Re:What annoys me about the Reuters article...
on
SCO Offline
·
· Score: 1
Let me start by saying I HATE microsoft and the security of their software IS pathetic. However, this virus spreads by stupid users that open viral email attachments. It has nothing to do with any flaws in windows. The same virus could have worked with linux except that linux users are smarter than windows users.
Re:SCO running Apache?
on
SCO Offline
·
· Score: 1
Its not the BSD license either its the apache license.
OK listen. I hate SCO as much as any of you. This is a clear pump and dump. However, I am getting sick of people saying SCO or someone wanting to discredit the open source community wrote this worm. I can think of A LOT of linux supporters that would have done this in a second if they had thought of it. The chances are, it was a linux supporter. I'm not saying whether I support the people that did this or not. I'm really not sure but I am also getting tired of this "holier than thou" attitude of people who say its not good because it makes open source look bad blah blah blah. I'm beginning to think we must fight fire with fire. We must fight these tacticts of SCO, tactics that may even be illegal under RICO, with tactics that are less than legal. Maybe it is time we start doing things designed to bring down SCO, just as they are trying to bring down linux. The legal process will take years. SCO will probobly do alot more damage in that time than some worm written by a linux supporter. So we must do something. WE MUST FIGHT!
OK listen. I hate SCO as much as any of you. This is a clear pump and dump. However, I am getting sick of people saying SCO or someone wanting to discredit the open source community wrote this worm. I can think of ALOT of linux supporters that would have done this in a second if they had thought of it. The chances are, it was a linux supporter. I'm not saying whether I support the people that did this or not. I'm really not sure but I am also getting tired of this "holier than thou" attitude of people who say its not good because it makes open source look bad blah blah blah. I'm beginning to think we must fight fire with fire. We must fight these tacticts of SCO, tactics that may even be illegal under RICO, with tactics that are less than legal. Maybe it is time we start doing things designed to bring down SCO, just as they are trying to bring down linux. The legal process will take years. SCO will probobly do alot more damage in that time than some worm written by a linux supporter. So we must do something. WE MUST FIGHT!
That doesn't even make any sence. What are terroristic means accept those which fit the defintion of terrorism. This is like saying their intent was to use means which met the definition of the intent to use means which met the definition of......you get the idea. The definition i quoted had to do with intent. It has NOTHING to do with means so the phrase terroristic means is meaningless.
Sky != civilian population Airplane != civilian population People on airplane != civilian population
Anyone that kills anyone in america most likely killed an american civilian but that doesn't make them a terrorist. Oh wait, it does if they dont have white skin. I get it now.
I'm not even really argueing the people that hijacked the planes weren't terrorists. I'm saying they aren't under the US OFFICIAL diffintion. Not that this matters anyway as we all no, anything anyone does against the US governments interests is terrorist. If we really wanted to be accurate the U.S. is the REAL terrorist threat. We were condemned by the world court for being terrorists in iran contra. Of course we refused to pay the reparations the court ordered. We then went on to veto a UN resolution calling on all states (meaning us) to abide by international law.
I dont think the terrorists on those planes really had any intent to intimidate anyone. There is evidence that many of the hijackers didn't even know they were on a suicide mission. Also, those that did probobly did it purely for the sake of killing Amerikans and nothing beyond that.
The US Code defines terrorism as a crime that appears to be intended to (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by assassination or kidnapping.
None of the crimes committed by the 9/11 attackers fall within the "intent" definition of the US code. They were hijackers and mass murderers, but not terrorists.
The U.S. is officially committed to what is called "low-intensity warfare." That's the official doctrine. If you read the standard definitions of low-intensity conflict and compare them with official definitions of "terrorism" in army manuals, or the U.S. Code you find they're almost the same.
I'm getting sick of hearing ADD/ADHD don't exist. It most certianly does and the medications can help many people function better in society. It is possible that it is overdiagnosed but that it doesn't exist sounds to me like the arguement of one of the people who won't imunize their kids. That being said I wish we did live in a society where nobody cared. Where someone could function just as well with ADD as without. I might quote alan watts in his book, The Joyous Cosmology. " "Listen, there's something I must tell. I've never, never seen it so clearly. But it doesn't matter a bit if you don't understand, because each one of you is quite perfect as you are, even if you don't know it. Life is basically a gesture, but no one, no thing, is making it. There is no necessity for it to happen, and none for it to go on happening. For it isn't being driven by anything; it just happens freely of itself. It's a gesture of motion, of sound, of color, and just as no one is making it, it isn't happening to anyone. There is simply no problem of life; it is completely purposeless play--exuberance which is its own end. Basically there is the gesture. Time, space, and multiplicity are complications of it. There is no reason whatever to explain it, for explanations are just another form of complexity, a new manifestation of life on top of life, of gestures gesturing. Pain and suffering are simply extreme forms of play, and there isn't anything in the whole universe to be afraid of because it doesn't happen to anyone! There isn't any substantial ego at all. The ego is a kind of flip, a knowing of knowing, a fearing of fearing. It's a curlicue, an extra jazz to experience, a sort of double-take or reverberation, a dithering of consciousness which is the same as anxiety."
Yeah but its really not that hard to remove addresses. I would bet they could do it in a matter of hours if they really wanted to but they would rather intimidate people into not sending them comments.
Slashdot Mirror
Let me start by saying I HATE microsoft and the security of their software IS pathetic. However, this virus spreads by stupid users that open viral email attachments. It has nothing to do with any flaws in windows. The same virus could have worked with linux except that linux users are smarter than windows users.
Its not the BSD license either its the apache license.
Both, they probobly got ddos'd by someone ON slashdot. (Im not a troll, its probobly true)
Actually thats an interesting idea. Someone should write a worm that targets SCO's email system. That really would affect them.
It is out of the DNS now it seems.
(01:08pm) Looking up www.sco.com....
(01:08pm) Could not resolve.
Well im all for hiring a hit man to deal with darl but thats just me.
This is nothing new and im not really sure why its considered news. ISPs have been doing this since before worm.SCO.A. Look here
OK listen. I hate SCO as much as any of you. This is a clear pump and dump. However, I am getting sick of people saying SCO or someone wanting to discredit the open source community wrote this worm. I can think of A LOT of linux supporters that would have done this in a second if they had thought of it. The chances are, it was a linux supporter. I'm not saying whether I support the people that did this or not. I'm really not sure but I am also getting tired of this "holier than thou" attitude of people who say its not good because it makes open source look bad blah blah blah. I'm beginning to think we must fight fire with fire. We must fight these tacticts of SCO, tactics that may even be illegal under RICO, with tactics that are less than legal. Maybe it is time we start doing things designed to bring down SCO, just as they are trying to bring down linux. The legal process will take years. SCO will probobly do alot more damage in that time than some worm written by a linux supporter. So we must do something. WE MUST FIGHT!
OK listen. I hate SCO as much as any of you. This is a clear pump and dump. However, I am getting sick of people saying SCO or someone wanting to discredit the open source community wrote this worm. I can think of ALOT of linux supporters that would have done this in a second if they had thought of it. The chances are, it was a linux supporter. I'm not saying whether I support the people that did this or not. I'm really not sure but I am also getting tired of this "holier than thou" attitude of people who say its not good because it makes open source look bad blah blah blah. I'm beginning to think we must fight fire with fire. We must fight these tacticts of SCO, tactics that may even be illegal under RICO, with tactics that are less than legal. Maybe it is time we start doing things designed to bring down SCO, just as they are trying to bring down linux. The legal process will take years. SCO will probobly do alot more damage in that time than some worm written by a linux supporter. So we must do something. WE MUST FIGHT!
Nevermind i figured it out.
Yes but im too stupid to turn that into something I can actually run.
erm, no he didn't. If your company was all linux you would not be affected.
Can someone please post a torrent to download the executable?
Response here.
That doesn't even make any sence. What are terroristic means accept those which fit the defintion of terrorism. This is like saying their intent was to use means which met the definition of the intent to use means which met the definition of......you get the idea. The definition i quoted had to do with intent. It has NOTHING to do with means so the phrase terroristic means is meaningless.
it doesn't matter what they did. It has to do with intent not the result.
(i) intimidate or coerce a CIVILIAN POPULATION.
Sky != civilian population
Airplane != civilian population
People on airplane != civilian population
Anyone that kills anyone in america most likely killed an american civilian but that doesn't make them a terrorist. Oh wait, it does if they dont have white skin. I get it now.
I'm not even really argueing the people that hijacked the planes weren't terrorists. I'm saying they aren't under the US OFFICIAL diffintion. Not that this matters anyway as we all no, anything anyone does against the US governments interests is terrorist. If we really wanted to be accurate the U.S. is the REAL terrorist threat. We were condemned by the world court for being terrorists in iran contra. Of course we refused to pay the reparations the court ordered. We then went on to veto a UN resolution calling on all states (meaning us) to abide by international law.
I dont think the terrorists on those planes really had any intent to intimidate anyone. There is evidence that many of the hijackers didn't even know they were on a suicide mission. Also, those that did probobly did it purely for the sake of killing Amerikans and nothing beyond that.
The US Code defines terrorism as a crime that appears to be intended to (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by assassination or kidnapping.
None of the crimes committed by the 9/11 attackers fall within the "intent" definition of the US code. They were hijackers and mass murderers, but not terrorists.
The U.S. is officially committed to what is called "low-intensity warfare." That's the official doctrine. If you read the standard definitions of low-intensity conflict and compare them with official definitions of "terrorism" in army manuals, or the U.S. Code you find they're almost the same.
hear hear!
so all the potheads could live on a comune and farm togeather.
I'm getting sick of hearing ADD/ADHD don't exist. It most certianly does and the medications can help many people function better in society. It is possible that it is overdiagnosed but that it doesn't exist sounds to me like the arguement of one of the people who won't imunize their kids. That being said I wish we did live in a society where nobody cared. Where someone could function just as well with ADD as without. I might quote alan watts in his book, The Joyous Cosmology. " "Listen, there's something I must tell. I've never, never seen it so clearly. But it doesn't matter a bit if you don't understand, because each one of you is quite perfect as you are, even if you don't know it. Life is basically a gesture, but no one, no thing, is making it. There is no necessity for it to happen, and none for it to go on happening. For it isn't being driven by anything; it just happens freely of itself. It's a gesture of motion, of sound, of color, and just as no one is making it, it isn't happening to anyone. There is simply no problem of life; it is completely purposeless play--exuberance which is its own end. Basically there is the gesture. Time, space, and multiplicity are complications of it. There is no reason whatever to explain it, for explanations are just another form of complexity, a new manifestation of life on top of life, of gestures gesturing. Pain and suffering are simply extreme forms of play, and there isn't anything in the whole universe to be afraid of because it doesn't happen to anyone! There isn't any substantial ego at all. The ego is a kind of flip, a knowing of knowing, a fearing of fearing. It's a curlicue, an extra jazz to experience, a sort of double-take or reverberation, a dithering of consciousness which is the same as anxiety."
I sell crack for the CIA. Really, I do!
Personally I trust al jazeera WAY more than I trust fox news.
Yeah but its really not that hard to remove addresses. I would bet they could do it in a matter of hours if they really wanted to but they would rather intimidate people into not sending them comments.