You can rest assured that your statement is correct. Eron is the tip of the iceberg. Notice how many Texas good-old-boys were involved in that? Little goes on in Texas' big business without lots of back scratching first. Often this type junk goes all the way to the capital.
Bluntly stated, your assessment is in error. In no way, shape, or form could this of ever been considered to be a "small hole" or minor. As local application exploits go, it's about as big as it gets short of delivering root access.
If you have any application which is to perform task-x and an exploit can be used to destroy and and all work that should be achieved by doing task-x, I'd say you should just burn your box because it's worthless. In other words, it was a VERY significant issue. The fact that the author refused to even acknowledge the significance of such an issue pretty much demotes him to the realm of the ignorant, not to mention blind and closed minded.
I honestly don't have a problem with Postfix, per se, however, I have a significant problem with the blind leading the blind and then bragging about how blind they are. As if it were a bonus.
I'm fully aware of what the exploit was. If you bothered to read it, you would of found that it would of actually been fairly easy to exploit. Furthermore, the write-up even offers additional information on how it could of been more easily exploited. Also, you seemed to of missed the part where users could submit mail from ANY local user without any trace where the mail originated from.
Just because something hasn't been exploited doesn't mean it's hard. Second part of the exploit, which you seemingly overlooked, could of been exploited millions of times and chances are, no one would of ever known. Fact of the matter is, no one really knows if it was ever exploited.
Seriously, this was a serious exploit and could of easily been exploited if someone had wanted to.
As far as I can remember, this was a problem. In fact, I remember people talking about it even in 2002. For such a widely known exploit, you would of thought, had it been fixed, people would of bothered to make it public.
Compared to the 4-12 m/g you get from a hummer, this thing should be great.
As for stealth, well, if you really need stealth, that's why they have soldiers with feet. AFAIK, that's the only official "stealth" activities that is part of our fighting doctrine. Everything else is "low profile", "low visability", etc.
Besides, as I read the article, this is not part of a forward fighting force. This, in turn, further removes demand on the supply line. This vehicle is supposed to be a support* vehicle as is.
Support = rear guard, scouting, patrol, chemical & biological detection, etc. Doesn't really appear to be targeting primary attack vehicle or even APC type stuff. It's basically a multifunction service/patrol vehicle.
Check the archives. Someguy through a huge fit about the author refusing to even acknoledge the fact that it's a problem even though everyone agrees that it is.
Again, IIRC, Postfix has a local exploit. To my knowledge, it has never been fixed.
there's no reason the truck needs more than 200 hp
Bzzz. That's just plain wrong.
They need 300+ hp for good reason. First, they carry heavy equipment and people. Secondly, some of the terrain these things may need to run in may be at high elevation. If they need to run at 10,000-15,000+ feet, that alone will considerably effect available hp. Then, plan on some wear and tear. Add an the scotching heat or other such horrible environments where the airfilter is resticting air flow. Now, allow for minor par failure (stuck lifter or valve, etc), you're no where near 300hp.
After it's all said and done, if you allow for realistic use, wear/tear and operating conditions, the surplus hp is needed. ZERO question about it. Period.
I'd sure hate to be a soldier stuck in a crappy vehicle that you under-designed. Doomed from the start to say the least.
Shesh! Either the parent poster is a complete dolt or he didn't bother to read the article. He's modded +5 when it should of been -1 troll some such thing. I point out the obvious and get rated -1 for off topic.
Love how some moderators don't seem to understand their job.
Pick the text apart all you like it makes ZERO difference. I think his intent was rather clear. If my interpretation differs from what HE meant, I'm sure we'll hear about it.
In the mean time, you need to accept that people don't always say (write even) EXACTLY what they mean.
I've worked with many Indians and I must say some were a pleasure to work with. The others were a horrible experience because of the language barrier. Worse yet, I was one of the leads on a very large project. Long story short, with the ones that I had even minor communication issues with, I *NEVER* knew what I'd get back from them. Sometimes it was spot on. Other times, what I got back had absolutely nothing to do with the project and you're left wondering why it didn't raise a flag with them in the first place.
That doesn't make them bad people or even bad workers, it just highlights that ANY language/communication issues are SERIOUS problems. It alone can doom any project regardless of the nature of the problem (comprehension skills, poor transfer, accent, or even different native languages).
No, that's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he should be able to as effectively communicate with them as with any other native speaker.
I have run into this MANY times and I can tell you it's a MAJOR problem. This is not bigotry. It's a simple fact that ANY barrier to communication (work or life) cause problems and confusion.
How many times do you see job adds which read, "must have excellent communication and presentation skills". Is that bigotry? Of course not. It's people looking for other people that are not going to further complicate the job they need filled.
Communication the most basic skill required to effectively work. Period.
What platforms does it run on and what widget set was used to develop it? The homepage really doesn't show anything...other than a couple of screenshots.
From the plug in section, it seems to imply that it uses MFC. The Win platform needs another modeler like Gates needs another hole in his head. Hopefully, if it's worth a darn, it will be available of Linux and other Unix PDQ. I'm not holding my breath as it never seems to happen. Go figure....
DO NOT use a cross platform GUI toolkit, they all end up looking like crap, and pissing users of all the platforms off because the look and feel is all wrong.
LOL.
You've obviously never used wxWindows. It has the native look and feel of each platform. Period. wxWindows rocks. I highly recommend you go check it out before you comment further on GUI toolkits.
Actually, as I understand it, that's not entirely true. While Aegis does have support for "a process", it is not mandatory. Rather, steps can be skipped and ignored. Furthermore, you can elect to adopt only the portions of the process that you like (test cases, etc). That means you only have to use as much as the process as you desire or none at all. In other words, it allows for a process framework to be used where developer supplied content fills in the framework or you can have null steps for each part of that framework leaving you with only the toolset behind.
Long story short, I believe that you've been misinformed. Feel free to correct as need.
Simple fact is, awareness of buffer overflow exploits has been high for a very long time. Anytime you have a buffer overflow, it is a serious problem. That doesn't mean that every overflow can be exploited by running code, however, it a bug nontheless. You're welcome to characterize this type of bug however you like but the fact remains, almost all buffer overflow bugs are CS101 (real basic in nature) problems which one shouldn't find much of these days.
Combine that with the simple fact that hackers do tend to have real ingenuity, it creates a simple backdoor to walk right through.
Make no mistake about it. Buffer overflows are bugs and a programmer's failing. The fact that so many are found coming from Microsoft's direction only highlights just how little they cared about the quality of their products and the effect it can have on their user base. After all, even the most basic of code reviews should of been catching most and possibly all (vast majority) of them. Again, this creates several possibilities: 1, MS doesn't review their code. 2, MS employs programmers that are reviewing code but simply don't have the proper experience. 3, Such sloppy programming is well accepted and simply ignored by a review process as it's deemed unimportant, or worse, acceptable by corporate standards.
I would like to point out that I've met several people that work for MS and none were short in the brain department. If they are typical, I'm betting that possibility #2 probably does not apply.
I would say this has more to do with either pure ignorance on the part of the DOD, or an excuse to squash this liberating technology.
Certainly sounds reasonable considering a large enough network built using wireless could effectively prevent a large segment of traffic from ever going across major backbones. That means in some instances, the DoD's net and ISP sniffing technologies will be greatly snubbed.
There is *nothing* in there that would lead anyone to conclude that removing ABS would be an advantage. Quite the opposite. The only time it increases your stopping distance is a) driver misuse (letting up on the brake due to feedback), b) snow covered road where the "piling up" of snow in front of the wheel helps.
You've been misinformed. ABS does increase stopping distance. Period. You're greatest stopping potential is acheived at or just prior to wheel lock. The problem is, you have no control once your tires do lock. That means, while you can stop faster, you can't avoid hitting objects and other people. That's where ABS' advantage comes in. You get *almost* the same stopping distance (usually within 5% -- obviously speed and tire dependant) while maintaining control of your vehicle. PLUS, in inclimate weather, and other adverse driving conditions, it allows you to avoid losing control in even moderate braking conditions.
The big win from ABS is that it allows the AVERAGE driver to break much better than they typically would be able to, while maintaining control of their vehicle.
His assertions were not dangerous, only how you decided to read into them. Like it or not, a small segment of high performance drivers can out break ABS consistently. He stated fact! In fact, should you ever bother to take an actual high performance driving course, this fact will be highlighted to you so that you understand what you have to work with.
As a rider, I can tell you the best thing people can wear is the existing safety equipment. A good set of leathers is good for 150+ MPH slide and tumble. The problem is, sudden deceleration (impacting something or something impacting your) tends to be the killer. Even with good gear on, it doesn't protect the neck which is made worse by the weight of the helmet. After it's all said and done, unless this prevents broken necks, object pentration or extreme blunt trama (being run over), it's going to be worthless.
Imagine traveling at 80+ MPH, a car side swipes you, sending you and your bike into a side rail. Your neck get's broken from the angle of impact and you tumble end over end with your bike (this really happens). Imagine being launched over the side rail into oncoming traffic (this really happens). Imagine being launched and you luckily slide on your leathers; only sadly, you get run over by a car or truck (this really happens). These are the things that typically kill already protected riders. I seriously doubt that vest is going to protect the rider in any significant manner. After all, if he's wearing that vest, chances are he's already smart enough to be wearing REAL safety gear in the first place.
Checklist: o Helmet o Riding gloves o Riding leathers (jergin and pants) o Riding boots
That was my point...partially anyways. That is, if you have that kind of serious heat and energy, I'm not sure water is going to be flowing. Rather, I'd be expecting it to be burning off. And if it's in a crator that's deep enough to hold it while it melts, where is it going to be flowing to. After all, once the ice melts, the remaining water will more easily fit into the crator than the ice did.
Yes, but notice that we have an atmosphere which allows water to remain wet. So while I presume that this is somewhat plausible, the explanation does seem fairly improbable.
Consider for a momment that ice did impact and formed a large crator. Is it now hot enough to melt? I thought it was more likely that it would of turned to a vapor (atmosphere required again right?). Even if it does melt into water, where is it going to go? It's in a crator. It's got no where to run off too. Even if it did, it would be a race for it to run off versus the cooling action of space. Skip ahead a little bit. Now, we should see a crator with vast amounts of ice. Even it hadn't frozen completely at the time, surely the top would freeze quickly enough (like a frozen lake) to prevent it from running off somewhere.
After it's all said and done, I can't believe that such a thing was very probable. As such, seems much more likely that Mars had an atmosphere with rivers and some event happened which destroyed it (huge chunk of ice anyone?;).
Ya, I've wondered about this exact thing before too. It always struck me as odd to pay refrig costs twice. Once for the frig to remove the heat from the frig and once again to remove the added heat from the house. It always seemed completely back assward.
In fact, I recently wondered why you simply couldn't "plug" your frig into the house's cooling lines for the AC unit. At which point, I think the only reason you'd actually need to plug your frig into an electrical outlet would be to run the light and motors for water and ice.
Perhaps even a hybrid approach (keeping the internal parts for emergency backup) would be possible while keeping costs close to what they are today. Plus, if you bought a unit which used your house's AC unit, in theory, I'd imagine the unit would become cheaper to own and run, assuming your AC unit knows about it.
Actually, as rants go, it was very mellow. To top it off, most everyone is tired of these idiots that say things like, "gosh, I didn't kill him...I only loaded the gun. See, I'm not nearly as bad as the other guy." This back-assward logic is ruining most online gaming experiences and all of the people that modded me down are the lazy people whom do nothing, thus allowing it to continue. After all, it was "that guy " that shot him, not the other one!
After it's all said and done, it's pretty sad when a truthful opinion is marked as flamebait or overated (especially when it hadn't been marked up in the first place). I have to believe it was done so by SEQ users that didn't appreciate someone pointing out the type of people they really are. After all, on too many occations I've seen far too many rants that were completely offtopic left alone or even modded up. Modding this down was like saying, "there, there, leave the robber alone...he just didn't know that wasn't his house. Oh, poor baby. He only broke in and looked around...he didn't really steal anything." My heart really goes out to him for being so wacky.
If you bothered to read his reply you'll see that his only comment was that I obviously didn't play. Not once did he bother to address any of the issues that point out what a cheater he really is. Notice that he completely ignored all of the points that explain how he can play without using SEQ. But nope...why would he when there are so many ready to people like this do as they please while ruining the experience and joy for everyone else.
After all, it's easier to shoot the messenger than it is to fix the problem. Those that modded me down and agree with that action deserve to have their online experience completely ruined. And yes, it really is that black and white.
Also notice, I had the guts to use my own name...he couldn't even do so...If he's so justisfied, how is it he has to hide in the shadows like any other cheater?
Slashdot Mirror
You can rest assured that your statement is correct. Eron is the tip of the iceberg. Notice how many Texas good-old-boys were involved in that? Little goes on in Texas' big business without lots of back scratching first. Often this type junk goes all the way to the capital.
Bluntly stated, your assessment is in error. In no way, shape, or form could this of ever been considered to be a "small hole" or minor. As local application exploits go, it's about as big as it gets short of delivering root access.
;)
If you have any application which is to perform task-x and an exploit can be used to destroy and and all work that should be achieved by doing task-x, I'd say you should just burn your box because it's worthless. In other words, it was a VERY significant issue. The fact that the author refused to even acknowledge the significance of such an issue pretty much demotes him to the realm of the ignorant, not to mention blind and closed minded.
I honestly don't have a problem with Postfix, per se, however, I have a significant problem with the blind leading the blind and then bragging about how blind they are. As if it were a bonus.
Shesh..assess away...the rest of us will laugh.
I'm fully aware of what the exploit was. If you bothered to read it, you would of found that it would of actually been fairly easy to exploit. Furthermore, the write-up even offers additional information on how it could of been more easily exploited. Also, you seemed to of missed the part where users could submit mail from ANY local user without any trace where the mail originated from.
Just because something hasn't been exploited doesn't mean it's hard. Second part of the exploit, which you seemingly overlooked, could of been exploited millions of times and chances are, no one would of ever known. Fact of the matter is, no one really knows if it was ever exploited.
Seriously, this was a serious exploit and could of easily been exploited if someone had wanted to.
As far as I can remember, this was a problem. In fact, I remember people talking about it even in 2002. For such a widely known exploit, you would of thought, had it been fixed, people would of bothered to make it public.
Go figure...
LOL!
First of all, the hole was NOT small.
Second of all, I did not assert that it was current information. Go back and read what I said.
Please stop wasting bandwidth.
Compared to the 4-12 m/g you get from a hummer, this thing should be great.
As for stealth, well, if you really need stealth, that's why they have soldiers with feet. AFAIK, that's the only official "stealth" activities that is part of our fighting doctrine. Everything else is "low profile", "low visability", etc.
Besides, as I read the article, this is not part of a forward fighting force. This, in turn, further removes demand on the supply line. This vehicle is supposed to be a support* vehicle as is.
Support = rear guard, scouting, patrol, chemical & biological detection, etc. Doesn't really appear to be targeting primary attack vehicle or even APC type stuff. It's basically a multifunction service/patrol vehicle.
postfix exploit
Found this by typing, "postfix local exploit" on google. Seems there were tons of other hits on this too (about 6,900).
Check the archives. Someguy through a huge fit about the author refusing to even acknoledge the fact that it's a problem even though everyone agrees that it is.
Again, IIRC, Postfix has a local exploit. To my knowledge, it has never been fixed.
there's no reason the truck needs more than 200 hp
Bzzz. That's just plain wrong.
They need 300+ hp for good reason. First, they carry heavy equipment and people. Secondly, some of the terrain these things may need to run in may be at high elevation. If they need to run at 10,000-15,000+ feet, that alone will considerably effect available hp. Then, plan on some wear and tear. Add an the scotching heat or other such horrible environments where the airfilter is resticting air flow. Now, allow for minor par failure (stuck lifter or valve, etc), you're no where near 300hp.
After it's all said and done, if you allow for realistic use, wear/tear and operating conditions, the surplus hp is needed. ZERO question about it. Period.
I'd sure hate to be a soldier stuck in a crappy vehicle that you under-designed. Doomed from the start to say the least.
I think postfix still has a local exploit.
Shesh! Either the parent poster is a complete dolt or he didn't bother to read the article. He's modded +5 when it should of been -1 troll some such thing. I point out the obvious and get rated -1 for off topic.
Love how some moderators don't seem to understand their job.
Shesh. Where's the overrated or troll mod points when you need 'em.
How obtuse can logic get...shesh...
Oh brother!
Pick the text apart all you like it makes ZERO difference. I think his intent was rather clear. If my interpretation differs from what HE meant, I'm sure we'll hear about it.
In the mean time, you need to accept that people don't always say (write even) EXACTLY what they mean.
I've worked with many Indians and I must say some were a pleasure to work with. The others were a horrible experience because of the language barrier. Worse yet, I was one of the leads on a very large project. Long story short, with the ones that I had even minor communication issues with, I *NEVER* knew what I'd get back from them. Sometimes it was spot on. Other times, what I got back had absolutely nothing to do with the project and you're left wondering why it didn't raise a flag with them in the first place.
That doesn't make them bad people or even bad workers, it just highlights that ANY language/communication issues are SERIOUS problems. It alone can doom any project regardless of the nature of the problem (comprehension skills, poor transfer, accent, or even different native languages).
No, that's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he should be able to as effectively communicate with them as with any other native speaker.
I have run into this MANY times and I can tell you it's a MAJOR problem. This is not bigotry. It's a simple fact that ANY barrier to communication (work or life) cause problems and confusion.
How many times do you see job adds which read, "must have excellent communication and presentation skills". Is that bigotry? Of course not. It's people looking for other people that are not going to further complicate the job they need filled.
Communication the most basic skill required to effectively work. Period.
What platforms does it run on and what widget set was used to develop it? The homepage really doesn't show anything...other than a couple of screenshots.
From the plug in section, it seems to imply that it uses MFC. The Win platform needs another modeler like Gates needs another hole in his head. Hopefully, if it's worth a darn, it will be available of Linux and other Unix PDQ. I'm not holding my breath as it never seems to happen. Go figure....
DO NOT use a cross platform GUI toolkit, they all end up looking like crap, and pissing users of all the platforms off because the look and feel is all wrong.
LOL.
You've obviously never used wxWindows. It has the native look and feel of each platform. Period. wxWindows rocks. I highly recommend you go check it out before you comment further on GUI toolkits.
Actually, as I understand it, that's not entirely true. While Aegis does have support for "a process", it is not mandatory. Rather, steps can be skipped and ignored. Furthermore, you can elect to adopt only the portions of the process that you like (test cases, etc). That means you only have to use as much as the process as you desire or none at all. In other words, it allows for a process framework to be used where developer supplied content fills in the framework or you can have null steps for each part of that framework leaving you with only the toolset behind.
Long story short, I believe that you've been misinformed. Feel free to correct as need.
Simple fact is, awareness of buffer overflow exploits has been high for a very long time. Anytime you have a buffer overflow, it is a serious problem. That doesn't mean that every overflow can be exploited by running code, however, it a bug nontheless. You're welcome to characterize this type of bug however you like but the fact remains, almost all buffer overflow bugs are CS101 (real basic in nature) problems which one shouldn't find much of these days.
Combine that with the simple fact that hackers do tend to have real ingenuity, it creates a simple backdoor to walk right through.
Make no mistake about it. Buffer overflows are bugs and a programmer's failing. The fact that so many are found coming from Microsoft's direction only highlights just how little they cared about the quality of their products and the effect it can have on their user base. After all, even the most basic of code reviews should of been catching most and possibly all (vast majority) of them. Again, this creates several possibilities: 1, MS doesn't review their code. 2, MS employs programmers that are reviewing code but simply don't have the proper experience. 3, Such sloppy programming is well accepted and simply ignored by a review process as it's deemed unimportant, or worse, acceptable by corporate standards.
I would like to point out that I've met several people that work for MS and none were short in the brain department. If they are typical, I'm betting that possibility #2 probably does not apply.
I would say this has more to do with either pure ignorance on the part of the DOD, or an excuse to squash this liberating technology.
Certainly sounds reasonable considering a large enough network built using wireless could effectively prevent a large segment of traffic from ever going across major backbones. That means in some instances, the DoD's net and ISP sniffing technologies will be greatly snubbed.
There is *nothing* in there that would lead anyone to conclude that removing ABS would be an advantage. Quite the opposite. The only time it increases your stopping distance is a) driver misuse (letting up on the brake due to feedback), b) snow covered road where the "piling up" of snow in front of the wheel helps.
You've been misinformed. ABS does increase stopping distance. Period. You're greatest stopping potential is acheived at or just prior to wheel lock. The problem is, you have no control once your tires do lock. That means, while you can stop faster, you can't avoid hitting objects and other people. That's where ABS' advantage comes in. You get *almost* the same stopping distance (usually within 5% -- obviously speed and tire dependant) while maintaining control of your vehicle. PLUS, in inclimate weather, and other adverse driving conditions, it allows you to avoid losing control in even moderate braking conditions.
The big win from ABS is that it allows the AVERAGE driver to break much better than they typically would be able to, while maintaining control of their vehicle.
His assertions were not dangerous, only how you decided to read into them. Like it or not, a small segment of high performance drivers can out break ABS consistently. He stated fact! In fact, should you ever bother to take an actual high performance driving course, this fact will be highlighted to you so that you understand what you have to work with.
You made excellent points!
As a rider, I can tell you the best thing people can wear is the existing safety equipment. A good set of leathers is good for 150+ MPH slide and tumble. The problem is, sudden deceleration (impacting something or something impacting your) tends to be the killer. Even with good gear on, it doesn't protect the neck which is made worse by the weight of the helmet. After it's all said and done, unless this prevents broken necks, object pentration or extreme blunt trama (being run over), it's going to be worthless.
Imagine traveling at 80+ MPH, a car side swipes you, sending you and your bike into a side rail. Your neck get's broken from the angle of impact and you tumble end over end with your bike (this really happens). Imagine being launched over the side rail into oncoming traffic (this really happens). Imagine being launched and you luckily slide on your leathers; only sadly, you get run over by a car or truck (this really happens). These are the things that typically kill already protected riders. I seriously doubt that vest is going to protect the rider in any significant manner. After all, if he's wearing that vest, chances are he's already smart enough to be wearing REAL safety gear in the first place.
Checklist:
o Helmet
o Riding gloves
o Riding leathers (jergin and pants)
o Riding boots
That was my point...partially anyways. That is, if you have that kind of serious heat and energy, I'm not sure water is going to be flowing. Rather, I'd be expecting it to be burning off. And if it's in a crator that's deep enough to hold it while it melts, where is it going to be flowing to. After all, once the ice melts, the remaining water will more easily fit into the crator than the ice did.
See what I saying?
Yes, but notice that we have an atmosphere which allows water to remain wet. So while I presume that this is somewhat plausible, the explanation does seem fairly improbable.
;).
Consider for a momment that ice did impact and formed a large crator. Is it now hot enough to melt? I thought it was more likely that it would of turned to a vapor (atmosphere required again right?). Even if it does melt into water, where is it going to go? It's in a crator. It's got no where to run off too. Even if it did, it would be a race for it to run off versus the cooling action of space. Skip ahead a little bit. Now, we should see a crator with vast amounts of ice. Even it hadn't frozen completely at the time, surely the top would freeze quickly enough (like a frozen lake) to prevent it from running off somewhere.
After it's all said and done, I can't believe that such a thing was very probable. As such, seems much more likely that Mars had an atmosphere with rivers and some event happened which destroyed it (huge chunk of ice anyone?
Ya, I've wondered about this exact thing before too. It always struck me as odd to pay refrig costs twice. Once for the frig to remove the heat from the frig and once again to remove the added heat from the house. It always seemed completely back assward.
In fact, I recently wondered why you simply couldn't "plug" your frig into the house's cooling lines for the AC unit. At which point, I think the only reason you'd actually need to plug your frig into an electrical outlet would be to run the light and motors for water and ice.
Perhaps even a hybrid approach (keeping the internal parts for emergency backup) would be possible while keeping costs close to what they are today. Plus, if you bought a unit which used your house's AC unit, in theory, I'd imagine the unit would become cheaper to own and run, assuming your AC unit knows about it.
Actually, as rants go, it was very mellow. To top it off, most everyone is tired of these idiots that say things like, "gosh, I didn't kill him...I only loaded the gun. See, I'm not nearly as bad as the other guy." This back-assward logic is ruining most online gaming experiences and all of the people that modded me down are the lazy people whom do nothing, thus allowing it to continue. After all, it was "that guy " that shot him, not the other one!
After it's all said and done, it's pretty sad when a truthful opinion is marked as flamebait or overated (especially when it hadn't been marked up in the first place). I have to believe it was done so by SEQ users that didn't appreciate someone pointing out the type of people they really are. After all, on too many occations I've seen far too many rants that were completely offtopic left alone or even modded up. Modding this down was like saying, "there, there, leave the robber alone...he just didn't know that wasn't his house. Oh, poor baby. He only broke in and looked around...he didn't really steal anything." My heart really goes out to him for being so wacky.
If you bothered to read his reply you'll see that his only comment was that I obviously didn't play. Not once did he bother to address any of the issues that point out what a cheater he really is. Notice that he completely ignored all of the points that explain how he can play without using SEQ. But nope...why would he when there are so many ready to people like this do as they please while ruining the experience and joy for everyone else.
After all, it's easier to shoot the messenger than it is to fix the problem. Those that modded me down and agree with that action deserve to have their online experience completely ruined. And yes, it really is that black and white.
Also notice, I had the guts to use my own name...he couldn't even do so...If he's so justisfied, how is it he has to hide in the shadows like any other cheater?