Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.comp.os.windows-10 > #195491 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-09-03 16:30 +0930 |
| Last post | 2026-09-08 22:30 +0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 119 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-03 16:30 +0930
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-03 08:09 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-04 02:27 +0930
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-03 20:46 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 06:15 +0600
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2026-09-05 00:34 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 07:05 +0600
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2026-09-05 01:47 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 14:00 -0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2026-09-05 17:49 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 16:14 -0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2026-09-06 00:06 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-06 13:39 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2026-09-06 15:37 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-06 20:23 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 02:16 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-07 13:42 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 21:06 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-07 21:28 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 06:38 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 09:48 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 22:36 +0400
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-07 15:28 -0700
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-08 00:46 +0100
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 06:58 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 07:39 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 08:58 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "....winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> - 2026-09-07 02:01 -0400
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-07 01:47 -0500
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2026-09-07 10:18 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-07 13:30 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 21:22 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-07 22:28 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 01:50 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 07:29 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 07:22 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2026-09-08 10:44 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 13:27 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-08 09:47 -0600
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 19:51 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-09-08 10:23 -0700
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2026-09-08 18:12 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 22:18 +0400
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-09-09 19:46 -0700
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-10 09:38 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2026-09-10 10:21 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-11 07:45 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-09-11 09:49 -0700
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2026-09-11 19:29 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-11 20:26 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-09-25 23:43 +0800
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-09-25 13:14 -0700
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-09-26 04:41 +0800
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 18:59 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 21:20 +0400
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 19:37 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2026-09-08 19:26 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-08 11:36 -0600
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 20:05 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2026-09-08 20:35 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 19:06 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-07 10:47 +0100
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-07 13:34 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-07 18:48 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-07 18:46 +0100
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2026-09-07 14:04 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 03:47 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Nick Charles <none@none.none> - 2026-09-05 01:11 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 07:24 +0600
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-04 23:15 -0700
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 14:18 -0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-05 16:40 -0700
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 02:40 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 03:09 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 03:12 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 03:13 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 03:14 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 03:16 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 03:18 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 04:23 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-06 19:03 -0700
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2026-09-06 11:57 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-05 06:44 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 14:35 -0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ <winstonmvp@gmail.com> - 2026-09-04 00:45 -0400
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-03 15:48 -0700
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2026-09-04 02:02 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 07:46 +0600
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-04 10:28 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2026-09-04 11:44 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 20:28 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 21:45 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-07 21:28 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 07:38 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 09:54 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-04 22:58 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 07:13 +0600
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-05 07:57 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 14:48 -0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-05 12:13 -0600
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 15:18 -0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-05 12:25 -0600
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 16:22 -0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-06 00:11 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-09-05 09:17 +0100
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-05 11:22 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 15:13 -0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-06 07:55 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 07:50 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 07:10 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 09:58 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 21:00 +0400
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 21:26 +0000
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2026-09-06 20:39 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 08:07 +0300
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 10:04 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2026-09-08 13:03 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 13:38 +0200
Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 22:30 +0400
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-06 19:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <117l62n$2s6o1$1@kst.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #195573 |
Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> writes:
> Keith Thompson wrote:
>>> So, together, the Windows & Python newsgroup honed the working code.
>>> Do you need me to supply the code for you again so you can run it?
>>
>> You haven't supplied it once. If you did, I personally would not be
>> interested in running it, but it might at least be topical in
>> comp.lang.python *if* anyone actually discusses the code.
>
> Hi Keith Thompson,
>
> Thank you for bringing up your point of view, as all points are valid here.
> This is Usenet where we welcome deep detailed discussion of tech topics.
Usenet welcomes technical discussion of topics that are relevant to the
newsgroups in which they are posted.
> Jon Ribbens clearly ran the code so we have proof that it was referenced
> properly enough for him to have run it on his machine to prove the point.
I don't know or care where Jon Ribbens obtained any Python code.
Perhaps you provided it to him directly. It wasn't posted here.
> Nonetheless, it's good you're *asking* for the Python code, which I only
> ran on Windows 10, and which I'm happy to supply to you for all to review.
I don't know how you misunderstood what I wrote so badly.
I haven't asked for Python code. I've observed that you haven't
posted any Python code, and therefore your posts should not be
in comp.lang.python. If you want to talk about Python here in
comp.lang.python, that's great. If you don't, I wish you'd go away.
> Please keep in mind the progression of this topic started with this paper:
> *Surveilling the Masses with Wi-Fi-Based Positioning Systems*
> <https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14975>
>
> As Jon Ribbens did, I simply ran the Python code in that article on my PC.
Are you claiming that there's Python code in that paper? There is none
in the PDF. (I didn't read it in any depth because it's not something I
care about.)
I see you've posted some Python source code later in this thread, along
with Windows batch and PowerShell. Since you haven't said anything
about the code (how it's written, what features it uses, how it could be
improved), I suggest that it's (a) far too late to excuse you behavior
so far, and (b) still inappropriate for comp.lang.python.
Feel free to have the last word and pretend you've won.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-06 11:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <117jrft.j88.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #195525 |
Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote: > Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> writes: > [...] > > Heh heh heh... > > > > While I realize Apple religious zealots will attack people personally > [SNIP] > > Can you please restrict this to newsgroups where it's relevant? > > In particularly, there's in this thread nothing about Python or > Windows 10. I'm sorry, but no can do: Usenet/NetNews doesn't allow an empty 'Newsgroups:' header.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-05 06:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <117gdnl$19ma2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #195516 |
On Sat, 5 Sep 2026 06:15:55 +0600, Maria Sophia wrote: > Do you know the difference between these two situations: > a. iPhone owner happens to walk by my house & it uploads my BSSID/GPS? > b. Android owner happens to walk by my house & it uploads my BSSID/GPS? If there is any difference, it would not be wise to rely on it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-05 14:35 -0300 |
| Message-ID | <117hjti$sa2$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> |
| In reply to | #195527 |
Lawrence D㏕liveiro wrote:
>> Do you know the difference between these two situations:
>> a. iPhone owner happens to walk by my house & it uploads my BSSID/GPS?
>> b. Android owner happens to walk by my house & it uploads my BSSID/GPS?
>
> If there is any difference, it would not be wise to rely on it.
There is a *huge* difference, Lawrence.
For half of that huge difference, all you need to do is read this paper.
*Surveilling the Masses with Wi-Fi-Based Positioning Systems*
<https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14975>
For the other half of that huge difference, all you need to read is this.
<https://ichnaea.readthedocs.io/en/stable/api/geosubmit2.html>
"The BSSID of the Wifi network. Hidden Wifi networks
must not be collected."
Then, read how much Apple "cares about your privacy" by reading this!
<https://support.apple.com/en-ie/102515>
For contrast, read this:
<https://wiki.mozilla.org/CloudServices/Location/FAQ>
<https://wiki.mozilla.org/WIFI>
HINT:
Mozilla/MLS would not collect data from Wi-Fi networks with hidden SSIDs.
<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1177952>
Daniel Veditz confirmed that Mozilla MLS, like Google WPS, does not even
*collect* the BSSID/GPS pair for hidden-broadcast SSIDs.
Notice the difference between 'collect', 'save on device" and 'upload' to
servers, because collecting means it can't be uploaded and hence not saved
into a global database for everyone in the world to easily track the router
movements from anywhere in the world to anywhere else in the world, in
almost real time with meter-like accuracy with no restrictions at all.
Most people don't understand a word I'm saying above, so I need to be clear
that "collecting" is different from "uploading" which itself is different
from "saving" which itself is different from "allowing anyone in the entire
world to access the unique BSSID/SSID pair" sans restrictions.
If you think through the fate of the two situations I keep presenting to
you, you'll see where they diverge in such a way as to be shockingly scary.
With the Python scripts we worked on in December of last year, even I can
track any router's movements in the world, with zero restrictions.
Want to test it?
Give me your router AP BSSID in your own home.
I'll tell you where you live.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ <winstonmvp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-04 00:45 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <117die3$an9o$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #195496 |
On 03-Sep-26 12:57 PM, Maria Sophia wrote: > > Apple literally manually removed my SSIDs from their database, as a result > of my RADAR bug report and Apple literally changed their documentation. > <https://support.apple.com/en-ie/102515> Documentation available on that link has not been updated for over 3 months. > > That's new. > That's solely because of me. Doubtful. > > > The entire reason for a hidden SSID is privacy. > If the SSID is hidden, it tells everyone you want to be private Not true. Basic network scanning apps/utilities can see hidden networks in a jiffy(almost instantaneously). While your device can't see it, your device continues to broadcast your private network name. - Continued broadcasting exposes your network and effectively gives attackers or trackers to ID devices - which is many cases is not necessarily about security but also includes future attempts to take advantage using other tools with the intent to invade your privacy. With respect to companies like Apple and other computer servicing industries: The reason these tech giants track access points is *not* necessarily about security and privacy => its about geolocation. i.e. ads, monetization of their services, dispatching support, fraud prevention, regulatory compliance, asset tracking(Enterprise and OEM), etc. With respect to Krebs. Well known and respected in the Enterprise admin community. We all already know that Krebs hasn't specifically addressed in his writings(or communication as a contributor to/from private security-based listserver groups - which fortunately you don't have access to) content with respect to 'do not hide your SSID' - his efforts about wireless networking echo a widely accepted consensus that hiding your SSID does not provide additional security, but also can lead to additional and future attempts to invade your privacy. Fyi... 1. Krebs covered security and privacy concerns with respect to Apple in 2024. (you should be able to find that article on your own time). It(how to protect your privacy and security) hasn't changed much since then, and none of it because of your efforts. 2. Krebs will also tell you that your best approach(which has been the norm for sometime) is to focus on meaningful configuration, privacy oriented naming , proper encryption and strong device hygiene I.e. use: - Strong encryption - unique password(i.e phrases or not easily guessed) - Update Windows and router firmware - disable WPS If you expect anyone to believe you had discussions about this topic 'a billion times', your misrepresenting your efforts and only showing the true colors of a fool and poseur. -- ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-03 15:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87a4pykl2c.fsf@nightsong.com> |
| In reply to | #195492 |
Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes: > I don’t understand what you’re complaining about, exactly. Your wi-fi > network broadcasts its existence to all and sundry, and yet you feel > upset when somebody collects that information and passes it on. Your car broadcasts its license plate number to anyone in sight of it, yet people are rightfully ticked off at Flock cameras everywhere recording them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-04 02:02 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <20260904020244.c8a3fcce14ca5eb4f7473c14@gmail.moc> |
| In reply to | #195500 |
Paul Rubi: > Your car broadcasts its license plate number to anyone in > sight of it, yet people are rightfully ticked off at Flock > cameras everywhere recording them. Because machine data acquirement is more powerful. -- () ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-05 07:46 +0600 |
| Message-ID | <117fsac$23sa$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> |
| In reply to | #195501 |
Anton Shepelev wrote: >> Your car broadcasts its license plate number to anyone in >> sight of it, yet people are rightfully ticked off at Flock >> cameras everywhere recording them. > > Because machine data acquirement is more powerful. The flock camera analogy only works if anyone in the world can access it. *Surveilling the Masses with Wi-Fi-Based Positioning Systems* <https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14975> While I understand the analogies being presented, and certainly I understand the purpose is to claim "no big deal" as a result, I must beg to differ because the analogies, while reasonable, fall flat on some regards. What if, for example, the government allowed you to put a black cloth over your license plate, and that is a clear indication that you don't want it to be recorded by Flock cameras (& by extension, your movements recorded). What if Google cameras respected that black cloth as did Mozilla cameras. But what if Apple cameras refused to respect that common leave-me-alone black cloth? Think about that. What if *only* Apple cameras lifted up that black cloth, on purpose. So that they could get your unique vehicle VIN that tracks you everywhere. Pretty bad, huh? But wait... it gets worse. What if the Google camera, if it happens to get your license plate, which is tied to your unique VIN, but the Google camera sees *another* indicator that you do not want them to put that license plate into their database. Let's say that's a sticker, on the plate, that says, oh, let's say _nomap. What does Apple do? Versus what Google and Mozilla do? But wait, if that's not bad enough, there's still more. A lot more in fact. What if anyone in the world could look up that license plate & related VIN from anywhere in the world, and there are absolutely no controls on that? What? Do you see the difference? Allow me to provide an example: a. Let's say my ex-wife is in Germany, back in the home country b. But, she wants to track my vehicle everywhere I go c. As described in the aforementioned research paper, she can. It's no different than you choosing the license plate of your ex-wife (or whomever) and tracking them anywhere in the world, with no controls on that. Do you see why understanding the problem set makes the flock camera issue only superficially an analogy. The flock camera could only be an analogy if anyone in the world could track your movements down to a meter resolution, with no controls on that. -- What people need to know about privacy is complex, so they simplify it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-04 10:28 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <o2cqmmxodi.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #195492 |
On 2026-09-03 10:09, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Thu, 3 Sep 2026 16:30:15 +0930, Maria Sophia wrote: > >> Those scripts proved I could collect a list of every single access >> point in Apple's database, just as researchers Eric Rye and Dave >> Levin did, using a simple perl script which proved the results of >> their paper, and which went further to prove that my own >> hidden-broadcast SSIDs were in that database. > > I don’t understand what you’re complaining about, exactly. Your wi-fi > network broadcasts its existence to all and sundry, and yet you feel > upset when somebody collects that information and passes it on. I guess it is because the SSID is terminated in _nomap, which is documented as a flag to Apple and others to not store this SSID in their maps. But Apple is/was mapping them all the same. > > And hiding SSIDs is a complete waste of time, which gains you nothing > in security or privacy. Don’t do it. Yep. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-04 11:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn119lbpq.2a0.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu> |
| In reply to | #195508 |
On 2026-09-04, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: > On 2026-09-03 10:09, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >> On Thu, 3 Sep 2026 16:30:15 +0930, Maria Sophia wrote: >>> Those scripts proved I could collect a list of every single access >>> point in Apple's database, just as researchers Eric Rye and Dave >>> Levin did, using a simple perl script which proved the results of >>> their paper, and which went further to prove that my own >>> hidden-broadcast SSIDs were in that database. >> >> I don’t understand what you’re complaining about, exactly. Your wi-fi >> network broadcasts its existence to all and sundry, and yet you feel >> upset when somebody collects that information and passes it on. > > I guess it is because the SSID is terminated in _nomap, which is > documented as a flag to Apple and others to not store this SSID in their > maps. But Apple is/was mapping them all the same. I got the impression they were claiming that their SSID was hidden, which makes it irrelevant as to whether it has "_nomap" at the end of it, but that Apple had somehow discovered and logged it nonetheless. It seems highly implausible.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-07 20:28 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <117ms7b$1d4s$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> |
| In reply to | #195509 |
Jon Ribbens wrote: >>> I don┤ understand what you┴e complaining about, exactly. Your wi-fi >>> network broadcasts its existence to all and sundry, and yet you feel >>> upset when somebody collects that information and passes it on. >> >> I guess it is because the SSID is terminated in _nomap, which is >> documented as a flag to Apple and others to not store this SSID in their >> maps. But Apple is/was mapping them all the same. > > I got the impression they were claiming that their SSID was hidden, > which makes it irrelevant as to whether it has "_nomap" at the end > of it, but that Apple had somehow discovered and logged it nonetheless. > It seems highly implausible. Hi Jon, I appreciate your intelligence as you got everything right tactically. You even got the fact of how shocking the truth is, correct! You said what Apple is doing is, to you, "highly implausible". I would agree, had I not been horrified to find out Apple is doing it! The fact Apple is doing it shocked me, which is what started this quest. At that time, Apple said nothing about whether they're doing it. But I have letters from Apple lawyers saying they will document it. And they did. So... It's not only not "highly implausible", but Apple now *says* they do it! <https://support.apple.com/en-ie/102515> That documentation, which I have in my email records dated months before it was documented, from Apple lawyers, saying that they'd document it, makes it pretty plausible after all. The fact Apple documents it, when they didn't document it when I first brought this to their attention (and to that of the newsgrops), is pretty good evidence that it's not only NOT "highly implausible" but shockingly true. The fact it's true is the shocking part. Is it not? -- The great thing about Usenet is people work together to help all learn.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-07 21:45 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <117n0nr$12aj$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> |
| In reply to | #195508 |
Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> And hiding SSIDs is a complete waste of time, which gains you nothing
>> in security or privacy. Don�t do it.
>
> Yep.
There are two fundamental issues which are making this task more difficult:
1. The common trolls are *desperate* to infest this thread
(and yet, not a single one of the trolls can possibly add value),
2. And, people who are NOT trolls, like Carlos above, still do not
(yet) understand the topic because they're applying old knowledge.
Anyone who thinks he'll understand this topic who only knows the stone-age
networking basics (which we all know) will *never* understand this topic.
Anyone who says "yep" to that statement, fundamentally doesn't understand
that hiding the broadcast works for every outfit on the planet we know of.
Except Apple.
When I write a thread, it's about something important most people
can't even fathom, so it takes intelligence to understand the topic.
None of the common trolls, Hank or Franlin or Wolfan, et al. has the
intelligence to even begin to understand this topic.
Yet, these trolls, like Nuno Silva, feel *desperate* to say "something",
(anything!) because they simply cannot comprehend the topic at hand.
However, some people are intelligent, who, unlike Nuno or Winston or
Franklin or Hank, et al., have the intelligence to comprehend the topic.
Only the people who possess the minimum intelligence, can add value here.
Not the common trolls like Winston, Slootweg, Nuno Silva, Wolfan, et al.
Carlos, to his credit, is *trying* to bring his level of knowledge out of
the stone age of networking, which, let's be clear, we all start with that.
But this topic is not from the stone age of networking.
This topic is new.
If people can't follow the trail of the BSSID from the home router to the
mass surveillance team somewhere in Russia (or at R122 at Fort Mead), then
they have not understood how *different* things are in the modern day.
Three fundamental modern facts need to be understood before someone, like
Carlos did above, simply claims "yep" to something completely incorrect.
1. Apple iOS devices see & collect & store & upload BSSID/GPS pairs
*COMPLETELY DIFFERENTLY* than do Google Android devices.
If you don't know that difference, you know nothing about this topic.
You're in the stone age of knowledge.
That isn't bad. It just means you have to seek to understand before
you say "yep" to obviously incorrect assessments of the situation.
2. Apple stores, vets, culls, and distributes its internal WPS cloud db
*COMPLETELY DIFFERENTLY* than does Google/Mozilla (and others).
If you don't know that difference, you know nothing about this topic.
You're in the stone age of knowledge.
That isn't bad. It just means you have to seek to understand before
you say "yep" to obviously incorrect assessments of the situation.
If anyone is stuck in the stone age of knowledge level, that's fine, as
there's nothing wrong with the stone-age knowledge that, oh, say,
Winston spewed.
But spewing stone-age knowledge does not help when we all know the
stone-age knowledge of networking.
What would help is if people understood the path of the BSSID/GPS pair.
--
When I write a thread, it's about something important most people
can't even fathom, so it takes intelligence to understand the topic.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-07 21:28 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <psf3nmxviq.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #195623 |
On 2026-09-07 20:45, Maria Sophia wrote: > Carlos E.R. wrote: >>> And hiding SSIDs is a complete waste of time, which gains you nothing >>> in security or privacy. Don�t do it. >> >> Yep. > > There are two fundamental issues which are making this task more difficult: > 1. The common trolls are *desperate* to infest this thread > (and yet, not a single one of the trolls can possibly add value), > 2. And, people who are NOT trolls, like Carlos above, still do not > (yet) understand the topic because they're applying old knowledge. ... The point we are saying is not what you claim it to be. It is not about Apple storing and publishing BSSIDs of hidden SSIDs. This is bad behaviour by them. Ok. But our point is that you gain nothing by making your AP hidden in the first place. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-08 07:38 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <117o3go$r53$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> |
| In reply to | #195627 |
Carlos E.R. wrote: > The point we are saying is not what you claim it to be. It is not about > Apple storing and publishing BSSIDs of hidden SSIDs. This is bad > behaviour by them. Ok. But our point is that you gain nothing by making > your AP hidden in the first place. Hi Carlos, I disagree. The answer to *this* question, will tell you why what you said is wrong: Q: Will Google's WPS database contain a BSSID:GPS pair for an access point whose SSID broadcast is set to hidden (i.e., empty or null)? A: Please answer "yes", or "no". I know the answer to that question. You clearly do not. Once you know the answer to that question, you'll see why what you said, is dead wrong. I could ask the same question of the Mozilla MLS, but it's now defunct, but they document this (and we published that documentation elsewhere). Only Apple ignores the clear privacy intent of setting a hidden SSID. Nobody else. Just Apple. (to our knowledge)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-08 09:54 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <air4nmxl5i.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #195642 |
On 2026-09-08 06:38, Maria Sophia wrote: > Carlos E.R. wrote: >> The point we are saying is not what you claim it to be. It is not about >> Apple storing and publishing BSSIDs of hidden SSIDs. This is bad >> behaviour by them. Ok. But our point is that you gain nothing by making >> your AP hidden in the first place. > > Hi Carlos, > > I disagree. > > The answer to *this* question, will tell you why what you said is wrong: > > Q: Will Google's WPS database contain a BSSID:GPS pair for an access point > whose SSID broadcast is set to hidden (i.e., empty or null)? > A: Please answer "yes", or "no". > > I know the answer to that question. > You clearly do not. I do, as a matter of fact. > > Once you know the answer to that question, you'll see why what you said, > is dead wrong. > > I could ask the same question of the Mozilla MLS, but it's now defunct, > but they document this (and we published that documentation elsewhere). > > Only Apple ignores the clear privacy intent of setting a hidden SSID. > Nobody else. > > Just Apple. (to our knowledge) -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-04 22:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <117fif2$12j9f$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #195491 |
Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote: > This is an update to the WPS scripts that I posted a few months ago. I was wondering how you got on with your "experiment" only the other day. You said you had installed two routers in friends' houses downtown, move them around and then track the movement in the database. I'd like to see the results. How often did you move them, how far, and were the details tracked in the "apple database"?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-05 07:13 +0600 |
| Message-ID | <117fqcm$2v6k$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> |
| In reply to | #195515 |
Chris wrote: > Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote: >> This is an update to the WPS scripts that I posted a few months ago. > > I was wondering how you got on with your "experiment" only the other day. > > You said you had installed two routers in friends' houses downtown, move > them around and then track the movement in the database. > > I'd like to see the results. How often did you move them, how far, and were > the details tracked in the "apple database"? Hi Chris, Thanks for remembering that I ran a 3-router experiment early in the year. That experiment was run in the first month of the year, which was before Apple changed their documentation saying that they will track us forever. <https://support.apple.com/en-ie/102515> Those BSSIDs are now in Apple's WPS database, so the experiment worked. Now, anywhere in the world I move those routers, anyone can track them. Instantly. Down to a meter or so resolution. With no controls whatsoever. Think about that. What if I were hiding from an ex-wife or disgruntled Apple poster? Anyone on the planet can track my router location from anywhere in the world down to meter-like accuracy, and I simply cannot stop them. The only thing I can do, once my BSSID is in Apple's WPS database, is throw that router over the next bridge because I can't change the BSSID on it. I can be tracked forever, if my location is associated with that router. Just like the research paper said it would be. I simply reproduced exactly what the research paper said was possible. Worse, I proved hiding the BSSID broadcast was a catch-22 situation. a. It kept the BSSID out of Google/Mozilla hands (they're well behaved) b. Yet, it's permanently in the Apple WPS database Which do you pick to be in, given you can't solve both issues at once? HINT: Apple's WPS database has no protection whatsoever, as proved by: *Surveilling the Masses with Wi-Fi-Based Positioning Systems* <https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14975> My research *started* with that paper, and took it to the next level. -- Of the million things to know about privacy, most people only know 3.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-05 07:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <117gi0p$1b2mm$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #195520 |
Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote: > Chris wrote: >> Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote: >>> This is an update to the WPS scripts that I posted a few months ago. >> >> I was wondering how you got on with your "experiment" only the other day. >> >> You said you had installed two routers in friends' houses downtown, move >> them around and then track the movement in the database. >> >> I'd like to see the results. How often did you move them, how far, and were >> the details tracked in the "apple database"? > > Hi Chris, > > Thanks for remembering that I ran a 3-router experiment early in the year. > > That experiment was run in the first month of the year, which was before > Apple changed their documentation saying that they will track us forever. > <https://support.apple.com/en-ie/102515> > > Those BSSIDs are now in Apple's WPS database, so the experiment worked. That wasn't the experiment. > Now, anywhere in the world I move those routers, anyone can track them. That's not answering my question. Did you move them and what did you see? Remember your claim was that you could track people from California to Florida using only their router. > Instantly. Evidence? > Down to a meter or so resolution. > With no controls whatsoever. What did you test? > Think about that. > What if I were hiding from an ex-wife or disgruntled Apple poster? Just get a different router. > Anyone on the planet can track my router location from anywhere in the > world down to meter-like accuracy, and I simply cannot stop them. No-one knows which, of the billions of entries in the databases, is *your* router. No big deal. > The only thing I can do, once my BSSID is in Apple's WPS database, is throw > that router over the next bridge because I can't change the BSSID on it. > > I can be tracked forever, if my location is associated with that router. > > Just like the research paper said it would be. > I simply reproduced exactly what the research paper said was possible. > > Worse, I proved hiding the BSSID broadcast was a catch-22 situation. > a. It kept the BSSID out of Google/Mozilla hands (they're well behaved) > b. Yet, it's permanently in the Apple WPS database > > Which do you pick to be in, given you can't solve both issues at once? > > HINT: Apple's WPS database has no protection whatsoever, as proved by: > *Surveilling the Masses with Wi-Fi-Based Positioning Systems* > <https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14975> > > My research *started* with that paper, and took it to the next level.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-05 14:48 -0300 |
| Message-ID | <117hklq$ljt$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> |
| In reply to | #195528 |
Chris wrote:
>> What if I were hiding from an ex-wife or disgruntled Apple poster?
>
> Just get a different router.
Chris,
I realize your only goal is to defend Apple's honor to the death, no matter
what, but I only needed to prove two things, both of which are now obvious.
1. Apple's WPS database can be used by anyone in the world to track the
location of a router AP (by BSSID/GPS) without any restrictions.
2. Apple's refuses to honor the documented intent of a hidden-broadcast.
The fact you're desperate to dispute those facts in order to protect the
honor of your religious God is evident in the fact that the researchers
proved the first point, and Apple's *new* documentation proves the second.
Three simple questions for you, Chris:
Q1: What do you dispute about point #1 above, after reading this paper?
*Surveilling the Masses with Wi-Fi-Based Positioning Systems*
<https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14975>
Q2: What do you dispute about point #2 above, after reading this new link?
<https://support.apple.com/en-ie/102515>
Only a religious zealot could possibly deny the veracity of those 2 facts.
Want to know what my third question asked of you is, Chris:
Q3: Would you kindly give me the BSSID of your home router AP please?
When/if you do so, not only will I provide the exact location of that
router (to the resolution of GPS) but I can track its movement, forever.
With no restrictions on that tracking (see point #1 above, for proof).
--
Everyone disputing this is doing so only on their religious belief system.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-05 12:13 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <117hm3u$1ns1p$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #195535 |
Maria Sophia wrote: > Chris wrote: >>> What if I were hiding from an ex-wife or disgruntled Apple poster? >> >> Just get a different router. > > Chris, > > I realize your only goal is to defend Apple's honor to the death, no matter > what, but I only needed to prove two things, both of which are now obvious. > > 1. Apple's WPS database can be used by anyone in the world to track the > location of a router AP (by BSSID/GPS) without any restrictions. This is the same as: 5e) A few maggots are going at it eating an apple, and nearby there is a pumpkin in the field. I felt that since everyone was throwing analogies out there I'd try my hand too. There's only so far analogies can take you when you actually believe they are the same without a shred of proof.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.os.windows-10
csiph-web