Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #77544 > unrolled thread

Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?!

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?! Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2015-12-01 20:49 +0200
    Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-12-01 11:11 -0800
    Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?! "Skybuck Flying" <skybuck2000@hotmail.com> - 2015-12-02 01:22 +0100
      Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?! "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-12-01 16:44 -0800
    Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?! Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2015-12-02 08:57 +0000
      Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-12-02 09:42 +0000
        Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?! Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-02 15:20 +0000
          Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?! Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2015-12-03 06:21 +0200
            Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?! Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2015-12-03 07:43 +0200
      Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?! Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-12-02 04:09 -0600
        Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?! Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-02 15:20 +0000
      Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?! glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-12-02 12:40 +0000
      Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-12-02 08:36 -0800
      Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?! Chris in Makati <mail@nospam.com> - 2015-12-03 14:24 +0800
        Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-12-03 10:00 +0100
        Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?! Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2015-12-03 09:16 +0000
          Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?! Chris in Makati <mail@nospam.com> - 2015-12-04 11:22 +0800

#77544 — Re: Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?!

On Tue, 1 Dec 2015 03:19:39 +0100, "Skybuck Flying"
<skybuck2000@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Hello,
>
>The question is:
>
>Is Microsoft Windows secretly downloading childporn to your computer ?!

You download things FROM a computer, you upload them TO a computer.

Since you don't even know that much about computers, anything else you
say is obviously not worth readin. 



-- 
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web:  http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#77548

Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> writes:
> On Tue, 1 Dec 2015 03:19:39 +0100, "Skybuck Flying"
> <skybuck2000@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>The question is:
>>
>>Is Microsoft
[snip]
>
> You download things FROM a computer, you upload them TO a computer.
>
> Since you don't even know that much about computers, anything else you
> say is obviously not worth readin. 

Nor is it worth replying to.  *Please* don't feed the troll.

(Followups set.)

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77583

It's not YOU doing it.

Since you obviously don't understand that it's not worth reading anything 
else you wrote LOL.

Bye,
  Skybuck. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77585

> "Skybuck Flying"  wrote in message 
> news:32371$565e3a1e$d47876e2$6836@news.ziggo.nl...

> It's not YOU doing it.

> Since you obviously don't understand that it's not worth reading anything 
> else you wrote LOL.

If this crap is really happening to you, take your harddrive out and burn it 
into fuc%ing dust!

Do it NOW! 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77598

In comp.lang.c++ Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> You download things FROM a computer, you upload them TO a computer.

It's a matter of perspective. If a hacker breaks into your computer and
starts a download from somewhere else into your computer, isn't the hacker
"downloading" things to your computer?

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77599

On 02/12/15 08:57, Juha Nieminen wrote:
> In comp.lang.c++ Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>> You download things FROM a computer, you upload them TO a computer.
>
> It's a matter of perspective. If a hacker breaks into your computer and
> starts a download from somewhere else into your computer, isn't the hacker
> "downloading" things to your computer?

My understanding of the term has always been that you upload from a 
smaller device to a larger, and download from a larger device to a 
smaller. Thus, from your laptop you might *up*load data to a Web server 
or a mainframe, but you would *down*load data to your phone or tablet.

If the devices are of comparable size and power, you aren't upping or 
downing anything - you're just transferring data from one computer to 
another. I suppose we could say "crossloading"?

-- 
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77622

On 2015-12-02, Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
> On 02/12/15 08:57, Juha Nieminen wrote:
>> In comp.lang.c++ Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>> You download things FROM a computer, you upload them TO a computer.
>>
>> It's a matter of perspective. If a hacker breaks into your computer and
>> starts a download from somewhere else into your computer, isn't the hacker
>> "downloading" things to your computer?
>
> My understanding of the term has always been that you upload from a 
> smaller device to a larger, and download from a larger device to a 
> smaller. Thus, from your laptop you might *up*load data to a Web server 
> or a mainframe, but you would *down*load data to your phone or tablet.

That's sort of the usage I'm used to, but it probably has more to do
with network topology than CPU power.  Servers on the internet are at
the top of the diagram, and embedded devices that can't access the
internet directly are at the bottom with my PC somewhere in the
middle.

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! Are you still an
                                  at               ALCOHOLIC?
                              gmail.com            

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77701

On Wed, 2 Dec 2015 15:20:13 +0000 (UTC), Grant Edwards
<invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>On 2015-12-02, Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
>> On 02/12/15 08:57, Juha Nieminen wrote:
>>> In comp.lang.c++ Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>>> You download things FROM a computer, you upload them TO a computer.
>>>
>>> It's a matter of perspective. If a hacker breaks into your computer and
>>> starts a download from somewhere else into your computer, isn't the hacker
>>> "downloading" things to your computer?
>>
>> My understanding of the term has always been that you upload from a 
>> smaller device to a larger, and download from a larger device to a 
>> smaller. Thus, from your laptop you might *up*load data to a Web server 
>> or a mainframe, but you would *down*load data to your phone or tablet.
>
>That's sort of the usage I'm used to, but it probably has more to do
>with network topology than CPU power.  Servers on the internet are at
>the top of the diagram, and embedded devices that can't access the
>internet directly are at the bottom with my PC somewhere in the
>middle.

In my usage it all has to do with sending and receiving, like
immigration and emigration. 

I UPload photos from my cell phone to Facebook. 

I DOWNload photos from my cell phone to my desktop computer. 


-- 
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web:  http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77704

On Thu, 03 Dec 2015 06:21:45 +0200, Steve Hayes
<hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 2 Dec 2015 15:20:13 +0000 (UTC), Grant Edwards
><invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On 2015-12-02, Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
>>> On 02/12/15 08:57, Juha Nieminen wrote:
>>>> In comp.lang.c++ Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>>>> You download things FROM a computer, you upload them TO a computer.
>>>>
>>>> It's a matter of perspective. If a hacker breaks into your computer and
>>>> starts a download from somewhere else into your computer, isn't the hacker
>>>> "downloading" things to your computer?
>>>
>>> My understanding of the term has always been that you upload from a 
>>> smaller device to a larger, and download from a larger device to a 
>>> smaller. Thus, from your laptop you might *up*load data to a Web server 
>>> or a mainframe, but you would *down*load data to your phone or tablet.
>>
>>That's sort of the usage I'm used to, but it probably has more to do
>>with network topology than CPU power.  Servers on the internet are at
>>the top of the diagram, and embedded devices that can't access the
>>internet directly are at the bottom with my PC somewhere in the
>>middle.
>
>In my usage it all has to do with sending and receiving, like
>immigration and emigration. 
>
>I UPload photos from my cell phone to Facebook. 
>
>I DOWNload photos from my cell phone to my desktop computer. 

To which I will add that uploading is sending, and downloading is
fetching.

So saying that Microsoft downloaded something to my computer is like
saying that someone fetched me a ltter when they actually sent it. 


-- 
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web:  http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77600

Juha Nieminen wrote:
> In comp.lang.c++ Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>> You download things FROM a computer, you upload them TO a computer.
>
> It's a matter of perspective. If a hacker breaks into your computer and
> starts a download from somewhere else into your computer, isn't the hacker
> "downloading" things to your computer?
>
> --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
>

Down is towards an end node; up is towards the backbone. Servers
live closer to the backbone. Usually. Or rather did when the
nomenclature was forged.

-- 
Les Cargill

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77623

On 2015-12-02, Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> wrote:
> Juha Nieminen wrote:
>> In comp.lang.c++ Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>> You download things FROM a computer, you upload them TO a computer.
>>
>> It's a matter of perspective. If a hacker breaks into your computer and
>> starts a download from somewhere else into your computer, isn't the hacker
>> "downloading" things to your computer?
>>
>> --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
>>
>
> Down is towards an end node; up is towards the backbone. Servers live
> closer to the backbone. Usually. Or rather did when the nomenclature
> was forged.

Exactly!  Thats the usage I've been used to for the past 30 years.

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! I'm pretending that
                                  at               we're all watching PHIL
                              gmail.com            SILVERS instead of RICARDO
                                                   MONTALBAN!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77611

In comp.lang.c Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> wrote:
> In comp.lang.c++ Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>> You download things FROM a computer, you upload them TO a computer.
 
> It's a matter of perspective. If a hacker breaks into your computer and
> starts a download from somewhere else into your computer, isn't the hacker
> "downloading" things to your computer?

As well as I know it, the term originated near the beginning of the
microcomputer era, when data would be downloaded from a larger
computer to a smaller one, or uploaded from a small computer to a
larger one.  There is an assumption of a big server and a small
local machine.  (The server may be a large server farm with many
small computers, the size being aggregate.)


Early machines weren't big enough to run an assembler, so it was
done with a cross assembler on a bigger machine and downloaded.

So, in the case of a hacker, it depends on the size of your computer
and the size of the computer where the data is coming from. 

There should also be size independent terms like transfer and copy.

-- glen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77632

Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> writes:
> In comp.lang.c++ Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>> You download things FROM a computer, you upload them TO a computer.
>
> It's a matter of perspective. If a hacker breaks into your computer and
> starts a download from somewhere else into your computer, isn't the hacker
> "downloading" things to your computer?

My understanding of the word "downloading" has always been STOP FEEDING
THE TROLL!

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77708

On Wed, 2 Dec 2015 08:57:44 +0000 (UTC), Juha Nieminen
<nospam@thanks.invalid> wrote:

>In comp.lang.c++ Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>> You download things FROM a computer, you upload them TO a computer.
>
>It's a matter of perspective. If a hacker breaks into your computer and
>starts a download from somewhere else into your computer, isn't the hacker
>"downloading" things to your computer?

Does it matter? As far as the law is concerned, it is possession of
child porn that's illegal. How it got there is irrelevant.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77713

On 03/12/15 07:24, Chris in Makati wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Dec 2015 08:57:44 +0000 (UTC), Juha Nieminen
> <nospam@thanks.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> In comp.lang.c++ Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>> You download things FROM a computer, you upload them TO a computer.
>>
>> It's a matter of perspective. If a hacker breaks into your computer and
>> starts a download from somewhere else into your computer, isn't the hacker
>> "downloading" things to your computer?
> 
> Does it matter? As far as the law is concerned, it is possession of
> child porn that's illegal. How it got there is irrelevant.
> 

You are posting to a wide range of international newsgroups (with this
thread being way off-topic for all of them...).  It makes no sense to
talk about "the law", because this is not something covered by
/international/ law.

What counts as "child porn", what counts as "possession", how relevant
intention, knowledge, etc., is, varies enormously from country to
country.  Even if the OP is telling the truth (and if Skybuck said that
grass is green, I'd recommend going outside to check), and he gets
caught with this stuff on his machine, punishments can vary from "it's
fine as long as you don't distribute it" to "25 years for each picture,
to be served consecutively".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77715

In comp.lang.c++ Chris in Makati <mail@nospam.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Dec 2015 08:57:44 +0000 (UTC), Juha Nieminen
> <nospam@thanks.invalid> wrote:
> 
>>In comp.lang.c++ Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>> You download things FROM a computer, you upload them TO a computer.
>>
>>It's a matter of perspective. If a hacker breaks into your computer and
>>starts a download from somewhere else into your computer, isn't the hacker
>>"downloading" things to your computer?
> 
> Does it matter? As far as the law is concerned, it is possession of
> child porn that's illegal. How it got there is irrelevant.

Most judiciary systems are not robots following a narrow set of instructions.
If they determine that it wasn't your fault, they will not punish the
innocent.

Besides, how would they even know what's in your computer?

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77797

On Thu, 3 Dec 2015 09:16:32 +0000 (UTC), Juha Nieminen
<nospam@thanks.invalid> wrote:

>In comp.lang.c++ Chris in Makati <mail@nospam.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Dec 2015 08:57:44 +0000 (UTC), Juha Nieminen
>> <nospam@thanks.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>>In comp.lang.c++ Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>>> You download things FROM a computer, you upload them TO a computer.
>>>
>>>It's a matter of perspective. If a hacker breaks into your computer and
>>>starts a download from somewhere else into your computer, isn't the hacker
>>>"downloading" things to your computer?
>> 
>> Does it matter? As far as the law is concerned, it is possession of
>> child porn that's illegal. How it got there is irrelevant.
>
>Most judiciary systems are not robots following a narrow set of instructions.
>If they determine that it wasn't your fault, they will not punish the
>innocent.
>
>Besides, how would they even know what's in your computer?

If you do a Google search for <child porn arrested> you will find
literally thousands of cases where raids have taken place and people
have been found with this material on their computers.

In many of these cases the authorities have traced the IP addresses of
people whose computers have made connections to known sites that host
child porn. It's no use trying to claim that a bot you weren't aware
of downloaded it without your knowledge. If you could get off the hook
that easily everybody who was interested in the stuff would
deliberately install such a bot and use that as an excuse.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c

csiph-web