There are a lot of people claiming to run uninfected naked machines for years.
Invariably what it means it they don't run ANY Microsoft products that access the Net - no IE, no Outlook, no Outlook Express, no nothing. AND they patch everything anyway.
They also never indicate their volume of email, volume of Web site access, nature of Web site access (do you access sports sites, porn sites?), etc.
To suggest that anybody else who RUNS Microsoft software on the Net can do the same just by not installing security software is just irresponsible and stupid.
It's been demonstrated that XP will get infected in twenty minutes put on the Net without patches and security software. With patches, it might last longer - maybe even months - but it WILL get infected if ANY Microsoft software (and possibly other common commercial software which has holes) accesses the Net from it.
I don't run any Microsoft software except Update on the Net. I got TODAY THREE viruses downloaded from my SBC Yahoo email account via Thunderbird (detected and cleaned by Avast). Without Avast running on my system, I probably would have viruses all over my system.
I just got through yesterday cleaning a client's machine that WAS naked on the Net with no patches, no firewall and no AV. Hundreds of spyware, hundreds of trojans.
It's bullshit to generalize that running naked is safer than having security software.
I believe that's not entirely true - that you can do EVERYTHING from the command line or scripts.
In my Windows 2003 server class, the teacher (who is a consultant as his primary job) complained how many of the Windows command line tools - things like migrating user accounts in Active Directory and the like - tend to screw up, so he avoids them like the plague.
While Windows seems to have a lot of command line tools, it pales against the UNIX shells and utilities that are much easier to use with each other because they follow a (more-or-less) common design model.
Perhaps the new Longhorn shell will be better, as it supposedly will support object piping and the like.
If you're still running legacy COBOL apps on a legacy OS, you have worse problems with productivity than security, I'd say.
You're working for a company which will shortly be out of business (unless of course your company dominates your industry - other factors than IT do apply in the real world) - I suggest posting your resume now.
Yes, Windows 2000 and XP CAN be brought dead to the metal in certain circumstances NOT involving hardware failure. I've seen it.
Besides, the OP's point was that Windows was ORIGINALLY not multiuser or secure and the DESIGN flaws from that are STILL present in the current versions, regardless of their current multiuser and memory protection capabilities. IE (a fucking WEB BROWSER) and its integration into the OS is just one example.
Ah, the Windows trolls have moderator points again!
"Insightful"?
After SEVERAL studies have shown OSS software to be higher code quality than most commercial software?
I don't think so.
Also, the only "worthy" software running on Windows seems to be the hundred thousand viruses and worms, against the ten or twenty such running on Linux. There probably are as many viruses running on Windows as there is commercial software.
This also perfectly applies to Microsoft's attitude toward security. If it isn't making Bill money, he just doesn't give a shit.
The other problem is programmer quality: if you don't have corporate standards - and quality control people who know enough about code security to enforce them - you get security problems. Most quality control people are just testing the program to see if it WORKS. They need to have people testing it to see if it can be BROKEN - or broken INTO.
Both are free for home use, and are lightweight on resources. Neither are supposedly as good at catching everything as Norton or McAfee according to the tests, but they're quite good enough for home use where they aren't dealing with thousands of emails at a time.
I've used one or the other for over two years with no problems on my 2GHz AMD system. I switched from AVG to Avast when AVG suddenly started turning off its email scanner for no known reason after two years, and rather than figure it out, I just switched. Avast so far has given my no problems - once I turned off its sound notification (the screeching siren when it detects a virus and the loud voice announcing "the virus database has been updated" was ridiculous.)
I loaded a thirty-day trial version of TDS-3 on her machine and found there were only a couple trojans left.
One of them was that goddamn crap that names a file "t?skmgr.exe" - so that you can't delete it from the XP Recovery Console because stupid Microsoft won't let the RC delete command run wildcards (for "security" reasons, right?), and you can't SEE it in Explorer because it looks just like taskmgr.exe, so you can only tell which one it is by looking at where they appear in the file listing. Then they make it a hidden, system and read-only file and of course it's in use by a process, so Windows won't let you touch it.
Bart's PE and Knoppix couldn't help me with this one.
Acting on a tip from the Net, I loaded Winfile, the old Windows NT file manager, and managed to rename it, move it to another directory, so it couldn't be run, and after rebooting into safe mode, I could delete it.
The other trojan was the one that originally was driving me nuts. I forget how I finally got rid of that one.
There was still at least one spyware somewhere, so I loaded HijackThis on and got rid of some more crap.
And finally I found a "Security Agent" from "CastleCops" which was actually a trojan. The service was running but the rest of it had already been cleaned, so I disabled the service.
Plus I went into the Registry and clobbered everything I could find that wasn't a known user, Microsoft or Dell installed program. I think I cleaned out a lot iof spyware keys that even all the other antispyware programs didn't find.
Then I checked the client's account status and found she was running as Administrator, so I switched her to limited. That caused TDS-3 to stop working under her account (apparently it needs not only Admin status to install, but to run, no surprise given what it does). I got confused by XP's stupid "tri-mod flag" technigue of labeling all file folders faux "read-only" into thinking somehow the disk was screwed, but I finally determined that was not the case. So she's back to running as Administrator until I can tell her to create a new account (because I don't know what's been installed by her as Administrator so I don't think it's safe to just change her back to limited - something other than TDS-3 might break) and move her desktop icons over to the new profile.
She seems to be clean now - no system error messages, no popups, and the system seems stable.
It only took me another eight hours - mostly because I don't have a Bart's PE and Knoppix that's REALLY loaded with anti-trojan, AV, spyware and other tools. That's my next project - buff up my bootable tools so I can access ANY file ANYWHERE and kill it.
I get my hands on the asshole wrote that "PurityScan" adware trojan, I'm gonna nail his knees to the floor with railroad spikes - so he stays put while I really do some damage to him.
Somebody needs to start scanning Web sites where this crap comes from, report the assholes to the law, and get the lot thrown in jail. NONE of this stuff came in through email because my client uses Web mail exclusively. That means it came from Web sites. So why not set up a Web scanner that visits suspicious Web sites, downloads this crap into a sandbox, logs everything as evidence, then publishes it as a blacklist - a "reverse honeypot"?
Is that why Chris Lee said the following (obviously referring to Christensen, although the context seems to have been the Lord of the Rings):
Legendary Actor's Scathing Attack on Young Film Stars
By Sherna Noah, PA Showbusiness Correspondent
Movie legend Christopher Lee has criticised today's generation of younger stars for being "over-hyped".
Lee, 82, who has more than 200 films to his name, described some actors' performances as "holes in the air".
The actor, known for playing villains such as wizard Saruman in Lord of the Rings and Dracula, told Total Film magazine: "Johnny Depp, as far as I'm concerned, is number one.
"Of his generation, there's no one who can touch him.
"Some performers today, it's like looking at holes in the air."
The British actor, who made his name in the Hammer films, said: "You get these young, over-hyped stars with very little experience, pitched into big-budget movies in major roles and they can't begin to handle them.
"It's extremely dangerous because it means they're not going to last long."
"'I don't think the public knows what it wants Congress to do, but it wants Congress to do something,...They don't have a lot of confidence that Congress will do the right thing.'"
By the time we have the resources and technology to terraform on a large scale, we will have "transmogrified" OURSELVES so we do not NEED to terraform planets.
A fully developed nanotech entity needs only five things: 1) Energy. 2) Matter. 3) Nanomass. 4) Knowledgebases. 5) Computing power.
A postbiological entity does not need food, air, water, or any of the things present day humans want to terraform a planet to provide.
A Transhuman might modify a planet or other object for other purposes, but "terraforming" as people usually refer to it would be pointless except as an experiment. It certainly won't be needed to provide "living space" as there is effectively unlimited "living space" for a Transhuman throughout space.
In fact, it WOULD be better if the SCO story had its own topic since it obviously is going to be long-running and complicated, with many updates. That's why Groklaw exists.
Otherwise that's entirely different from a single event that has a couple new lines of info added to one media's reporting of it. A court case gets major new info every time there's a new hearing or filing (well, almost every time - sometimes the hearing or filing is just boilerplate and not worth reporting on. This story is more like the latter.)
Yes, I told the client that software firewalls aren't as good as hardware firewalls. She may be springing for SBC DSL and since she has wireless, she might go for the 2Line wireless/powerline router which has a firewall in it.
I've got TDS-3 which ought to detect anything left - it's reputedly the best anti-trojan around. And I've got a couple others which are good just in case.
Good point to check for hidden drivers, I'd forgot about that. I do plan to run SFC to replace any damaged system files from the trojans or cleaning.
I'll be seeing the client tomorrow, hopefully a couple hours will finish the cleaning without having to do either a complete reinstall or a repair install. So far it doesn't look like there's too much damage - winlogon,exe seems to have a problem, hopefully SFC will fix it. The system seems pretty stable and functional now, I just have to make sure nothing's left to start importing more trojans all over again.
which was quoted on another discussion of this article elsewhere on the Net:
"On December 20 [1994], Theo de Raadt was asked to resign from the NetBSD Project by the remaining members of 'core'. This was a very difficult decision to make, and resulted from Theo's long history of rudeness towards and abuse of users and developers of NetBSD. We believe that there is no place for that type of behaviour from representatives of the NetBSD Project, and that, overall, it has been damaging to the project.
This decision was difficult to make because Theo has a long history of positive contributions to the project. He was the principal caretaker of NetBSD's SPARC support, and has written too much code to mention.
We are certainly willing to accept (and would very much like to see) future contributions from Theo, but we believe that it is inappropriate for him to be an "official" representative of the project any longer."
I'd say that pretty well takes care of that. Theo is apparently an asshole. That he prostitutes himself to Daniel Lyons, a know anti-OSS/Linux FUD merchant, seems to make it clear that this rant is to be ignored by anybody with a brain, whether you like the BSDs or not.
It wasn't me, I was referring to the previous poster who claimed he submitted a bug report that included everything requested on the "how to". Talk to him.
In the meantime, I quote this from the NetBSD project which was quoted on another board:
"On December 20 [1994], Theo de Raadt was asked to resign from the NetBSD Project by the remaining members of 'core'. This was a very difficult decision to make, and resulted from Theo's long history of RUDENESS TOWARDS AND ABUSE OF USERS AND DEVELOPERS [my emphasis] of NetBSD. We believe that there is no place for that type of behaviour from representatives of the NetBSD Project, and that, overall, it has been damaging to the project.
This decision was difficult to make because Theo has a long history of positive contributions to the project. He was the principal caretaker of NetBSD's SPARC support, and has written too much code to mention.
We are certainly willing to accept (and would very much like to see) future contributions from Theo, but we believe that it is inappropriate for him to be an "official" representative of the project any longer."
So I would say that (certain portions of) BSD have indeed had a history of being rude to users. And the principal instigator is the individual now prostituting himself to Daniel Lyons who is a known anti-OSS/Linux FUD merchant.
"When we submitted the bug-report, with logs, version numbers, exact details on system setup and what was running, and everything else listed on the "how to file a bug-report" list, we got a response from Theo: "Come on! That's not nearly enough information!" He then closed the post, with no mention of what further information he wanted or needed, and no suggestion as to where else to try."
I've seen this attitude on Linux newsgroups, too, so it doesn't surprise me that BSD nerdboys have the same impatience.
While I see plenty of newbies posting totally inadequate questions on Linux newsgroups, the "How to Ask A Smart Question" document is NOT required reading for everybody on the planet by the age of five. Mostly I've seen it used to avoid dealing with newbie problems that might actually be a challenge to solve.
It also speeds things up if you at least try to be civil while pointing the newbie to the document while at the same time offering suggestions as to possible causes of their problem - something I've found a lot of nerdboys have difficulty comprehending.
Lyons is an asshole - probably just another "journalist" on the take from Microsoft.
He was the one asking Turner of LinuxWorld all sorts of creepy questions about the Sys-Con/Maureen O'Gara hit piece on Groklaw - obviously intending to do one of his own.
Sorry, my favorite band...And if they were on everybody's holding music, most people - except the rappers, soul, R&B, jazz, country-Western, punk, death metal and Gothic types - wouldn't mind. And if you could see their music videos while you wait, even those types wouldn't mind.
Hey! Great idea! Get video to everybody's phone and show PORN while you wait!
I can see the phone menu now: Press 1 for straight, press 2 for lesbian, press 3 for gay, press 4 for orgy, press 5 for fat women...
"You Americans do realise that the people you vote for like looking at pr0n as well ?"
Actually, according to quite a few Net rumors, the people we vote for are apparently involved in producing porn - kiddie porn at that.
I recently saw a LONG list of prominent Republicans throughout the country who were in past years officially charged with various forms of paedophilia, or other criminal behavior. I'm sure one could find an equal number of prominent Democrats if one went searching through court records, but the degree of hypocrisy associated with previous statements by these indicted Republicans was nauseating.
People are still trying to discover just where and what and WHOM the gay prostitute "journalist" Jeff Gannon was doing at the White House when he checked in on the Secret Service logs and never checked out.
Slashdot Mirror
There are a lot of people claiming to run uninfected naked machines for years.
Invariably what it means it they don't run ANY Microsoft products that access the Net - no IE, no Outlook, no Outlook Express, no nothing. AND they patch everything anyway.
They also never indicate their volume of email, volume of Web site access, nature of Web site access (do you access sports sites, porn sites?), etc.
To suggest that anybody else who RUNS Microsoft software on the Net can do the same just by not installing security software is just irresponsible and stupid.
It's been demonstrated that XP will get infected in twenty minutes put on the Net without patches and security software. With patches, it might last longer - maybe even months - but it WILL get infected if ANY Microsoft software (and possibly other common commercial software which has holes) accesses the Net from it.
I don't run any Microsoft software except Update on the Net. I got TODAY THREE viruses downloaded from my SBC Yahoo email account via Thunderbird (detected and cleaned by Avast). Without Avast running on my system, I probably would have viruses all over my system.
I just got through yesterday cleaning a client's machine that WAS naked on the Net with no patches, no firewall and no AV. Hundreds of spyware, hundreds of trojans.
It's bullshit to generalize that running naked is safer than having security software.
I believe that's not entirely true - that you can do EVERYTHING from the command line or scripts.
In my Windows 2003 server class, the teacher (who is a consultant as his primary job) complained how many of the Windows command line tools - things like migrating user accounts in Active Directory and the like - tend to screw up, so he avoids them like the plague.
While Windows seems to have a lot of command line tools, it pales against the UNIX shells and utilities that are much easier to use with each other because they follow a (more-or-less) common design model.
Perhaps the new Longhorn shell will be better, as it supposedly will support object piping and the like.
Oh, wait, they just pulled that from Longhorn...
If you're still running legacy COBOL apps on a legacy OS, you have worse problems with productivity than security, I'd say.
You're working for a company which will shortly be out of business (unless of course your company dominates your industry - other factors than IT do apply in the real world) - I suggest posting your resume now.
Right - the BLUE SOD is now the BLACK SOD.
Yes, Windows 2000 and XP CAN be brought dead to the metal in certain circumstances NOT involving hardware failure. I've seen it.
Besides, the OP's point was that Windows was ORIGINALLY not multiuser or secure and the DESIGN flaws from that are STILL present in the current versions, regardless of their current multiuser and memory protection capabilities. IE (a fucking WEB BROWSER) and its integration into the OS is just one example.
Ah, the Windows trolls have moderator points again!
"Insightful"?
After SEVERAL studies have shown OSS software to be higher code quality than most commercial software?
I don't think so.
Also, the only "worthy" software running on Windows seems to be the hundred thousand viruses and worms, against the ten or twenty such running on Linux. There probably are as many viruses running on Windows as there is commercial software.
Fuck off, troll.
This also perfectly applies to Microsoft's attitude toward security. If it isn't making Bill money, he just doesn't give a shit.
The other problem is programmer quality: if you don't have corporate standards - and quality control people who know enough about code security to enforce them - you get security problems. Most quality control people are just testing the program to see if it WORKS. They need to have people testing it to see if it can be BROKEN - or broken INTO.
"Look at a hacked file with .jpg extension in Outlook and you've got a problem. The best way to protect against it is to keep the scanning on."
Nope - best way is not to use Outlook. AND keep the scanning on.
Of course, in a corporate environment, you may not have such a choice.
Switch to either Grisoft AVG or Avast.
Both are free for home use, and are lightweight on resources. Neither are supposedly as good at catching everything as Norton or McAfee according to the tests, but they're quite good enough for home use where they aren't dealing with thousands of emails at a time.
I've used one or the other for over two years with no problems on my 2GHz AMD system. I switched from AVG to Avast when AVG suddenly started turning off its email scanner for no known reason after two years, and rather than figure it out, I just switched. Avast so far has given my no problems - once I turned off its sound notification (the screeching siren when it detects a virus and the loud voice announcing "the virus database has been updated" was ridiculous.)
I loaded a thirty-day trial version of TDS-3 on her machine and found there were only a couple trojans left.
One of them was that goddamn crap that names a file "t?skmgr.exe" - so that you can't delete it from the XP Recovery Console because stupid Microsoft won't let the RC delete command run wildcards (for "security" reasons, right?), and you can't SEE it in Explorer because it looks just like taskmgr.exe, so you can only tell which one it is by looking at where they appear in the file listing. Then they make it a hidden, system and read-only file and of course it's in use by a process, so Windows won't let you touch it.
Bart's PE and Knoppix couldn't help me with this one.
Acting on a tip from the Net, I loaded Winfile, the old Windows NT file manager, and managed to rename it, move it to another directory, so it couldn't be run, and after rebooting into safe mode, I could delete it.
The other trojan was the one that originally was driving me nuts. I forget how I finally got rid of that one.
There was still at least one spyware somewhere, so I loaded HijackThis on and got rid of some more crap.
And finally I found a "Security Agent" from "CastleCops" which was actually a trojan. The service was running but the rest of it had already been cleaned, so I disabled the service.
Plus I went into the Registry and clobbered everything I could find that wasn't a known user, Microsoft or Dell installed program. I think I cleaned out a lot iof spyware keys that even all the other antispyware programs didn't find.
Then I checked the client's account status and found she was running as Administrator, so I switched her to limited. That caused TDS-3 to stop working under her account (apparently it needs not only Admin status to install, but to run, no surprise given what it does). I got confused by XP's stupid "tri-mod flag" technigue of labeling all file folders faux "read-only" into thinking somehow the disk was screwed, but I finally determined that was not the case. So she's back to running as Administrator until I can tell her to create a new account (because I don't know what's been installed by her as Administrator so I don't think it's safe to just change her back to limited - something other than TDS-3 might break) and move her desktop icons over to the new profile.
She seems to be clean now - no system error messages, no popups, and the system seems stable.
It only took me another eight hours - mostly because I don't have a Bart's PE and Knoppix that's REALLY loaded with anti-trojan, AV, spyware and other tools. That's my next project - buff up my bootable tools so I can access ANY file ANYWHERE and kill it.
I get my hands on the asshole wrote that "PurityScan" adware trojan, I'm gonna nail his knees to the floor with railroad spikes - so he stays put while I really do some damage to him.
Somebody needs to start scanning Web sites where this crap comes from, report the assholes to the law, and get the lot thrown in jail. NONE of this stuff came in through email because my client uses Web mail exclusively. That means it came from Web sites. So why not set up a Web scanner that visits suspicious Web sites, downloads this crap into a sandbox, logs everything as evidence, then publishes it as a blacklist - a "reverse honeypot"?
Let's put it this way:
Windows is the Paris Hilton of operating systems.
It looks good, but it's wide open all the time.
Is that why Chris Lee said the following (obviously referring to Christensen, although the context seems to have been the Lord of the Rings):
Legendary Actor's Scathing Attack on Young Film Stars
By Sherna Noah, PA Showbusiness Correspondent
Movie legend Christopher Lee has criticised today's generation of younger stars for being "over-hyped".
Lee, 82, who has more than 200 films to his name, described some actors' performances as "holes in the air".
The actor, known for playing villains such as wizard Saruman in Lord of the Rings and Dracula, told Total Film magazine: "Johnny Depp, as far as I'm concerned, is number one.
"Of his generation, there's no one who can touch him.
"Some performers today, it's like looking at holes in the air."
The British actor, who made his name in the Hammer films, said: "You get these young, over-hyped stars with very little experience, pitched into big-budget movies in major roles and they can't begin to handle them.
"It's extremely dangerous because it means they're not going to last long."
"'I don't think the public knows what it wants Congress to do, but it wants Congress to do something,...They don't have a lot of confidence that Congress will do the right thing.'"
Alternative heading: Why Humans Don't Work.
By the time we have the resources and technology to terraform on a large scale, we will have "transmogrified" OURSELVES so we do not NEED to terraform planets.
A fully developed nanotech entity needs only five things:
1) Energy.
2) Matter.
3) Nanomass.
4) Knowledgebases.
5) Computing power.
A postbiological entity does not need food, air, water, or any of the things present day humans want to terraform a planet to provide.
A Transhuman might modify a planet or other object for other purposes, but "terraforming" as people usually refer to it would be pointless except as an experiment. It certainly won't be needed to provide "living space" as there is effectively unlimited "living space" for a Transhuman throughout space.
In fact, it WOULD be better if the SCO story had its own topic since it obviously is going to be long-running and complicated, with many updates. That's why Groklaw exists.
Otherwise that's entirely different from a single event that has a couple new lines of info added to one media's reporting of it. A court case gets major new info every time there's a new hearing or filing (well, almost every time - sometimes the hearing or filing is just boilerplate and not worth reporting on. This story is more like the latter.)
Yes, I told the client that software firewalls aren't as good as hardware firewalls. She may be springing for SBC DSL and since she has wireless, she might go for the 2Line wireless/powerline router which has a firewall in it.
I've got TDS-3 which ought to detect anything left - it's reputedly the best anti-trojan around. And I've got a couple others which are good just in case.
Good point to check for hidden drivers, I'd forgot about that. I do plan to run SFC to replace any damaged system files from the trojans or cleaning.
I'll be seeing the client tomorrow, hopefully a couple hours will finish the cleaning without having to do either a complete reinstall or a repair install. So far it doesn't look like there's too much damage - winlogon,exe seems to have a problem, hopefully SFC will fix it. The system seems pretty stable and functional now, I just have to make sure nothing's left to start importing more trojans all over again.
The list was sent to me in email, and I don't have it or the sources.
You may ASS-U-ME anything you wish. I couldn't care less.
Fine.
Don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out, moron.
And when BSD is even more marginalized than it is now, don't expect anybody on the Linux side to give a shit since you obviously don't.
which was quoted on another discussion of this article elsewhere on the Net:
"On December 20 [1994], Theo de Raadt was asked to resign from the NetBSD Project by the remaining members of 'core'. This was a very difficult decision to make, and resulted from Theo's long history of rudeness towards and abuse of users and developers of NetBSD. We believe that there is no place for that type of behaviour from representatives of the NetBSD Project, and that, overall, it has been damaging to the project.
This decision was difficult to make because Theo has a long history of positive contributions to the project. He was the principal caretaker of NetBSD's SPARC support, and has written too much code to mention.
We are certainly willing to accept (and would very much like to see) future contributions from Theo, but we believe that it is inappropriate for him to be an "official" representative of the project any longer."
I'd say that pretty well takes care of that. Theo is apparently an asshole. That he prostitutes himself to Daniel Lyons, a know anti-OSS/Linux FUD merchant, seems to make it clear that this rant is to be ignored by anybody with a brain, whether you like the BSDs or not.
It wasn't me, I was referring to the previous poster who claimed he submitted a bug report that included everything requested on the "how to". Talk to him.
In the meantime, I quote this from the NetBSD project which was quoted on another board:
"On December 20 [1994], Theo de Raadt was asked to resign from the NetBSD Project by the remaining members of 'core'. This was a very difficult decision to make, and resulted from Theo's long history of RUDENESS TOWARDS AND ABUSE OF USERS AND DEVELOPERS [my emphasis] of NetBSD. We believe that there is no place for that type of behaviour from representatives of the NetBSD Project, and that, overall, it has been damaging to the project.
This decision was difficult to make because Theo has a long history of positive contributions to the project. He was the principal caretaker of NetBSD's SPARC support, and has written too much code to mention.
We are certainly willing to accept (and would very much like to see) future contributions from Theo, but we believe that it is inappropriate for him to be an "official" representative of the project any longer."
So I would say that (certain portions of) BSD have indeed had a history of being rude to users. And the principal instigator is the individual now prostituting himself to Daniel Lyons who is a known anti-OSS/Linux FUD merchant.
So I'm not impressed by Theo's rant.
What part of this didn't you understand?
"When we submitted the bug-report, with logs, version numbers, exact details on system setup and what was running, and everything else listed on the "how to file a bug-report" list, we got a response from Theo: "Come on! That's not nearly enough information!" He then closed the post, with no mention of what further information he wanted or needed, and no suggestion as to where else to try."
I've seen this attitude on Linux newsgroups, too, so it doesn't surprise me that BSD nerdboys have the same impatience.
While I see plenty of newbies posting totally inadequate questions on Linux newsgroups, the "How to Ask A Smart Question" document is NOT required reading for everybody on the planet by the age of five. Mostly I've seen it used to avoid dealing with newbie problems that might actually be a challenge to solve.
It also speeds things up if you at least try to be civil while pointing the newbie to the document while at the same time offering suggestions as to possible causes of their problem - something I've found a lot of nerdboys have difficulty comprehending.
It's a Daniel Lyons FUD piece.
Lyons is an asshole - probably just another "journalist" on the take from Microsoft.
He was the one asking Turner of LinuxWorld all sorts of creepy questions about the Sys-Con/Maureen O'Gara hit piece on Groklaw - obviously intending to do one of his own.
when there's nothing to download on it because it's all "legal"...
Press 4 for The Corrs!
Sorry, my favorite band...And if they were on everybody's holding music, most people - except the rappers, soul, R&B, jazz, country-Western, punk, death metal and Gothic types - wouldn't mind. And if you could see their music videos while you wait, even those types wouldn't mind.
Hey! Great idea! Get video to everybody's phone and show PORN while you wait!
I can see the phone menu now: Press 1 for straight, press 2 for lesbian, press 3 for gay, press 4 for orgy, press 5 for fat women...
"the company now spends $2 billion a year--more than a third of its research budget--on security-related issues."
"You Americans do realise that the people you vote for like looking at pr0n as well ?"
Actually, according to quite a few Net rumors, the people we vote for are apparently involved in producing porn - kiddie porn at that.
I recently saw a LONG list of prominent Republicans throughout the country who were in past years officially charged with various forms of paedophilia, or other criminal behavior. I'm sure one could find an equal number of prominent Democrats if one went searching through court records, but the degree of hypocrisy associated with previous statements by these indicted Republicans was nauseating.
People are still trying to discover just where and what and WHOM the gay prostitute "journalist" Jeff Gannon was doing at the White House when he checked in on the Secret Service logs and never checked out.