Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.computer.security > #5533 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Anonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-12-21 09:17 +0100 |
| Last post | 2015-12-24 10:04 -0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 78 — 22 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.computer.security
Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Anonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> - 2015-12-21 09:17 +0100
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-12-21 09:07 -0500
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software linuxiac <linuxiac@usa.com> - 2015-12-21 14:47 +0000
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-12-21 09:58 -0500
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2015-12-21 15:37 +0000
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-12-21 10:45 -0500
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2015-12-23 10:12 +0000
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-12-23 11:19 -0500
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2015-12-24 11:41 +0000
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-12-24 14:21 +0100
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-12-24 11:54 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Big Bad Bob <BigBadBob-at-mrp3-dot-com@testing.local> - 2015-12-24 13:49 -0800
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-12-24 15:24 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snerdly <noneofyourbusiness@anyway.net> - 2015-12-24 15:32 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-12-24 20:00 -0500
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-12-28 06:55 -0600
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snerdly <noneofyourbusiness@anyway.net> - 2015-12-28 11:08 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-12-28 13:26 -0600
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-12-28 13:02 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snerdly <noneofyourbusiness@anyway.net> - 2015-12-28 13:30 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-12-28 15:01 -0600
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snerdly <noneofyourbusiness@anyway.com> - 2015-12-28 18:33 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-12-28 20:45 -0500
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-12-28 19:02 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snerdly <noneofyourbusiness@anyway.com> - 2015-12-29 13:53 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-12-30 01:35 +0000
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-12-29 19:03 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-12-30 06:15 -0600
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-12-30 09:33 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-01-03 05:18 +0000
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-12-30 06:24 -0600
Re: Eddie Haskell admits: William Jefferson Clinton lied to the country when he said Iraq had WMD Anonymous <anonymous@foto.nl1.torservers.net> - 2015-12-28 18:05 -0500
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2015-12-29 21:00 +0000
Re: Eddie Haskell admits: William Jefferson Clinton lied to the country when he said Iraq had WMD Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2015-12-28 23:26 +0000
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software "p-0''0-h the cat (UK) - The voice of the Sheeple" <super.pooh@furryfreeware.invalid> - 2015-12-29 00:54 +0000
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software G. Morgan <graham@grahammorgan.name> - 2015-12-30 16:39 -0600
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2015-12-31 03:20 +0000
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-12-31 08:25 -0600
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2016-01-01 11:47 +0100
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software "p-0''0-h the cat (UK) - The voice of the Sheeple" <super.pooh@furryfreeware.invalid> - 2016-01-01 11:38 +0000
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-01 11:11 -0500
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> - 2015-12-28 14:42 -0500
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snerdly <noneofyourbusiness@anyway.net> - 2015-12-28 13:34 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-12-28 15:03 -0600
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snerdly <noneofyourbusiness@anyway.com> - 2015-12-28 18:35 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-12-29 06:21 -0600
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snerdly <noneofyourbusiness@anyway.com> - 2015-12-29 13:54 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-12-29 18:07 -0500
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-12-30 06:05 -0600
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-12-30 13:13 +0100
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-12-30 09:32 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snerdly <noneofyourbusiness@anyway.com> - 2015-12-30 13:36 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> - 2015-12-28 16:35 -0500
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-12-28 16:55 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snerdly <noneofyourbusiness@anyway.com> - 2015-12-28 18:38 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-12-28 19:00 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-12-29 06:24 -0600
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snerdly <noneofyourbusiness@anyway.com> - 2015-12-29 13:55 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snerdly <noneofyourbusiness@anyway.com> - 2015-12-28 18:36 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2015-12-29 03:26 +0100
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Snerdly <noneofyourbusiness@anyway.com> - 2015-12-29 13:56 -0700
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-12-24 10:46 -0500
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2015-12-21 13:52 -0200
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Jeremy Bentham <nobody@anemone.mooo.com> - 2015-12-21 23:38 +0100
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-12-21 19:05 -0500
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-12-22 07:04 -0600
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-12-21 09:10 -0600
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2015-12-21 13:44 -0200
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Anonymous <anonymous@foto.nl1.torservers.net> - 2015-12-21 16:32 -0500
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2015-12-21 20:19 -0200
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-12-21 19:03 -0500
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Big Bad Bob <BigBadBob-at-mrp3-dot-com@testing.local> - 2015-12-22 13:08 -0800
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-12-22 17:44 -0500
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2015-12-23 10:15 +0000
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Big Bad Bob <BigBadBob-at-mrp3-dot-com@testing.local> - 2015-12-23 11:37 -0800
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2015-12-24 09:45 +0100
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2015-12-23 22:08 +0000
Re: Juniper faces many questions after spying code planted in software Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2015-12-24 10:04 -0200
Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 Next page →
| From | chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-28 15:01 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <gd838bds0srqk3rfm8vqrgcof75imbjogl@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #5582 |
Snerdly wrote: >But that is what Peter had written. > >"You are truly a snittish idiot. Having the source is useful for every user, >even if he is a total non-programmer. It makes certain that the programs are >available and changeable." > >Now, don't you think that your vitriol should be directed to Peter? Nope. It's your stupid interpretation of Peter's "useful for every user" that deserves my vitriol. Hint: Since no one would claim that everyone can program, *some other* definition of "useful" was intended. Troll. -- "Y'know what, let people use GNU/Linux and realize how atrocious it is on their own. It's a lot more potent than warning them that it's absolute shit." - "Slimer"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snerdly <noneofyourbusiness@anyway.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-28 18:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <n5snp8$10h$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #5584 |
On 12/28/2015 2:01 PM, chrisv wrote: > Snerdly wrote: > >> But that is what Peter had written. >> >> "You are truly a snittish idiot. Having the source is useful for every user, >> even if he is a total non-programmer. It makes certain that the programs are >> available and changeable." >> >> Now, don't you think that your vitriol should be directed to Peter? > > Nope. It's your stupid interpretation of Peter's "useful for every > user" that deserves my vitriol. > It isn't useful for every user. Most users don't even bother to look at source code. > Hint: Since no one would claim that everyone can program, *some > other* definition of "useful" was intended. > Maybe, but on the front of it, Peter wrote it. How else do you want to define it? > Troll. > This is a rather strange news group.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-28 20:45 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n5sojg$1ba$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #5591 |
Snerdly wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > On 12/28/2015 2:01 PM, chrisv wrote: >> Snerdly wrote: >> >>> But that is what Peter had written. >>> >>> "You are truly a snittish idiot. Having the source is useful for every user, >>> even if he is a total non-programmer. It makes certain that the programs are >>> available and changeable." >>> >>> Now, don't you think that your vitriol should be directed to Peter? >> >> Nope. It's your stupid interpretation of Peter's "useful for every >> user" that deserves my vitriol. > > It isn't useful for every user. > Most users don't even bother to look at source code. True. They depend on *others* who do look at the source code. In fact, since there is probably no Linux user that looks at every line of code in his distro, it is highly probable that all Linux users depend, to varying extents, on *other* people looking at the source code. If I fix a bug, you benefit, even if you don't know C from D. -- The human race is a race of cowards; and I am not only marching in that procession but carrying a banner. -- Mark Twain
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-28 19:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D2A737C9.680D9%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #5595 |
On 12/28/15, 6:45 PM, in article n5sojg$1ba$1@dont-email.me, "Chris Ahlstrom" <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote: > Snerdly wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> On 12/28/2015 2:01 PM, chrisv wrote: >>> Snerdly wrote: >>> >>>> But that is what Peter had written. >>>> >>>> "You are truly a snittish idiot. Having the source is useful for every >>>> user, >>>> even if he is a total non-programmer. It makes certain that the programs >>>> are >>>> available and changeable." >>>> >>>> Now, don't you think that your vitriol should be directed to Peter? >>> >>> Nope. It's your stupid interpretation of Peter's "useful for every >>> user" that deserves my vitriol. >> >> It isn't useful for every user. >> Most users don't even bother to look at source code. > > True. They depend on *others* who do look at the source code. > > In fact, since there is probably no Linux user that looks at > every line of code in his distro, it is highly probable that > all Linux users depend, to varying extents, on *other* people > looking at the source code. > > If I fix a bug, you benefit, even if you don't know C from D. This does not help when the current developers acknowledge that to fix bugs and to otherwise get a product to compete well would take a major overhaul. This is one such example (and a common one at that): * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c> It is not as if there is no value to open source code - much can be great and is a part of or even the whole of many great programs. But to pretend that being open source somehow makes a program great or makes it compete well is just insane. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snerdly <noneofyourbusiness@anyway.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-29 13:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <n5urni$koa$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #5595 |
On 12/28/2015 6:45 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > Snerdly wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> On 12/28/2015 2:01 PM, chrisv wrote: >>> Snerdly wrote: >>> >>>> But that is what Peter had written. >>>> >>>> "You are truly a snittish idiot. Having the source is useful for every user, >>>> even if he is a total non-programmer. It makes certain that the programs are >>>> available and changeable." >>>> >>>> Now, don't you think that your vitriol should be directed to Peter? >>> >>> Nope. It's your stupid interpretation of Peter's "useful for every >>> user" that deserves my vitriol. >> >> It isn't useful for every user. >> Most users don't even bother to look at source code. > > True. They depend on *others* who do look at the source code. > Absolutely. > In fact, since there is probably no Linux user that looks at > every line of code in his distro, it is highly probable that > all Linux users depend, to varying extents, on *other* people > looking at the source code. > > If I fix a bug, you benefit, even if you don't know C from D. > Yes, and that is what the employer will do is hire a programmer to either modify or fix code when the source is handy. The employer can't expect the secretary to fix it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-30 01:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <degqnpFaivoU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #5595 |
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 20:45:59 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > Snerdly wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> On 12/28/2015 2:01 PM, chrisv wrote: >>> Snerdly wrote: >>> >>>> But that is what Peter had written. >>>> >>>> "You are truly a snittish idiot. Having the source is useful for >>>> every user, >>>> even if he is a total non-programmer. It makes certain that the >>>> programs are available and changeable." >>>> >>>> Now, don't you think that your vitriol should be directed to Peter? >>> >>> Nope. It's your stupid interpretation of Peter's "useful for every >>> user" that deserves my vitriol. >> >> It isn't useful for every user. >> Most users don't even bother to look at source code. > > True. They depend on *others* who do look at the source code. > > In fact, since there is probably no Linux user that looks at every line > of code in his distro, it is highly probable that all Linux users > depend, to varying extents, on *other* people looking at the source > code. > > If I fix a bug, you benefit, even if you don't know C from D. Which is obvious to everybody but those with room temperature IQ's. (I think snerd just being intentionally obtuse, I don't think he's as stupid as he lets on.) [Sidenote: note change in news provider -- astraweb has a brain-dead crossposting policy. ] -- -v Kernel:4.3.3-sd Desktop:Xfce 4.12.2 Distro:Linux Mint 17.3 Rosa
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-29 19:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D2A8896B.6817C%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #5607 |
On 12/29/15, 6:35 PM, in article degqnpFaivoU1@mid.individual.net, "vallor" <vallor@cultnix.org> wrote: > On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 20:45:59 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > >> Snerdly wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >> >>> On 12/28/2015 2:01 PM, chrisv wrote: >>>> Snerdly wrote: >>>> >>>>> But that is what Peter had written. >>>>> >>>>> "You are truly a snittish idiot. Having the source is useful for >>>>> every user, >>>>> even if he is a total non-programmer. It makes certain that the >>>>> programs are available and changeable." >>>>> >>>>> Now, don't you think that your vitriol should be directed to Peter? >>>> >>>> Nope. It's your stupid interpretation of Peter's "useful for every >>>> user" that deserves my vitriol. >>> >>> It isn't useful for every user. >>> Most users don't even bother to look at source code. >> >> True. They depend on *others* who do look at the source code. >> >> In fact, since there is probably no Linux user that looks at every line >> of code in his distro, it is highly probable that all Linux users >> depend, to varying extents, on *other* people looking at the source >> code. >> >> If I fix a bug, you benefit, even if you don't know C from D. > > Which is obvious to everybody but those with room temperature IQ's. > > (I think snerd just being intentionally obtuse, I don't think he's as > stupid as he lets on.) > > [Sidenote: note change in news provider -- astraweb has a brain-dead > crossposting policy. ] Bug fixes which get put back into a project help the whole community. Sure. But the reality is with many open source project they NEVER catch up to the competition. To pretend they are used for their quality is thus silly. Does not mean they are not great - there is more than just quality. There is price, availability, and - for some - the license itself is a philosophical reason to use it. Look at LibreOffice. It is a pretty weak copy of MS Office, but it is adequate for many purposes. Adequate. Does not sound great perhaps but it is free... as in no cost. That in itself is an amazing "selling" point and should not be underestimated. And for those who have only moderate needs it may even work as well as MS Office. Apple goes after the same market segment - those who are looking for an office product that does not do all of what MS Office does. But they do not seek to copy MS Office - instead they made their own paradigm (though based on a long history of office suites, going back to the old AppleWorks on the Apple IIe and others from pre-MS Office). What iWork does it tends to do very well... often even better than MS Office, but it does not do it in the same way and it is not as full featured as MS Office. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-30 06:15 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <r7i78bdhdi83bht2sj92o9a97p6k4iqq46@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #5607 |
vallor wrote: > Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >> >> In fact, since there is probably no Linux user that looks at every line >> of code in his distro, it is highly probable that all Linux users >> depend, to varying extents, on *other* people looking at the source >> code. >> >> If I fix a bug, you benefit, even if you don't know C from D. > >Which is obvious to everybody but those with room temperature IQ's. > >(I think snerd just being intentionally obtuse, I don't think he's as >stupid as he lets on.) Well, how could anyone be that stupid, to think that anyone would suggest that "desk clerks" are going to fix or change FOSS? Then, like a true "Snit", he insists on his shitty, insulting interpretation of what was said, despite having it explained to him that he's wrong. -- "Ah, so you think it is impossible to put someone else's email in a Usenet post." - some thing, lying shamelessly (but no one can quote it lying)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-30 09:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D2A9555E.681FE%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #5611 |
On 12/30/15, 5:15 AM, in article r7i78bdhdi83bht2sj92o9a97p6k4iqq46@4ax.com, "chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote: > vallor wrote: > >> Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>> >>> In fact, since there is probably no Linux user that looks at every line >>> of code in his distro, it is highly probable that all Linux users >>> depend, to varying extents, on *other* people looking at the source >>> code. >>> >>> If I fix a bug, you benefit, even if you don't know C from D. >> >> Which is obvious to everybody but those with room temperature IQ's. >> >> (I think snerd just being intentionally obtuse, I don't think he's as >> stupid as he lets on.) > > Well, how could anyone be that stupid, to think that anyone would > suggest that "desk clerks" are going to fix or change FOSS? Then, > like a true "Snit", he insists on his shitty, insulting interpretation > of what was said, despite having it explained to him that he's wrong. What a shitting and insulting interpretation of my actions. Oh. You just self-nuked. :) -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-03 05:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <derp9qF2q02U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #5611 |
On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 06:15:49 -0600, chrisv wrote: > vallor wrote: > >> Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>> >>> In fact, since there is probably no Linux user that looks at every >>> line of code in his distro, it is highly probable that all Linux users >>> depend, to varying extents, on *other* people looking at the source >>> code. >>> >>> If I fix a bug, you benefit, even if you don't know C from D. >> >>Which is obvious to everybody but those with room temperature IQ's. >> >>(I think snerd just being intentionally obtuse, I don't think he's as >>stupid as he lets on.) > > Well, how could anyone be that stupid, to think that anyone would > suggest that "desk clerks" are going to fix or change FOSS? Then, like > a true "Snit", he insists on his shitty, insulting interpretation of > what was said, despite having it explained to him that he's wrong. Also, there is the fact that back in the day (and perhaps, still today), there was the "departmental guru model" of IT support, where a "desk clerk" (whatever that is) can report a bug to whomever would presumably installed the software in the department. And whomever installed the software -- the "departmental guru" -- would either take it to the organization's IT department, or perhaps even report the bug herself. Anything reported in such a way benefits from the FOSS model of software development. It's not perfect, but I think you're more likely to get a reported bug fixed in (say) LibreOffice than Word. -- -v You will be Told about it Tomorrow. Go Home and Prepare Thyself.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-30 06:24 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <hoi78bdgmsqhte36kpvk2q56dg13ipjljg@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #5595 |
Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > Snerdly wrote: >> >> Most users don't even bother to look at source code. Really? Dumbshit. >They depend on *others* who do look at the source code. > >In fact, since there is probably no Linux user that looks at >every line of code in his distro, it is highly probable that >all Linux users depend, to varying extents, on *other* people >looking at the source code. > >If I fix a bug, you benefit, even if you don't know C from D. It's just amazing that anyone can look-around and see the vast amount of quality Free software, and think that "only programmers benefit" or whatever. I mean, even if someone has never thought about, or cannot understand, the *massive* importance of software Freedom, they must still appreciate free (of cost) software! -- 'What part of "there is no advantage if they do not ever use the source" confuses you?' - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anonymous <anonymous@foto.nl1.torservers.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-28 18:05 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Eddie Haskell admits: William Jefferson Clinton lied to the country when he said Iraq had WMD |
| Message-ID | <7c0c635d14e4cea132099255396c802d@foto.nl1.torservers.net> |
| In reply to | #5579 |
In article <2h138bds9cp00ijffbuh6ves52k8t09ohd@4ax.com> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote: > > Snerdly wrote: > > > chrisv wrote: > >> > >> Snerdly wrote: > >> > >>> Peter Köhlmann wrote: > >>>> > >>>> You are truly a snittish idiot. Having the source is useful for every user, > >>>> even if he is a total non-programmer. It makes certain that the programs are > >>>> available and changeable. > >>> > >>> Only to the IT dept. that actually has a decent programmer. The end > >>> user would have no need and is not trained for that task. > >> > >> Dumbshit. > > > >How would a desk clerk know about programming? > >They aren't trained to do the job, nor are they competent to do the > >task. What part of this do you not understand? > > The below will certainly be wasted on someone who would ask such > *stupid* fscking questions, as if those are the issues in dispute. > But, for the benefit of others: > > 100's of millions of people benefit from Free and Open Source > Software, despite not being technical people. The source being both > Free (as in Freedom) and Open is essential for this thriving community > to exist. > > Dumbshits can have a hard time understanding the importance of > Freedom. It doesn't mean that everything is without cost or effort, > but it does mean that anything is possible. jesus, that's a hillary clinton answer if i ever read one.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-29 21:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2f07bc33d4648b846234d6c4256737a4@remailer.paranoici.org> |
| In reply to | #5587 |
In article <7c0c635d14e4cea132099255396c802d@foto.nl1.torservers.net> Anonymous <anonymous@foto.nl1.torservers.net> wrote: > > In article <2h138bds9cp00ijffbuh6ves52k8t09ohd@4ax.com> > chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote: > > > > Snerdly wrote: > > > > > chrisv wrote: > > >> > > >> Snerdly wrote: > > >> > > >>> Peter Köhlmann wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> You are truly a snittish idiot. Having the source is useful for every user, > > >>>> even if he is a total non-programmer. It makes certain that the programs are > > >>>> available and changeable. > > >>> > > >>> Only to the IT dept. that actually has a decent programmer. The end > > >>> user would have no need and is not trained for that task. > > >> > > >> Dumbshit. > > > > > >How would a desk clerk know about programming? > > >They aren't trained to do the job, nor are they competent to do the > > >task. What part of this do you not understand? > > > > The below will certainly be wasted on someone who would ask such > > *stupid* fscking questions, as if those are the issues in dispute. > > But, for the benefit of others: > > > > 100's of millions of people benefit from Free and Open Source > > Software, despite not being technical people. The source being both > > Free (as in Freedom) and Open is essential for this thriving community > > to exist. > > > > Dumbshits can have a hard time understanding the importance of > > Freedom. It doesn't mean that everything is without cost or effort, > > but it does mean that anything is possible. > > jesus, that's a hillary clinton answer if i ever read one. Vandalism repaired. Did you have something to contribute?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-28 23:26 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Eddie Haskell admits: William Jefferson Clinton lied to the country when he said Iraq had WMD |
| Message-ID | <7c0c635d14e4cea132099255396c802d@remailer.paranoici.org> |
| In reply to | #5579 |
In article <2h138bds9cp00ijffbuh6ves52k8t09ohd@4ax.com> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote: > > Snerdly wrote: > > > chrisv wrote: > >> > >> Snerdly wrote: > >> > >>> Peter Köhlmann wrote: > >>>> > >>>> You are truly a snittish idiot. Having the source is useful for every user, > >>>> even if he is a total non-programmer. It makes certain that the programs are > >>>> available and changeable. > >>> > >>> Only to the IT dept. that actually has a decent programmer. The end > >>> user would have no need and is not trained for that task. > >> > >> Dumbshit. > > > >How would a desk clerk know about programming? > >They aren't trained to do the job, nor are they competent to do the > >task. What part of this do you not understand? > > The below will certainly be wasted on someone who would ask such > *stupid* fscking questions, as if those are the issues in dispute. > But, for the benefit of others: > > 100's of millions of people benefit from Free and Open Source > Software, despite not being technical people. The source being both > Free (as in Freedom) and Open is essential for this thriving community > to exist. > > Dumbshits can have a hard time understanding the importance of > Freedom. It doesn't mean that everything is without cost or effort, > but it does mean that anything is possible. jesus, that's a hillary clinton answer if i ever read one.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "p-0''0-h the cat (UK) - The voice of the Sheeple" <super.pooh@furryfreeware.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-29 00:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <1jqpalnoifj66$.xkf3rgo0htx9$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #5579 |
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 13:26:41 -0600, chrisv wrote: > Dumbshits can have a hard time understanding the importance of > Freedom. It doesn't mean that everything is without cost or effort, > but it does mean that anything is possible. No, it doesn't. Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly. -- p-0.0-h the cat Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat, Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy, Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath, the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll infâme, the OVERCAT[The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife troll, shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook, smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag, liar, total ******* retard, shill, pooh-seur, scouringerer, jumped up chav, lycanthropic schizotypal lesbian, the most complete ignoid, joker, and furball. NewsGroups Numbrer One Terrorist Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery. By Appointment to God Frank-Lin. Signature integrity check md5 Checksum: be0b2a8c486d83ce7db9a459b26c4896
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | G. Morgan <graham@grahammorgan.name> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-30 16:39 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <c6n88b5o5a7gk1nth63j4lhj12oh5db8e4@Osama-is-dead.net> |
| In reply to | #5579 |
chrisv wrote: >Snerdly wrote: > >> chrisv wrote: >>> >>> Snerdly wrote: >>> >>>> Peter Köhlmann wrote: >>>>> >>>>> You are truly a snittish idiot. Having the source is useful for every user, >>>>> even if he is a total non-programmer. It makes certain that the programs are >>>>> available and changeable. >>>> >>>> Only to the IT dept. that actually has a decent programmer. The end >>>> user would have no need and is not trained for that task. >>> >>> Dumbshit. >> >>How would a desk clerk know about programming? >>They aren't trained to do the job, nor are they competent to do the >>task. What part of this do you not understand? > >The below will certainly be wasted on someone who would ask such >*stupid* fscking questions, as if those are the issues in dispute. >But, for the benefit of others: > >100's of millions of people benefit from Free and Open Source >Software, despite not being technical people. The source being both >Free (as in Freedom) and Open is essential for this thriving community >to exist. > >Dumbshits can have a hard time understanding the importance of >Freedom. It doesn't mean that everything is without cost or effort, >but it does mean that anything is possible. Agreed. I'm not a current programmer but have been exposed to it. Its nice to see the source and if there are questions then I can just ask. ' -- They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Ben Franklin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-31 03:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <0d1f7153ad069143379dd380d1afc204@remailer.paranoici.org> |
| In reply to | #5617 |
In article <c6n88b5o5a7gk1nth63j4lhj12oh5db8e4@Osama-is-dead.net> G. Morgan <graham@grahammorgan.name> wrote: > > chrisv wrote: > > >Snerdly wrote: > > > >> chrisv wrote: > >>> > >>> Snerdly wrote: > >>> > >>>> Peter Köhlmann wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> You are truly a snittish idiot. Having the source is useful for every user, > >>>>> even if he is a total non-programmer. It makes certain that the programs are > >>>>> available and changeable. > >>>> > >>>> Only to the IT dept. that actually has a decent programmer. The end > >>>> user would have no need and is not trained for that task. > >>> > >>> Dumbshit. > >> > >>How would a desk clerk know about programming? > >>They aren't trained to do the job, nor are they competent to do the > >>task. What part of this do you not understand? > > > >The below will certainly be wasted on someone who would ask such > >*stupid* fscking questions, as if those are the issues in dispute. > >But, for the benefit of others: > > > >100's of millions of people benefit from Free and Open Source > >Software, despite not being technical people. The source being both > >Free (as in Freedom) and Open is essential for this thriving community > >to exist. > > > >Dumbshits can have a hard time understanding the importance of > >Freedom. It doesn't mean that everything is without cost or effort, > >but it does mean that anything is possible. > > Agreed. I'm not a current programmer but have been exposed to it. Its > nice to see the source and if there are questions then I can just ask. > ' My initial foray into programming was SAS. Learned to hate it and every aspect of programming.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-31 08:25 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <kuca8bldeg6uauqsak3vbte0lbum92q8ns@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #5617 |
G. Morgan wrote: > chrisv wrote: >> >>100's of millions of people benefit from Free and Open Source >>Software, despite not being technical people. The source being both >>Free (as in Freedom) and Open is essential for this thriving community >>to exist. >> >>Dumbshits can have a hard time understanding the importance of >>Freedom. It doesn't mean that everything is without cost or effort, >>but it does mean that anything is possible. > >Agreed. I'm not a current programmer but have been exposed to it. Its >nice to see the source and if there are questions then I can just ask. It's much more than "nice", though. Being Free and Open-Source is *everything*. It's what allows people to build-up the work of others. It's what allows the sharing of code, with the assurance that it won't be usurped and used against you. Of course, proprietary software has its role in the world, too. -- "So sentient human beings should have their freedom restricted so that some bits on a disk somewhere (source code) can have freedom instead." - trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel", attacking the GPL
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-01 11:47 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <5904ef9a355b91c256a8c676cfe3ea3c@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #5625 |
In article <kuca8bldeg6uauqsak3vbte0lbum92q8ns@4ax.com> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote: > > G. Morgan wrote: > > > chrisv wrote: > >> > >>100's of millions of people benefit from Free and Open Source > >>Software, despite not being technical people. The source being both > >>Free (as in Freedom) and Open is essential for this thriving community > >>to exist. > >> > >>Dumbshits can have a hard time understanding the importance of > >>Freedom. It doesn't mean that everything is without cost or effort, > >>but it does mean that anything is possible. > > > >Agreed. I'm not a current programmer but have been exposed to it. Its > >nice to see the source and if there are questions then I can just ask. > > It's much more than "nice", though. Being Free and Open-Source is > *everything*. It's what allows people to build-up the work of others. > It's what allows the sharing of code, with the assurance that it won't > be usurped and used against you. > > Of course, proprietary software has its role in the world, too. Who watches the watchers?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "p-0''0-h the cat (UK) - The voice of the Sheeple" <super.pooh@furryfreeware.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-01 11:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m24mkb2yd2qp$.6mc3spkv8d7d$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #5630 |
On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 11:47:37 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio wrote: > Who watches the watchers? The watcher watcher's. Sheesh, everyone knows that. Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly. -- p-0.0-h the cat Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat, Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy, Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath, the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll infâme, the OVERCAT[The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife troll, shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook, smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag, liar, total ******* retard, shill, pooh-seur, scouringerer, jumped up chav, lycanthropic schizotypal lesbian, the most complete ignoid, joker, and furball. NewsGroups Numbrer One Terrorist Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery. By Appointment to God Frank-Lin. Signature integrity check md5 Checksum: be0b2a8c486d83ce7db9a459b26c4896
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.computer.security
csiph-web