haha. wow. 'Jeffrey McJew'. I guess I came from the generic Jewish store, 'McJew's', where they sell generic jewish people. Even tho' I'm Scottish. Just like the 'hamburgers' at McDonalds aren't really from a cow...
Just goes to show that arguing (or even posting, it seems) on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics- even if you win, you're still a retard.
If you did forget, and you've got all your w-2 and such on hand, then just go to www.turbotax.com - here: http://www.quicken.com/taxes/products/#web_product s
It lets you fill out your taxes via an interactive online form that asks all the right questions and then 'E-files' a finished form for a small fee without having to leave your computer or find an all-night post office.
I have nothing to do with Quicken, i just used the service and it's great.
Re:A note from the antagonist
on
Spy v. Spy
·
· Score: 0
> Wow, I made it to Slashdot!
Good for you! I'm sure we are all happy for you.
> I am a programmer for one of the companies
> listed in the article, which disables "Anti Spy-
> ware." In fact, I'm the person who came up with > this "crashing" system.
Wow your just so cool...
> Say what you will about Spy software (it pays
> my bills), the fact of the matter is the ANTI-
> Spyware is trying to crash OUR program!
Oh boo hoo. So that makes it ok for you to purposly write a peice of maglinant software that crashes a process on my computer for your own ends? How is this differnent from a computer Cracker? Or a Trojan?
> Because of this, no company should be upset
> when we use the same tactics to try and prevent
> this from happening. They were crashing us, so > we crashed them. Sounds like fair play to me.
Sense when is MY computer YOUR battlefield?
> Although the whole "spy vs. spy" thing is
> getting a little bit out of hand, I personally
> think that the makers of anti-spyware should
> try coming up with some original way to make
> money instead of cashing in on our success. If
> you don't think that all those anti-spyware
> programs are just out to make a quick buck, you
> are surely mistaken.
Uhm.. dude, i think you are the one that's mistaken. Why do you have the right to put the spyware on my computer in the first place?
See... I'm an Architect, and I do a lot of computer rendering. Let's say that your little piece of spyware disrupts my system halfway into a six hour render, causing my system to hang and making me loose three hours worth of work.
It wasn't my choice to have your spyware on my system in the first place. Now, if I had installed Anti-spyware on my system, and it disrupted my system in a way that hurts my productivity that's my problem. But if YOU install something on my system WITHOUT MY KNOWLEGE that disrupts my system and the PROGRAMS I PAID FOR that's *YOUR FAULT*, and I hope someone sues your company out of existance.
> Again, I am HIGHLY excited that my code (one
> way or another!) made it on Slashdot's front
> page!
Yea! what a Geek! Can't see the forest for the trees. If you really wanna make the front page of Slashdot, why don't you just start writing Outlook worms?
> (BTW, WinWhatWhere's crash system is a lot less
> sophisticated than mine, which wasn't
> highlighted as much in the article:)
Again, Good for you. Loser. Why don't you try to have your Code do something more productive than just make money. Just because the things you create make money it doesn't mean they are good, proper, or even have a right to exist.
Jeffrey McGrew
"There should also be provisions for abandonment. For example, if a copyrighted work is not available for sale (including for $0.00) from its copyright holder to the public for a total of ten years, then it is considered to be abandoned."
This idea is very simular to abandonded land. I'm an Architect, and the way it works (at least in the western states) is that if you use a abandoned peice of land, pay taxes on that land, and there is no protest (or awareness) from the owner of that land for 'x' number of years (changes from place to place) then you can challange the owner in court and gain deed to the land. The idea, in the eyes of the law, is that land is a public resource to be used and for that use to be taxed.
Jeffrey McGrew
Slashdot Mirror
haha. wow. 'Jeffrey McJew'. I guess I came from the generic Jewish store, 'McJew's', where they sell generic jewish people. Even tho' I'm Scottish. Just like the 'hamburgers' at McDonalds aren't really from a cow...
Just goes to show that arguing (or even posting, it seems) on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics- even if you win, you're still a retard.
If you did forget, and you've got all your w-2 and such on hand, then just go to www.turbotax.com - here: http://www.quicken.com/taxes/products/#web_product s
It lets you fill out your taxes via an interactive online form that asks all the right questions and then 'E-files' a finished form for a small fee without having to leave your computer or find an all-night post office.
I have nothing to do with Quicken, i just used the service and it's great.
get crackin, geeks!
http://216.239.51.100/search?q=cache:1WdOrdrxPe
> Wow, I made it to Slashdot! Good for you! I'm sure we are all happy for you. > I am a programmer for one of the companies > listed in the article, which disables "Anti Spy- > ware." In fact, I'm the person who came up with > this "crashing" system. Wow your just so cool... > Say what you will about Spy software (it pays > my bills), the fact of the matter is the ANTI- > Spyware is trying to crash OUR program! Oh boo hoo. So that makes it ok for you to purposly write a peice of maglinant software that crashes a process on my computer for your own ends? How is this differnent from a computer Cracker? Or a Trojan? > Because of this, no company should be upset > when we use the same tactics to try and prevent > this from happening. They were crashing us, so > we crashed them. Sounds like fair play to me. Sense when is MY computer YOUR battlefield? > Although the whole "spy vs. spy" thing is > getting a little bit out of hand, I personally > think that the makers of anti-spyware should > try coming up with some original way to make > money instead of cashing in on our success. If > you don't think that all those anti-spyware > programs are just out to make a quick buck, you > are surely mistaken. Uhm.. dude, i think you are the one that's mistaken. Why do you have the right to put the spyware on my computer in the first place? See... I'm an Architect, and I do a lot of computer rendering. Let's say that your little piece of spyware disrupts my system halfway into a six hour render, causing my system to hang and making me loose three hours worth of work. It wasn't my choice to have your spyware on my system in the first place. Now, if I had installed Anti-spyware on my system, and it disrupted my system in a way that hurts my productivity that's my problem. But if YOU install something on my system WITHOUT MY KNOWLEGE that disrupts my system and the PROGRAMS I PAID FOR that's *YOUR FAULT*, and I hope someone sues your company out of existance. > Again, I am HIGHLY excited that my code (one > way or another!) made it on Slashdot's front > page! Yea! what a Geek! Can't see the forest for the trees. If you really wanna make the front page of Slashdot, why don't you just start writing Outlook worms? > (BTW, WinWhatWhere's crash system is a lot less > sophisticated than mine, which wasn't > highlighted as much in the article :)
Again, Good for you. Loser. Why don't you try to have your Code do something more productive than just make money. Just because the things you create make money it doesn't mean they are good, proper, or even have a right to exist.
Jeffrey McGrew
"But because we didn't have the formula for SPACE MEAT, we made ours out of napkins"
What's next, the Scary Monkey Show on prime time? I mean, don't get me wrong, I love Invader Zim and All, but I didn't think it was REAL!
AGGGHHHH!
(P.S. I'm dancing like a monkey)
"There should also be provisions for abandonment. For example, if a copyrighted work is not available for sale (including for $0.00) from its copyright holder to the public for a total of ten years, then it is considered to be abandoned." This idea is very simular to abandonded land. I'm an Architect, and the way it works (at least in the western states) is that if you use a abandoned peice of land, pay taxes on that land, and there is no protest (or awareness) from the owner of that land for 'x' number of years (changes from place to place) then you can challange the owner in court and gain deed to the land. The idea, in the eyes of the law, is that land is a public resource to be used and for that use to be taxed. Jeffrey McGrew