed applications as well, but they've been internal things for companies I've worked for, not packaged software sold in stores. Most programmers work is never seen by the public at all as most software written is for internal use. Having software you worked on being reviewed by a magazine is hardly the gold standard for what makes a good programmer.
Could you elaborate more on what exactly you did for this Superdisk-NT software? You mention increasing the speed of the software 40%. I assume you mean you increased the speed of the core functionality of the software, rather than just decreasing the programs loading time or something like that. What details can you give on how that 40% speed increase is calculated. Does it mean making the program operate the same, but use 40% less CPU time, or does it mean adding 40% to the average speed boost that the program grants to disk access?
I've sent an e-mail to superspeed's pr dept to try to reach Eric Dickman since you didn't provide any contact info. I imagine it will take time to get a reply. Can you tell me what year he offered you a job. Was it 2003 2003 or 1999. I sometimes get confused about the precise year of things that happened years ago as well.
You wrote:
LEARN TO READ "ne'er-do-well":
"For Ultradefrag64, it looks like you contributed an icon" - by tragedy (27079) on Saturday November 12, @03:14AM (#38033346)
http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/handbook/Credits.html
or here
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2993462&group_id=199532&atid=969873
That first link, in regards to you, says only:
and the second link is to you contributing an icon, which wasn't accepted for the program as far as I can tell. Since what I wrote (and you clipped off halfway) was actually:
For Ultradefrag64, it looks like you contributed an icon that does not seem to have been accepted (it was a pretty nice icon, but might have been considered too derivative of other Windows icons, or it might just not have scaled down well to their size requirement) and suggested that they use a particular Windows API. In the credits, they thanked you for your suggestions. It was nice of you to contribute, but it's far from a towering achievement.
Unless there's some additional thing you did for that project that's contained in that link, then it looks like I'm not the one who needs to learn how to read.
As for my question about what was in those other magazine articles you quoted, I'm not saying you're lying about it, I'm saying that I don't have any access to those articles, so I don't know what's in them. So, why don't you just tell me? What applications of yours did they talk about in those magazines and what did they say (no need to quote in full, just a general overview).
Regarding your postscript. Are you trying to imply that I create additional accounts to jump into the conversation, pretending to be someone else, and support myself? Where exactly are you getting any indication I do this? Your imagination
It's one of those basic things you learn in history class you learn and that you expect that most people have heard already. I was just interjecting a quick comment into the conversation, I wasn't really looking to publish a treatise. In any case, the actual name of the political system doesn't really matter, what generally matters is if the people in charge of directing things do their jobs well and manage resources effectively. Hardly any of them ever do regardless of what political system they're in.
Good grief. Could you stop splitting the thread by multi-posting already?! I know you have trouble restraining yourself from copy and paste spam, but please exert yourself.
LOL! Quite literally. Your two links have nothing to do with that Thor guy, whose last name you can't get right. I also find it hilarious that you put in that bit about someone supposedly impersonating you and, right in it, claim that two of your detractors are the same person, when the section you've copied and pasted is obviously from some previous post where you were pretending to be a second person. The way you suddenly drop into referring to yourself in the third person kind of gives it away. Were you posting as Cybordeath at the time? Or some other alias?
My sources are virtually every discussion thread you've posted in pretty much ever. Do you think there's just some huge conspiracy against you? Isn't it just possible that all these people hate you because you barge in, blaring loudly, and act like a total jerk. And not just like the typical forum jerks that we end up thinking of as eccentric members of the family. You're more like the cloudcuckooland maniac living in the creepy abandoned looking house up the street who routinely runs around shouting and banging trash can lids at 2:00 am, then gets territorial and fires his shotgun at people who come around to complain the next day. Something like that anyway.
Seriously, why do _you_ think nearly everyone on the Internet who knows you hates you and even those who think of you as a friend at first distance themselves more and more as time goes on? Think about this. Have you ever truly apologized for anything, ever? You strike me as the sort who is virtually incapable of it and, even if you're forced to somehow, you frame it in such a way that it's not really an apology such as: "I'm sorry that you think that..."
P.S. You can't just declare victory and have it be so. You sound like a small child when you do that.
Of course Linux isn't a mainstream OS on the desktop. I never claimed anything remotely like that. Your statement about Linux doesn't change the fact that the NT series wasn't mainstream until XP.
What do my accomplishments in the world have to do with anything we've been talking about? Your creepily obsessive need to compare yourself favorably to everyone is something that everyone who has read any of your trolling can spot easily. You create extra accounts to post from in support of yourself to talk about how great you are and how awful your detractors are. That's just pathetic. Now you feel that, because I've discovered just what you are, you have to try to make me out to be something lesser than your self-publicized greatness. You're crazy. Actually, I've begun to suspect that you might have some sort of medication issue. I've seen people act kind of like you in reaction to drugs like Paxil. Although, maybe some sort of amphetamine makes a better explanation.
Anyway, I am quite a bit younger than you, so I don't have as much time in the field. I don't have any big public accomplishments to point to. I've helped build two tech startups and been a jack of all trades. My last job title at the most recent one is senior network adminstrator (the senior in the title wasn't really deserved, it was just because when we started I was the only network administrator). The actual duties of that job are everything from network administration to client support to light application programming to lugging racks around and slicing my fingers up on poorly finished edges. I've made very minor contributions to a few free software projects (mostly in documentation) and that's about it. I'm not in academia. I don't have a big list of publications. Like most people, I do my job as well as I can, and work to learn new things and improve myself.
You don't seem to understand the logical paradox in crowing about being older than me, while simultaneously lambasting me for supposedly being less accomplished. You see, if you're mocking me for being in diapers when you were accomplishing supposed great things, that means you're comparing yourself against a baby and saying that you're terrific because you can do more than a baby. You demand that I show that I've done more than you, earlier than you. That's basically you setting the bar high for me and low for you. If the age difference between us is that big (from what I could tell, it's at least 15 years), then your list of accomplishments below, which starts in 1997, starts when you were at the very least a year or two older than I am now and probably more. That just underscores how crazy your argument is.
As for Ozymandias, I'm guessing that you haven't actually read the poem or you wouldn't be using that quote here. Here is the wikipedia page for the poem, which has a copy of it on the right. If you read the poem, it does actually describe you in many ways. The sneer on the face of the broken statue. The arrogant self-aggrandizement delivered oblivious to the fact that all the reader can see of the claimed great works are a barren wasteland. So, the quote works well for you, but I don't think that's how you intended it. The words themselves are a wonderful example of irony. Ozymandias intends for the reader to despair because they will never achieve his state of glory and power but, instead, if the reader despairs it's because they realize that even their own glory will wither and fade and be forgotten.
The windows NT magazine article you mention seems to be available online here. They don't mention you at all, just the software. They say it has serious bugs that locked up a system in one case so it could only be repaired with another copy of NT installed on a different partition. They also do say that, in some circumstances, it increased disk performance by about 10%, although it could also
According to Lenin. He was an expert. His position was that communism could only be achieved transitionally and that state capitalism was one of the transition phases. So, the USSR adopted state capitalism and then stalled out and stayed essentially under that system for the rest of its existence. You can just do a google search for Lenin and "state capitalism" to find all kinds of references. Here's one to get you started.
Come on. 2000 was never particularly widely used. Only in business environments. The driver support was lacking for too much consumer-level hardware, for one thing. And of course, as you pointed out, games are important to mainstream acceptance, and 2000 didn't have the support from games companies. NT was even less mainstream. XP was the first mainstream NT derivative.
Anyway. I was interested in whether or not you were actually a career troll, or if it was just this one article you were posting on and you were having a bad week or something. So, I looked for you via google. It seems that you're pretty much a career troll. At least, it looks to me like just about everyone, just about everywhere you post thinks so. You can call this an Ad Hominem attack if you want, but an Ad Hominem attack isn't always a logical fallacy. When it bears on your character and your actual ability to engage in rational debate it's perfectly valid. An example would be someone who insists that the moon landings were faked because rocketry is impossible and refuses to even look at the mountain of evidence that thousands of rockets have been launched or to look through a telescope at the artificial satellites. In such a case, calling the person crazy might technically be an Ad Hominem attack, but it's not a logical fallacy.
So, anyway, some great links related to you:
This one about a situation where you threatened to sue over a piece of software of yours being identified as malware. It seems to me you could have worked with them to resolve the issue amicably, but you couldn't help yourself.
This insane thread that you posted to for years. My favorite quote from it is: "Great Scott! APK's numerous and highly repetitious responses read like examples from a freshman textbook on logical fallacy and deceptive rhetoric." I think that poster had you pegged perfectly.
This exchange which was absolutely hilarious. That one really was worth a LOL!
This has a list of some of your ars technica posts. You seem to have been hated there right from the start for good reason. The fact that you seem to have believed that C++ was dying, but that Delphi was the future is hilarious. It's also really funny when you post under a different alias pretending to be some random person supporting you. It's so blatantly obvious that it's you, even when you use a handle like Cybordeath. I'm a bit disturbed by some of the racism, homophobia and misogyny in some of your posts, by the way. Your temper seems to have calmed a bit over the years. Your fundamental troll nature seems to be coming through even more as you age, however.
So, basically, you're a very well known troll, which is an accomplishment, I suppose. Getting sucked into long flame wars with you doesn't seem wise, and it looks like any discussion with you pretty much has to turn into a flame war.
Any minimum wage job with significant tips, such as waitstaff, has a much lower minimum wage.
Technically, they were "State Capitalist", which is a form of capitalism, just not free-market capitalism (which has not existed in any developed economy ever).
My frustration is mainly with you. I am a little frustrated with myself for having bothered to reply to you at all. Mostly, though, I'm frustrated with dealing with a troll who's obviously barely capable of even reading the other person's post before replying with a formulaic post. Also, whatever you may think in your warped mind, your inability to admit you made a mistake when it's clearly pointed out to you isn't some sort of victory. It's pathetic.
That's pretty much all I have to say. You say nothing new or interesting in this post, nor do you in the post you linked to. You're not worth any detailed reply.
Good grief. You can't even get together the energy to post a reply that has anything at all to do with the post you're replying to. Sad.