twitter, I was wondering if you could take a few moments to respond to jwilcox's post in this thread? Since I'm on your list and you never enabled comments on it, I'm sure that like myself there are a lot of people in there who would like to refute your claims.
Also, could you comment on what is your motivation behind things likethese?
BTW, please don't use the name troll account you created for me, thanks.
So if I read you right, anyone who agrees with twitter must be one of his sock-puppets, since it is inconceivable that anyone could really agree with him.
No, only anyone who replies to him, talks like him and shills like him.
Seriously, I've read a few of twitter's posts, and I don't see what all the outrage about him is all about
Well, I suppose you could consider posting with 15 different accounts an outrage, but that's a personal opinion.
And this witch hunt for his alleged sock-puppet aliases looks like nothing less than outright bullying to me
Oh, twitter's really good at that too. Not only does he run joe job attacks on people he doesn't like, he also likes to collect evidence on people who are not properlittlezealots like him. Possibly for future prosecution under the GNU/Emergency Act or something, I don't know.
Especially since no claims are ever backed up by evidence.
Yes, it's the same singsong voice on all your accounts, including the new one.
Who pays you for all this shit, twitter? Surely no one can spend so much time and effort to post on a website unless they are being compensated somehow?
"right handed" is twitter's new sockpuppet. Or do you think it's a coincidence that four of his other accounts are posting in this thread and he's agreeing with them?
That "so bad you're posting at -1" thing is the same tactic he's used time and time again to call attention to his posts with accounts that are not posting at -1.
Here's another thread on this same article with the same bullshit.
I frankly don't understand why. This is not black magic, a trojan cannot enter a computer via osmosis or a teleporter, and it cannot function without being detected, unless it does absolutely nothing of value. The attack vectors and the symptoms are known. It follows that it's relatively simple to know if you have been compromised in any way. Unless you know something about the way Windows works that I don't?
How many Windows viruses, trojans, and other malware programs are there successfully spreading in the wild?
MyDoom, which holds the record for fastest-spreading worm ever, did so through email and required significant user action.
OK, now how many Linux, BSD, or OS X viruses, trojans, other malware programs are successfully spreading in the wild? ZERO, ZILCH, NADA, ZIP.
Statistically, there are about as many of those as there are normal desktop computer users for the platform, since most of these attacks rely on social engineering (as opposed to actual vulnerabilities) to succeed. So the lack of malware for your platform is not due to its inherent superiority, but to the size of its installed base. Windows may have more attack vectors than Linux or OS X, but that doesn't mean that they can be avoided with $0.05 worth of simple common sense.
So you tell me: How difficult is it to secure Windows? Must be damn near impossible.
No, that's why I asked you the question. It's not at all. If it were, those 100K machine botnets would have 100 million zombies instead, and that's not the case, is it? Or do you figure the malware vendors are just not interested in a potential pool of that size? By most measures there's about a billion computers in the planet running some version of Windows.
You even admit that despite your self-proclaimed superior ability to secure Windows, you were still a victim of a trojan.
Oh, sure. But there's no need to be quippy about it. That happened almost 20 years ago, and it was the first and last time any of my systems were compromised. I guess I'm a good learner.
And by the way, "superior ability" is not needed at all. Just patch your boxes and don't download or run stuff from untrusted sources. That should take care of about 99.99% of all your problems. And that's true of any OS.
One of the things to remember about countries like Chile (and Argentina, Venezuela, Mexico, etc) is that there's a HUGE divide between the upper and lower middle class, in the sense that there's no true middle class like there is in the US, Canada or Germany. They also tend to suffer from unregulated state-owned monopolies that have subtle effects on the spread of technology. For example, in the 90s getting on the Internet in Mexico was extremely expensive because of a stupid charge-per-call rule the state telephony company had. If your modem was dropping connections, you were in for pain at the end of the month when the bill arrived. I remember having to call home and ask my dad for more money just to pay the damn phone bill.
All this has the effect of putting the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder at a disadvantage. So the availability of cheap hardware running cheap software is important, because it offsets costs like electricity and broadband. There are retailers in Santiago, Caracas and Buenos Aires that will sell you essentially the same machines Dell or Gateway sell in the US. Trust me, those are not contributing to the tech revolution down there. It's the little mom and pop shops that sell crappy boxes with Linux (or pirated Windows...) that are doing that.
Is it really? I've owned many Windows computers over the past 20 years and I've never had any problems with security. Well, there was that one floppy in the early 90s I accidentally booted off of...
There's 8 Windows boxes here on my den right now. Three servers, two laptops and three workstations. None of them are pwned, rooted, infected, trojaned or otherwise compromised. And they've never been. None of my Server 2003 colo boxes have ever been compromised either. I'm curious, what do you find difficult about securing Windows?
Considering how difficult and expensive it is to track down, indict and convict spammers and malware peddlers (not to mention they later tend to escape and commit suicide), I doubt CNN has the time or energy to do this.
You're never going to fix people's stupidity, which is ultimately the root of the problem.
That's my data point, take it or leave it. "Popular" is not limited to whether or not Michael Dell likes you, and the world is not just Europe and North America.
There's a small company in Chile that sells custom-built boxes with it installed, and they sell quite a lot of them to lower-middle income families in the capital.
Don't ask me why they picked it, I have no idea. Having seen one of these systems up close, they're really crappy (hardware-wise), but I guess they work well enough. They also provide tech support for a nominal fee.
All passive filters I know require replacement because they get clogged, or the active elements eventually decay. Beyond making jokes about swapping the church bricks five years from now, TFA was a bit light on the details. Does anyone know how does this works, from a chemical perspective?
It's been about four months since I last flew into the States, but a while ago I overheard a conversation about how the shoe check was being phased out at some airports? Is that true? Or is it only for international flights?
This is the database that added IDENTITY columns in 2003, correct? The same one that took about a decade to finally work correctly outside of the yay-cobol-million-row-scrollable-rowset model used in the OS/390 version, right?
I recognize that intoxicating smell of underdog heroics is diminished when considering this problem in a logical way, so I completely understand that you so desperately want to keep the "us vs. them" status quo and "don't give a shit". It's been 14 years since I first heard about open source and how it was going to like totally kill Microsoft, so hopefully you have just 14 more to go.
I think the key difference you've failed to recognize is that the people who have done the things you point to aren't trying to get in good with Microsoft
Perhaps you'd like to read my post again. Attention to the part where I suggest trying to meet them halfway would be appreciated.
A 300lb gorilla is either abnormally small, juvenile, or perhaps a large female.
It's also faster and more nimble than the 800lb one. And it's still 300lb.
After years of calling it "open sores" and saying open source is a "cancer"
I hate to barge in on the fun here, but after years of calling them "Micro$haft" and "Windoze" and lame outdated jokes about Bob and Clippy, not to mention the massive FUD campaign against Vista, do you really wonder why they'd trust you at all?
You're not going to get rid of Microsoft, much as twitter & co. would want you to believe. So I'd recommend you eye them suspiciously and try to figure out if they're being open and straightforward about what they're doing. A sort of "keep your friends close and your enemies closer" deal.
My personal perception - admittedly a limited view of a slice of the company as viewed from the outside - is that the rank and file are more and more aware of the need to play fair in order to compete effectively. They know that they have some really good software, but they have to justify the costs that go with it. Interoperability is one way to do that, as long as it's in everybody's interest and not just theirs.
I think Microsoft is changing, but it's not going to happen overnight. You can either give it a chance, or continue down the same path. They still own 90% of the desktop, their server market share is growing and either way they're still shoveling money every quarter. They're still the 300lb gorilla, and charging them head on while screaming is not going to work very well.
Slashdot Mirror
twitter, I was wondering if you could take a few moments to respond to jwilcox's post in this thread? Since I'm on your list and you never enabled comments on it, I'm sure that like myself there are a lot of people in there who would like to refute your claims.
Also, could you comment on what is your motivation behind things like these?
BTW, please don't use the name troll account you created for me, thanks.
(sorry for the OT)
No, only anyone who replies to him, talks like him and shills like him.
Well, I suppose you could consider posting with 15 different accounts an outrage, but that's a personal opinion.
Oh, twitter's really good at that too. Not only does he run joe job attacks on people he doesn't like, he also likes to collect evidence on people who are not proper little zealots like him. Possibly for future prosecution under the GNU/Emergency Act or something, I don't know.
Enjoy.
Yes, it's the same singsong voice on all your accounts, including the new one.
Who pays you for all this shit, twitter? Surely no one can spend so much time and effort to post on a website unless they are being compensated somehow?
"right handed" is twitter's new sockpuppet. Or do you think it's a coincidence that four of his other accounts are posting in this thread and he's agreeing with them?
That "so bad you're posting at -1" thing is the same tactic he's used time and time again to call attention to his posts with accounts that are not posting at -1.
Here's another thread on this same article with the same bullshit.
Sorry you fell for that.
Yeah, because it's super hard to open a console and run netstat -a or look at the traffic logs on my router.
OK... how?
I frankly don't understand why. This is not black magic, a trojan cannot enter a computer via osmosis or a teleporter, and it cannot function without being detected, unless it does absolutely nothing of value. The attack vectors and the symptoms are known. It follows that it's relatively simple to know if you have been compromised in any way. Unless you know something about the way Windows works that I don't?
You are so entertaining when you're angry, trollboy. Angry, angry, angry. Always angry.
MyDoom, which holds the record for fastest-spreading worm ever, did so through email and required significant user action.
Statistically, there are about as many of those as there are normal desktop computer users for the platform, since most of these attacks rely on social engineering (as opposed to actual vulnerabilities) to succeed. So the lack of malware for your platform is not due to its inherent superiority, but to the size of its installed base. Windows may have more attack vectors than Linux or OS X, but that doesn't mean that they can be avoided with $0.05 worth of simple common sense.
No, that's why I asked you the question. It's not at all. If it were, those 100K machine botnets would have 100 million zombies instead, and that's not the case, is it? Or do you figure the malware vendors are just not interested in a potential pool of that size? By most measures there's about a billion computers in the planet running some version of Windows.
Oh, sure. But there's no need to be quippy about it. That happened almost 20 years ago, and it was the first and last time any of my systems were compromised. I guess I'm a good learner.
And by the way, "superior ability" is not needed at all. Just patch your boxes and don't download or run stuff from untrusted sources. That should take care of about 99.99% of all your problems. And that's true of any OS.
One of the things to remember about countries like Chile (and Argentina, Venezuela, Mexico, etc) is that there's a HUGE divide between the upper and lower middle class, in the sense that there's no true middle class like there is in the US, Canada or Germany. They also tend to suffer from unregulated state-owned monopolies that have subtle effects on the spread of technology. For example, in the 90s getting on the Internet in Mexico was extremely expensive because of a stupid charge-per-call rule the state telephony company had. If your modem was dropping connections, you were in for pain at the end of the month when the bill arrived. I remember having to call home and ask my dad for more money just to pay the damn phone bill.
All this has the effect of putting the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder at a disadvantage. So the availability of cheap hardware running cheap software is important, because it offsets costs like electricity and broadband. There are retailers in Santiago, Caracas and Buenos Aires that will sell you essentially the same machines Dell or Gateway sell in the US. Trust me, those are not contributing to the tech revolution down there. It's the little mom and pop shops that sell crappy boxes with Linux (or pirated Windows...) that are doing that.
Is it really? I've owned many Windows computers over the past 20 years and I've never had any problems with security. Well, there was that one floppy in the early 90s I accidentally booted off of...
There's 8 Windows boxes here on my den right now. Three servers, two laptops and three workstations. None of them are pwned, rooted, infected, trojaned or otherwise compromised. And they've never been. None of my Server 2003 colo boxes have ever been compromised either. I'm curious, what do you find difficult about securing Windows?
Considering how difficult and expensive it is to track down, indict and convict spammers and malware peddlers (not to mention they later tend to escape and commit suicide), I doubt CNN has the time or energy to do this.
You're never going to fix people's stupidity, which is ultimately the root of the problem.
That's my data point, take it or leave it. "Popular" is not limited to whether or not Michael Dell likes you, and the world is not just Europe and North America.
Of course you can also run Windows and avoid doing unsafe, stupid things. That usually works.
Since I'm on a 3270 terminal to an OS/390 box the size of your house right now, here's your nickel back, and a check for $50.
There's a small company in Chile that sells custom-built boxes with it installed, and they sell quite a lot of them to lower-middle income families in the capital.
Don't ask me why they picked it, I have no idea. Having seen one of these systems up close, they're really crappy (hardware-wise), but I guess they work well enough. They also provide tech support for a nominal fee.
Sez the moron with 30 accounts.
Oh, I fly into SFO all the time from BC. Damn. I really hate taking my shoes off because I have to remember to wear my good socks...
OK, that makes sense. Being originally from a third-world country the thought of repaving a road is alien to me... <g>
All passive filters I know require replacement because they get clogged, or the active elements eventually decay. Beyond making jokes about swapping the church bricks five years from now, TFA was a bit light on the details. Does anyone know how does this works, from a chemical perspective?
It's been about four months since I last flew into the States, but a while ago I overheard a conversation about how the shoe check was being phased out at some airports? Is that true? Or is it only for international flights?
Completely offtopic, but just in case someone actually doubts who "ibane" is after reading "his" post, take a look at this journal entry.
So in other words this is useful when your DBMS toolset sucks.
This is the database that added IDENTITY columns in 2003, correct? The same one that took about a decade to finally work correctly outside of the yay-cobol-million-row-scrollable-rowset model used in the OS/390 version, right?
I think I'll stick with MSSQL and Oracle, thanks.
I recognize that intoxicating smell of underdog heroics is diminished when considering this problem in a logical way, so I completely understand that you so desperately want to keep the "us vs. them" status quo and "don't give a shit". It's been 14 years since I first heard about open source and how it was going to like totally kill Microsoft, so hopefully you have just 14 more to go.
Perhaps you'd like to read my post again. Attention to the part where I suggest trying to meet them halfway would be appreciated.
It's also faster and more nimble than the 800lb one. And it's still 300lb.
I hate to barge in on the fun here, but after years of calling them "Micro$haft" and "Windoze" and lame outdated jokes about Bob and Clippy, not to mention the massive FUD campaign against Vista, do you really wonder why they'd trust you at all?
You're not going to get rid of Microsoft, much as twitter & co. would want you to believe. So I'd recommend you eye them suspiciously and try to figure out if they're being open and straightforward about what they're doing. A sort of "keep your friends close and your enemies closer" deal.
My personal perception - admittedly a limited view of a slice of the company as viewed from the outside - is that the rank and file are more and more aware of the need to play fair in order to compete effectively. They know that they have some really good software, but they have to justify the costs that go with it. Interoperability is one way to do that, as long as it's in everybody's interest and not just theirs.
I think Microsoft is changing, but it's not going to happen overnight. You can either give it a chance, or continue down the same path. They still own 90% of the desktop, their server market share is growing and either way they're still shoveling money every quarter. They're still the 300lb gorilla, and charging them head on while screaming is not going to work very well.