I find that when I use this software, it still misses a bit, and I still have to use Ad-aware SE, which still misses a bit, and I still have to use Spybot. And then I'm ok.....sometimes......
Quite frankly, valuing one anti-spyware software over another is foolish. It has been proven over time that no anti-spyware software has been a true solution, and that using more than one is the best way to go. I would never replace one anti-spyware product with another in any near future. Rather, I would add it to the list of anti-spyware software that I already use. That being said, I still like MS Antispyware, because it has a few tools on there to get rid of shell hooks and the rest of that noise. I just don't depend on it. I've run into countless issues where MSAS didn't get rid of a problem, and then when I ran Adaware SE, it DID get rid of the problem. BUT I've also seen it happen vice-versa, hence why I use a plethora of anti-spyware software and not just one program.
Re:Parent is flamebait and trollish. Mod down.
on
LokiTorrent Shut Down
·
· Score: 1
I gotta hand it to you, you made a damn good point. Although I still don't think that you should abandon such practices as downloading files, you have definitely proven to me that it is worthwile to talk to legislature about the matter. Thanks for opening my eyes!
Re:Parent is flamebait and trollish. Mod down.
on
LokiTorrent Shut Down
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
What???? If you think for one second that abandoning a practice, regardless of how lawful or unlawful it might be, will do anything toward convincing people that you are in the right, you're going nowhere with this system. What you are implying is that we should lay down, die, and then after we've shaken hands with the enemy, attempt to fight them in legality. Why? Once all that has transpired, who will you call upon for support? It won't be the millions of P2P users, because there won't be any. Actions speak louder than words. Legality/= Morality
At the end of your post, you mention that writing our congressmen/women is the "legal way to go about it". That may be true, but what's wrong with doing that AND showing your true colors? I know that's the LEGAL way of doing it, but I'd much rather have companies like the MPAA give a shit what I think. Seems to me that if they pay more attention to my file-sharing than my comments and emails that I send them on a weekly basis, then I suppose that might be the best way to reach them, huh? I mean, I agree with you on one front, that people need to stop bitching. But I think they need to stop bitching and get back to downloading like hell, instead of laying down and then bitching about the P2P system and the MPAA. I personally have more faith in the voice of a trillion downloads at once of "Meet the Fockers" after Lokitorrent has gone down, than a million emails to congress about a bunch of geeks who want shit for free.
staunchly defended Microsoft's record on security, basing part of his argument on how Windows Server 2003's 15 patches in the past year are far less than what RedHat or SuSE have had to endure."
No....mike....you're not helping your case.....people are upset with your company because they don't give out patches for the numerous bugs and security holes your software has....stop while you're slightly ahead mike......MIIIIIIKE!!!!!!!
I wonder if they'll ever send piratebay another threat? I want to read something funny today.....
Re:Not just developing countries
on
The Sub-$100 Laptop?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
all I would end up paying for is the price of mobility, really. I could care less how it performs at a price like that. Definitely wouldn't use it for my primary system, but for a CHEAP mobile secondary, why the hell not?
And I really like this guy's motivation for this. I think it just goes to show that technological gurus aren't money grubbers by nature.
'nuff said. I can't RTFA because I'm not a member of the NYtimes, but I would much rather read an article from a NEWS source or a research paper. NYTimes is nothing more than analysis these days. Calling upon them for a source is like using Slashdot for a reference manual.
you know, that's a good point. We continually see things at E3 that are made just for a showboating, but sometimes they don't have anything to do with the final product. First example that hits me is the playable level they showed off for Halo 2 at E3. The actual level that you play is VERY different, and doesn't take more than 2 or 3 levels to get through (been so long since I've played it now...).
So....are they gonna tackle Google soon, too?
I mean, they link to pages that link to files, so why the hell not? Let's just throw common sense right out the window.....
Can someone explain the cash incentive for Firefox to me? I mean, if products without cash incentives fail, and Firefox hasn't failed, then where is its cash incentive?
Despite these security flaws, Firefox doesn't integrate itself with the OPERATING SYSTEM, and therefore despite its security flaws, it can't do near the damage that IE can. Not only that, since this is an open source program, I wouldn't doubt that a fix will appear much much faster than it would for IE.
Need I also point out that more people still use IE than Firefox, and as a result, IE users are still the more targeted? Firefox is still safer to use, hands down.
a good point, and I can only compound it with:
If we've changed this much because of a single act of terrorism, can we really say that they didn't win the day? The whole point of terrorism is to TERRORIZE PEOPLE. Seems to me that they terrorized enough people that we're doing shit like this to make people feel safe when they fly......
Actually, I think its both Linux and Apple. Take a look at some of the other comments made against Apple. Quite a few of them got marked down as "Troll".......
its not like iTunes is the only place to get music... there are plenty of other online sources with different DRM that might suit this customers needs. hell he could just buy CDs like people used to back in the day from that small organization... what were they called... the record companies?
So you're implying that because our newest and hippest technology is monopolistic, that if we don't like it, we should take a step BACK, technologically speaking.....
Right, that's pretty stupid. If there were a "secret reason" behind this guy's lawsuit, you've indirectly nailed it.
but in order for this to be monopolistic wouldnt apple have to have a monopoly on the digital music market?
Apple isn't getting sued over having a monopoly over the digital music market. They're getting sued because this guy wants to use a different hard drive mp3 player than an Ipod with Itunes.
People misread the arguments yet again! I remember when Microsoft went to court over monopolizing WINDOWS, not OS's. Yet everyone misread the arguments to read "Microsoft has monopolized the OS market" and thought "That's crap, they're not the only OS on the market." Of course they're not the only OS on the market! And of course Apple isn't the only company to buy music from right now. But the fact of the matter is, they have a lock-in regarding which hardware you can use with their software. THAT'S what they're going to court over.
I'm afraid I'd have to agree with you. Pizza is a far cheaper commodity, and the value of some objects is much more a deterrent to thieves if they are of HIGHER value than a lesser value. The only people this would really keep from stealing your laptop are professional theives that like a bigger score.
All in all, you're asking to have a hobo break your windshield and steal your fake pizza.
not only that, but Asimo can recognize up to 10 different faces, and calls those people by name. His AI is actually top notch, he recognizes all sorts of objects and can manipulate a great number of tools.
If he isn't concerned about security or privacy, he's an accident waiting to happen. Give him Firefox so that he won't HAVE to worry about security or privacy.
It doesn't matter what the dictionary says. It matters what the law and the courts say. Running to a dictionary to prove a point only proves that you don't understand the law.
ok then, let's look at a law dictionary (via Law.com dictionary)
Monopoly:
n. a business or inter-related group of businesses which controls so much of the production or sale of a product or kind of product as to control the market, including prices and distribution. Business practices, combinations and/or acquisitions which tend to create a monopoly may violate various federal statutes which regulate or prohibit business trusts and monopolies or prohibit restraint of trade. However, limited monopolies granted by a manufacturer to a wholesaler in a particular area are usually legal, since they are like "licenses." Public utilities such as electric, gas and water companies may also hold a monopoly in a particular geographic area since it is the only practical way to provide the public service, and they are regulated by state public utility commissions.
EA has already said that no bid ever took place. They contacted IGN and told them that they never made a bid for it.
http://sports.ign.com/articles/575/575019p1.html
Might I also add that this is a rumor based on a rumor based on "sources"
EA closes shop when they buyout. Not that this is the case, but they've proven time and time again that they don't buy to produce more. They buy to earn more market share. If you want to root for a company that keeps buy-outs alive, root for Activision.
I could care less how bad our parents are at parenting. That isn't the job of our government. That's the job of our moral institutions (churches, etc.). The government and the market should NOT be responsible for your parenting.
Slashdot Mirror
I find that when I use this software, it still misses a bit, and I still have to use Ad-aware SE, which still misses a bit, and I still have to use Spybot. And then I'm ok.....sometimes......
Quite frankly, valuing one anti-spyware software over another is foolish. It has been proven over time that no anti-spyware software has been a true solution, and that using more than one is the best way to go. I would never replace one anti-spyware product with another in any near future. Rather, I would add it to the list of anti-spyware software that I already use. That being said, I still like MS Antispyware, because it has a few tools on there to get rid of shell hooks and the rest of that noise. I just don't depend on it. I've run into countless issues where MSAS didn't get rid of a problem, and then when I ran Adaware SE, it DID get rid of the problem. BUT I've also seen it happen vice-versa, hence why I use a plethora of anti-spyware software and not just one program.
I gotta hand it to you, you made a damn good point. Although I still don't think that you should abandon such practices as downloading files, you have definitely proven to me that it is worthwile to talk to legislature about the matter. Thanks for opening my eyes!
What???? If you think for one second that abandoning a practice, regardless of how lawful or unlawful it might be, will do anything toward convincing people that you are in the right, you're going nowhere with this system. What you are implying is that we should lay down, die, and then after we've shaken hands with the enemy, attempt to fight them in legality. Why? Once all that has transpired, who will you call upon for support? It won't be the millions of P2P users, because there won't be any. Actions speak louder than words. Legality /= Morality
At the end of your post, you mention that writing our congressmen/women is the "legal way to go about it". That may be true, but what's wrong with doing that AND showing your true colors? I know that's the LEGAL way of doing it, but I'd much rather have companies like the MPAA give a shit what I think. Seems to me that if they pay more attention to my file-sharing than my comments and emails that I send them on a weekly basis, then I suppose that might be the best way to reach them, huh? I mean, I agree with you on one front, that people need to stop bitching. But I think they need to stop bitching and get back to downloading like hell, instead of laying down and then bitching about the P2P system and the MPAA. I personally have more faith in the voice of a trillion downloads at once of "Meet the Fockers" after Lokitorrent has gone down, than a million emails to congress about a bunch of geeks who want shit for free.
staunchly defended Microsoft's record on security, basing part of his argument on how Windows Server 2003's 15 patches in the past year are far less than what RedHat or SuSE have had to endure."
No....mike....you're not helping your case.....people are upset with your company because they don't give out patches for the numerous bugs and security holes your software has....stop while you're slightly ahead mike......MIIIIIIKE!!!!!!!
I wonder if they'll ever send piratebay another threat? I want to read something funny today.....
all I would end up paying for is the price of mobility, really. I could care less how it performs at a price like that. Definitely wouldn't use it for my primary system, but for a CHEAP mobile secondary, why the hell not?
And I really like this guy's motivation for this. I think it just goes to show that technological gurus aren't money grubbers by nature.
I wonder how often Slashdot gets Slashdotted...
you know, that's a good point. We continually see things at E3 that are made just for a showboating, but sometimes they don't have anything to do with the final product. First example that hits me is the playable level they showed off for Halo 2 at E3. The actual level that you play is VERY different, and doesn't take more than 2 or 3 levels to get through (been so long since I've played it now...).
So....are they gonna tackle Google soon, too? I mean, they link to pages that link to files, so why the hell not? Let's just throw common sense right out the window.....
Can someone explain the cash incentive for Firefox to me? I mean, if products without cash incentives fail, and Firefox hasn't failed, then where is its cash incentive?
while I agree with the others that you were wrong in your statement, I don't understand why you got marked as a troll.....
Despite these security flaws, Firefox doesn't integrate itself with the OPERATING SYSTEM, and therefore despite its security flaws, it can't do near the damage that IE can. Not only that, since this is an open source program, I wouldn't doubt that a fix will appear much much faster than it would for IE. Need I also point out that more people still use IE than Firefox, and as a result, IE users are still the more targeted? Firefox is still safer to use, hands down.
a good point, and I can only compound it with: If we've changed this much because of a single act of terrorism, can we really say that they didn't win the day? The whole point of terrorism is to TERRORIZE PEOPLE. Seems to me that they terrorized enough people that we're doing shit like this to make people feel safe when they fly......
Actually, I think its both Linux and Apple. Take a look at some of the other comments made against Apple. Quite a few of them got marked down as "Troll".......
So you're implying that because our newest and hippest technology is monopolistic, that if we don't like it, we should take a step BACK, technologically speaking.....
Right, that's pretty stupid. If there were a "secret reason" behind this guy's lawsuit, you've indirectly nailed it.
Apple isn't getting sued over having a monopoly over the digital music market. They're getting sued because this guy wants to use a different hard drive mp3 player than an Ipod with Itunes.
People misread the arguments yet again! I remember when Microsoft went to court over monopolizing WINDOWS, not OS's. Yet everyone misread the arguments to read "Microsoft has monopolized the OS market" and thought "That's crap, they're not the only OS on the market." Of course they're not the only OS on the market! And of course Apple isn't the only company to buy music from right now. But the fact of the matter is, they have a lock-in regarding which hardware you can use with their software. THAT'S what they're going to court over.
I'm afraid I'd have to agree with you. Pizza is a far cheaper commodity, and the value of some objects is much more a deterrent to thieves if they are of HIGHER value than a lesser value. The only people this would really keep from stealing your laptop are professional theives that like a bigger score.
All in all, you're asking to have a hobo break your windshield and steal your fake pizza.
not only that, but Asimo can recognize up to 10 different faces, and calls those people by name. His AI is actually top notch, he recognizes all sorts of objects and can manipulate a great number of tools.
If he isn't concerned about security or privacy, he's an accident waiting to happen. Give him Firefox so that he won't HAVE to worry about security or privacy.
It doesn't matter what the dictionary says. It matters what the law and the courts say. Running to a dictionary to prove a point only proves that you don't understand the law.
p oly&type=1&submit1.x=54&submit1.y=8&submit1=Look+u p
ok then, let's look at a law dictionary (via Law.com dictionary)
Monopoly: n. a business or inter-related group of businesses which controls so much of the production or sale of a product or kind of product as to control the market, including prices and distribution. Business practices, combinations and/or acquisitions which tend to create a monopoly may violate various federal statutes which regulate or prohibit business trusts and monopolies or prohibit restraint of trade. However, limited monopolies granted by a manufacturer to a wholesaler in a particular area are usually legal, since they are like "licenses." Public utilities such as electric, gas and water companies may also hold a monopoly in a particular geographic area since it is the only practical way to provide the public service, and they are regulated by state public utility commissions.
http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?typed=mono
Whether or not they are a legal monopoly would be a good argument to have, but frankly, I'd let a court decide that, if it is even worth the cost.
EA has already said that no bid ever took place. They contacted IGN and told them that they never made a bid for it. http://sports.ign.com/articles/575/575019p1.html Might I also add that this is a rumor based on a rumor based on "sources"
EA closes shop when they buyout. Not that this is the case, but they've proven time and time again that they don't buy to produce more. They buy to earn more market share. If you want to root for a company that keeps buy-outs alive, root for Activision.
I could care less how bad our parents are at parenting. That isn't the job of our government. That's the job of our moral institutions (churches, etc.). The government and the market should NOT be responsible for your parenting.
In a few months you'll be repeating the same joke with "70+ percent" a few months? I give it less time than that. Say 3 weeks.....
the government has proven their technical ineptness time and time again lately. I have little faith that anything is enforced these days.