Nice lie you are spreading there. Completely and utterly debunked, of course. You are an evil person, because some will believe you and some of those will lose their children to infectious disease because of it.
I find that you can see this pretty clearly after a while. One exceptional shooter from time to time is normal, for example. But lots of them, and many even do not know how to move or hide and they still surprise you all the time? Time to leave.
Ah, yes. I found WOT enjoyable up to a certain level, but then it just started to be hugely unfair to those that did not pay. Hence I just stopped playing. Now I look for such things before I start a new game and if it has them, I just stay away.
I.e. the Dunning-Kruger sufferers of players, that are pretty bad by do not know that. Well, I predict they will make great business with that model, but quite a few players will find themselves disgusted and repulsed by these games. I certainly will very carefully check before I ever buy anything from the again.
Incidentally, why can you patent such stuff? this is both trivial and highly immoral. Both should make this completely non-patentable.
It is actually nothing of the sort. It is just an indicator that this smear-campaign is reasonably well organized. And who said I think Kaspersky is innocent? I am merely pointing out that the current accusations do not come with any evidence that would deserve that name at all. However, this campaign is obviously targeted at people like you that cannot distinguish fact and fantasy and mistake unsupported accusations for "evidence". Because of people like you, it is done this way, because people like you will be convinced even when the accuser have absolutely nothing. The fantasy just needs to be served in the right way. This one is.
Because dealing with these risks would cost money and they rather pay a bigger bonus to the C-levels than solve this problem. There are no specific risks of FOSS that are not present in commercial software. You can buy support for FOSS that is just as good or better. You can have your own people that can deal with problems. You can get independent reviews of the software. In fact, basically everything about FOSS is easier to secure than with the alternatives. It is still not simple and the time and effort has to be spent.
In a delayed "second system effect" they tried to literally put everything in there. Of course, this will never work well. This design was done by junior designers with a gross lack of experience and insight. (I don't care about their age. With a result this bad, they are "junior".)
But actual experts are expensive. Stay away from IT "security experts" that cannot code, that cannot configure a network or a firewall, that cannot administrate a system, mailserver, DNS server or webserver and that do not understand how crypto works and what it can and cannot do. I have seen far to many of these people and they universally make things worse in the long run instead of better.
Unfortunately, the data representations will not turn out to be compatible. But maybe if the EU donates 100M or so, something can be done about that. Only for the current version, of course, and the resulting "standard" may not be really usable...
These people are those for which image and appearance is everything and actual skill does not count. Unfortunately, they probably get the idea from how the rest of modern society works. One of the indicators of a society in decline.
Philanthropy basically allows people to work for the common good because they get money for it from some donor. In other systems besides capitalism, people already can work for the common good because they do not have to get money for it. Incidentally, there are a lot of volunteer workers even today with capitalism that work for the common good without getting money for it at all. Hence you made a completely empty argument.
And when you look right at it, a lot of Philanthropy comes from really, really big crooks that have made a lot of money by effectively defrauding others, holding back progress, selling overprices goods, establishing monopolies, etc. You get the impression that these people are often ones that have decided to give at least some semblance of not being all greedy and selfish and bad, but only after they have so much money that the donations they make do not hurt them at all financially, as they cannot spend all their money meaningfully anyways.
Well, yes. From "power corrupts" (which basically says that power also brings out what kind of person you actually are) I deduce that most people that manage to get rich are not very good people. A supporting effect here is certainly that bad people with a fine instinct of how to abuse the system have a better chance of getting rich than others and that bad people also have a higher desire to get rich in the first place.
It unfortunately does not even come down to that. As soon as some players are large enough, it comes down to market manipulation. We see a lot of that in the press these days and there will be much more of it that does not get reported on.
Your "proof" says "reportedly" right there in the headline. This is called "hearsay", not "proof". Or in other words, the proof value of that statement is zero.
Excellent example for how propaganda victims fall for it: There is zero actual evidence, yet you are convinced that "of course" all the accusations are true and that "of course" US products are better.
Slashdot Mirror
No. It would be completely worthless. Unless you are talking strong AI, but that does not exist.
Don't tell them! They are convinced that because they represent nation-states, they are all-powerful. Let them have that illusion!
After all, it is totally ridiculous to carry around powerful universal computers and restrict them to be used as a phone and phone-type app only.
Thanks for the hint, I was tempted for a while to buy it. These days, I carefully stay away from "easy" games, because they bore me pretty fast.
Current research says you are full of it, i.e. nothing of what you say is actual fact. Please go away ans top spreading lies.
Nice lie you are spreading there. Completely and utterly debunked, of course. You are an evil person, because some will believe you and some of those will lose their children to infectious disease because of it.
I find that you can see this pretty clearly after a while. One exceptional shooter from time to time is normal, for example. But lots of them, and many even do not know how to move or hide and they still surprise you all the time? Time to leave.
Ah, yes. I found WOT enjoyable up to a certain level, but then it just started to be hugely unfair to those that did not pay. Hence I just stopped playing. Now I look for such things before I start a new game and if it has them, I just stay away.
I.e. the Dunning-Kruger sufferers of players, that are pretty bad by do not know that. Well, I predict they will make great business with that model, but quite a few players will find themselves disgusted and repulsed by these games. I certainly will very carefully check before I ever buy anything from the again.
Incidentally, why can you patent such stuff? this is both trivial and highly immoral. Both should make this completely non-patentable.
And the uncontrolled use of other software is not risky? Your statement is nonsense.
It is actually nothing of the sort. It is just an indicator that this smear-campaign is reasonably well organized. And who said I think Kaspersky is innocent? I am merely pointing out that the current accusations do not come with any evidence that would deserve that name at all. However, this campaign is obviously targeted at people like you that cannot distinguish fact and fantasy and mistake unsupported accusations for "evidence". Because of people like you, it is done this way, because people like you will be convinced even when the accuser have absolutely nothing. The fantasy just needs to be served in the right way. This one is.
Because dealing with these risks would cost money and they rather pay a bigger bonus to the C-levels than solve this problem. There are no specific risks of FOSS that are not present in commercial software. You can buy support for FOSS that is just as good or better. You can have your own people that can deal with problems. You can get independent reviews of the software. In fact, basically everything about FOSS is easier to secure than with the alternatives. It is still not simple and the time and effort has to be spent.
In a delayed "second system effect" they tried to literally put everything in there. Of course, this will never work well. This design was done by junior designers with a gross lack of experience and insight. (I don't care about their age. With a result this bad, they are "junior".)
But actual experts are expensive. Stay away from IT "security experts" that cannot code, that cannot configure a network or a firewall, that cannot administrate a system, mailserver, DNS server or webserver and that do not understand how crypto works and what it can and cannot do. I have seen far to many of these people and they universally make things worse in the long run instead of better.
Unfortunately, the data representations will not turn out to be compatible. But maybe if the EU donates 100M or so, something can be done about that. Only for the current version, of course, and the resulting "standard" may not be really usable...
You do not have free speech on their servers. You have free speech only on your own servers. Nobody is obliged to give you a forum.
There was some game that put all the cheaters into their own server-pool, so they could cheat the hell out of each other. I like the idea.
These people are those for which image and appearance is everything and actual skill does not count. Unfortunately, they probably get the idea from how the rest of modern society works. One of the indicators of a society in decline.
Philanthropy basically allows people to work for the common good because they get money for it from some donor. In other systems besides capitalism, people already can work for the common good because they do not have to get money for it. Incidentally, there are a lot of volunteer workers even today with capitalism that work for the common good without getting money for it at all. Hence you made a completely empty argument.
And when you look right at it, a lot of Philanthropy comes from really, really big crooks that have made a lot of money by effectively defrauding others, holding back progress, selling overprices goods, establishing monopolies, etc. You get the impression that these people are often ones that have decided to give at least some semblance of not being all greedy and selfish and bad, but only after they have so much money that the donations they make do not hurt them at all financially, as they cannot spend all their money meaningfully anyways.
Well, yes. From "power corrupts" (which basically says that power also brings out what kind of person you actually are) I deduce that most people that manage to get rich are not very good people. A supporting effect here is certainly that bad people with a fine instinct of how to abuse the system have a better chance of getting rich than others and that bad people also have a higher desire to get rich in the first place.
It unfortunately does not even come down to that. As soon as some players are large enough, it comes down to market manipulation. We see a lot of that in the press these days and there will be much more of it that does not get reported on.
You probably have never heard of fraud, crime, and unethical business practices and that you cannot really get rich with honest work.
So no, you are dead wrong. And you are part of the problem because of that.
Actually, AV companies share malware samples all around. It is standard practice.
Here is the citation of proof of Kremlin involvement
Your "proof" says "reportedly" right there in the headline. This is called "hearsay", not "proof". Or in other words, the proof value of that statement is zero.
Excellent example for how propaganda victims fall for it: There is zero actual evidence, yet you are convinced that "of course" all the accusations are true and that "of course" US products are better.