Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #159496 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-02-16 10:37 -0600 |
| Last post | 2016-02-19 12:55 -0600 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 317 — 37 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
Ransomware "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-16 10:37 -0600
Re: Ransomware hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-16 09:54 -0800
Re: Ransomware Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-16 19:41 +0100
Re: Ransomware Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-16 21:11 +0100
Re: Ransomware Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-17 02:16 +0100
Re: Ransomware usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-02-17 22:05 +0000
Re: Ransomware Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-17 23:35 +0100
Re: Ransomware jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-18 13:58 +0000
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-17 18:41 -0700
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-16 18:52 -0700
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 14:13 +1100
Re: Ransomware Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-17 04:53 +0100
Re: Ransomware Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-17 04:21 +0000
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 17:24 +1100
Re: Ransomware Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-17 15:07 +0100
Re: Ransomware usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-02-17 23:02 +0000
Re: Ransomware Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-17 08:03 +0000
Re: Ransomware usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-02-17 23:02 +0000
Re: Ransomware Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-17 08:01 +0000
Re: Ransomware Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-17 18:07 +0000
Re: Ransomware Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-02-17 14:01 -0500
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-17 18:41 -0700
Re: Ransomware Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-02-17 18:09 -0800
Re: Ransomware Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-02-17 20:45 -0700
Re: Ransomware Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-02-17 22:34 -0600
Re: Ransomware "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-18 11:16 -0600
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 05:44 +1100
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 15:00 +1100
Re: Ransomware Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-02-18 02:12 +0000
Re: Ransomware Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-17 22:47 -0500
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 15:10 +1100
Re: Ransomware Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-02-17 21:29 -0800
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 17:56 +1100
Re: Ransomware Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-02-17 23:15 -0800
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 18:35 +1100
Re: Ransomware Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-02-18 17:58 -0800
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 13:44 +1100
Re: Ransomware hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-17 20:44 -0800
Re: Ransomware Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-18 08:03 -0600
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 17:14 -0600
Re: Ransomware Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-18 19:10 -0600
Re: Ransomware hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-18 20:13 -0800
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 15:26 +1100
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 09:34 -0600
Re: Ransomware scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-19 16:26 +0000
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 14:58 -0600
Re: Ransomware Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-19 18:21 -0500
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-19 18:43 -0700
Re: Ransomware Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-19 23:32 -0500
Re: Ransomware hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-19 19:34 -0800
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 19:59 +1100
Re: Ransomware "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 07:25 -0500
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 10:30 -0600
Re: Ransomware Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-20 10:58 -0600
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 04:25 +1100
Re: Ransomware Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-20 19:56 +0000
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-20 18:15 -0700
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 13:26 +1100
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 04:16 +1100
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-20 18:15 -0700
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 13:22 +1100
Re: Ransomware Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-02-19 17:36 -0500
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 10:01 +1100
Re: Ransomware Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-02-20 16:26 -0800
Re: Ransomware Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-02-21 13:52 -0800
Re: Ransomware Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-02-21 18:51 -0500
Re: Ransomware hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-19 19:18 -0800
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 15:03 +1100
Re: Ransomware Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-20 16:12 +0000
Re: Ransomware Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-19 15:59 -0600
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 09:59 +1100
Re: Ransomware Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-19 18:43 -0600
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 14:36 +1100
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 17:01 -0600
Re: Ransomware Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-19 18:54 -0600
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 19:48 -0600
Re: Ransomware Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-20 16:20 -0600
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 18:17 -0600
Re: Ransomware hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-19 19:53 -0800
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-19 18:43 -0700
Re: Ransomware "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 21:33 -0500
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 10:23 -0600
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 14:48 +1100
Re: Ransomware hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-19 19:56 -0800
Re: Ransomware Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-19 23:18 -0500
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 10:35 -0600
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 10:12 -0600
Re: Ransomware Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-20 15:33 -0600
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 12:11 +1100
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-19 18:43 -0700
Re: Ransomware hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-19 20:00 -0800
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-20 01:51 -0700
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 10:34 -0600
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 10:19 -0600
Re: Ransomware hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-19 19:40 -0800
Re: Ransomware jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-20 15:18 +0000
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 03:46 +1100
Re: Ransomware Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-18 23:55 -0600
Re: Ransomware mausg@mail.com - 2016-02-19 10:48 +0000
Re: Ransomware "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 05:56 -0500
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 09:50 -0600
Re: Ransomware scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-19 16:29 +0000
Re: Ransomware Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-02-19 16:54 +0000
Re: Ransomware Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-19 17:55 +0000
Re: Ransomware Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-02-20 08:30 +0000
Re: Ransomware Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-20 15:29 +0000
Re: Ransomware Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-20 10:06 -0600
Re: Ransomware "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-20 11:03 -0600
Re: Ransomware Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-22 16:14 -0600
Re: Ransomware Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-22 16:27 -0600
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 09:49 +1100
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 05:29 +1100
Re: Ransomware Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-19 18:53 +0000
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 09:42 +1100
Re: Ransomware Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-02-19 14:24 -0500
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 14:58 -0600
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 05:24 +1100
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 04:53 +1100
Re: Ransomware Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-19 18:15 +0000
Re: Ransomware hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-19 17:55 -0800
Re: Ransomware Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-02-18 11:19 -0500
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 10:19 -0600
Re: Ransomware Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-02-18 11:46 -0500
Re: Ransomware Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-18 18:01 +0000
Re: Ransomware Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-02-18 14:36 -0500
Re: Ransomware Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-19 11:23 +0000
Re: Ransomware Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-02-19 09:28 -0500
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 05:19 +1100
Re: Ransomware Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-18 11:06 -0600
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-18 10:24 -0700
Re: Ransomware hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-18 12:27 -0800
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 10:22 +1100
Re: Ransomware Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-19 00:07 -0600
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 18:34 +1100
Re: Ransomware "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 05:41 -0500
Re: Ransomware "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-19 07:43 -0600
Re: Ransomware scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-19 16:13 +0000
Re: Ransomware "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-19 08:01 -0600
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 04:50 +1100
Re: Ransomware Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-18 21:34 +0000
Re: Ransomware Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-18 13:34 -0600
Re: Ransomware "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 17:34 -0500
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 10:33 +1100
Re: Ransomware "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 21:04 -0500
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 13:46 +1100
Re: Ransomware "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 05:34 -0500
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 04:47 +1100
Re: Ransomware jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-19 14:24 +0000
Re: Ransomware Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-02-18 11:03 -0500
Re: Ransomware Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-02-18 19:21 +0000
Re: Ransomware scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-18 20:56 +0000
Re: Ransomware Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-02-18 21:19 +0000
Re: Ransomware scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-19 13:48 +0000
Re: Ransomware Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-02-19 14:12 +0000
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 09:54 -0600
Re: Ransomware jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-20 15:18 +0000
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 03:29 +1100
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 10:42 -0600
Re: Ransomware jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-21 15:48 +0000
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 03:43 +1100
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 12:55 -0600
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 07:53 +1100
Re: Ransomware jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-23 13:13 +0000
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 04:49 +1100
Re: Ransomware Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-02-21 19:56 +0000
Re: Ransomware scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-19 16:19 +0000
Re: Ransomware hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-19 18:08 -0800
Re: Ransomware hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-19 18:18 -0800
Re: Ransomware mausg@mail.com - 2016-02-19 18:10 +0000
Re: Ransomware Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-02-19 21:43 +0000
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 09:52 +1100
Re: Ransomware Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-02-19 16:53 -0800
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 18:37 -0600
Re: Ransomware jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-18 13:58 +0000
Re: Ransomware "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 05:32 +1100
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 11:13 -0600
Re: Ransomware Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-02-16 17:57 +0000
Re: Ransomware "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-16 14:19 -0600
Re: Ransomware Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-17 03:42 +0000
Re: Ransomware Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-17 08:05 +0000
Re: Ransomware Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-17 12:03 +0000
Re: Ransomware Morten Reistad <first@last.name,invalid> - 2016-02-17 15:21 +0100
Re: Ransomware Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-02-17 07:38 -0700
Re: Ransomware Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-17 18:07 +0000
Re: Ransomware "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-02-18 12:10 -0600
Re: Ransomware Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-18 21:34 +0000
Re: Ransomware "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-02-18 12:06 -0600
Re: Ransomware Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-16 12:49 -0800
Re: Ransomware Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-16 16:55 -0600
Re: Ransomware "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-16 17:31 -0600
Re: Ransomware hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-16 16:11 -0800
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 14:26 +1100
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 11:19 -0600
Re: Ransomware "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-17 12:05 -0600
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 17:58 -0600
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-17 18:41 -0700
Re: Ransomware Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-02-17 18:39 -0800
Re: Ransomware Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-02-16 16:44 -0400
Re: Ransomware Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-02-16 15:30 -0600
Re: Ransomware Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-17 00:20 +0100
Re: Ransomware usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-02-17 23:03 +0000
Re: Ransomware Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-17 18:48 -0500
Re: Ransomware jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-18 13:58 +0000
Re: Ransomware Morten Reistad <first@Last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-18 16:46 +0100
Re: Ransomware Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-02-18 11:06 -0800
Re: Ransomware Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-18 14:43 -0500
Re: Ransomware "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-18 14:06 -0600
Re: Ransomware Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-18 15:48 -0500
Re: Ransomware "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-18 15:36 -0600
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 10:30 +1100
Re: Ransomware Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-18 19:38 -0500
Re: Ransomware Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-18 21:43 +0000
Re: Ransomware Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-19 00:51 +0100
Re: Ransomware scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-19 13:45 +0000
Re: Ransomware Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-19 15:00 +0100
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-19 07:01 -0700
Re: Ransomware Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-19 10:16 -0500
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-19 11:15 -0700
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-19 11:19 -0700
Re: Ransomware Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-19 18:55 +0000
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-19 12:54 -0700
Re: Ransomware Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-02-20 17:46 -0800
Re: Ransomware JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 15:08 -0600
Re: Ransomware "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-02-23 16:01 -0600
Re: Ransomware "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 21:24 -0500
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 04:58 +1100
Re: Ransomware scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-19 13:40 +0000
Re: Ransomware jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-19 14:24 +0000
Re: Ransomware "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 05:06 +1100
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 10:11 +1100
Re: Ransomware Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-18 21:44 +0100
Re: Ransomware jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-19 14:24 +0000
Re: Ransomware "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 05:13 +1100
Re: Ransomware jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-19 14:24 +0000
Re: Ransomware Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-19 17:08 +0100
Re: Ransomware jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-20 15:18 +0000
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 03:41 +1100
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-20 18:15 -0700
Re: Ransomware Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-21 09:35 +0100
Re: Ransomware Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-21 10:18 +0000
Re: Ransomware Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-21 16:48 +0100
Re: Ransomware Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-21 18:40 -0600
Re: Ransomware Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-22 01:53 +0100
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-21 18:36 -0700
Re: Ransomware Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-22 00:12 -0600
Re: Ransomware Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-22 09:37 +0100
Re: Ransomware Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-22 09:17 -0500
Re: Ransomware Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-22 15:29 +0100
Re: Ransomware using libc Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-22 09:42 -0500
Re: Ransomware using libc Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-22 15:52 +0100
Re: Ransomware using libc Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-22 10:23 -0500
Re: Ransomware using libc scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-22 17:24 +0000
Re: Ransomware using libc Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-22 20:29 +0100
Re: Ransomware using libc Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-22 19:38 +0000
Re: Ransomware using libc Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-22 21:31 +0100
Re: Ransomware using libc Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-22 17:17 +0000
Re: Ransomware using libc Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-22 14:41 -0600
Re: Ransomware using libc Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-22 22:07 +0100
Re: Ransomware Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-02-22 09:16 -0700
Re: Ransomware Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-22 17:21 +0100
Re: Ransomware Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-02-22 09:34 -0700
Re: Ransomware Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-22 11:11 -0600
Re: Ransomware Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-22 18:25 +0100
Re: Ransomware Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-22 15:15 -0600
Re: Ransomware Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-22 22:28 +0100
Re: Ransomware Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-22 21:46 -0600
Re: Ransomware "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 05:05 +1100
Re: Ransomware "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 05:31 +1100
Re: Ransomware Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-02-18 13:56 -0600
Re: Ransomware jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-19 14:24 +0000
Re: Ransomware "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 05:16 +1100
Re: Ransomware Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-02-19 17:09 -0600
Re: Ransomware jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-20 15:18 +0000
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 03:55 +1100
Re: Ransomware Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-20 19:56 +0000
Re: Ransomware Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-02-22 14:07 -0600
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 07:15 +1100
Re: Ransomware "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 18:30 -0500
Re: Ransomware Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-23 01:49 +0000
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 13:09 +1100
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 13:03 +1100
Re: Ransomware Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-19 13:12 -0600
Re: Ransomware "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 06:29 -0500
Re: Ransomware Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-19 13:35 -0600
Re: Ransomware Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-20 09:55 +0000
Re: Ransomware Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-20 07:30 -0700
Re: Ransomware "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 11:11 -0500
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 04:05 +1100
Re: Ransomware Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-21 11:55 +0000
Re: Ransomware Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-21 14:04 +0100
Re: Ransomware Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-21 13:57 +0000
Re: Ransomware Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-21 23:28 +0000
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 03:34 +1100
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 03:32 +1100
Re: Ransomware Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-21 12:14 -0600
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 07:47 +1100
Re: Ransomware scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-17 14:03 +0000
Re: Ransomware Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-02-17 15:20 -0600
Re: Ransomware scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-17 21:31 +0000
Re: Ransomware Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-02-18 08:23 +0000
Re: Ransomware Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-02-18 11:42 -0600
Re: Ransomware "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 06:23 -0500
Re: Ransomware Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-02-18 11:43 -0600
Re: Ransomware "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 17:48 -0500
Re: Ransomware hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-16 17:04 -0800
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 14:42 +1100
Re: Ransomware Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-17 04:17 +0000
Re: Ransomware Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-02-17 04:08 -0400
Re: Ransomware usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-02-17 23:04 +0000
Re: Ransomware "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 06:38 -0500
Re: Ransomware Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-18 13:38 +0100
Re: Ransomware "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 17:57 -0500
Re: Ransomware "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 14:24 +1100
Re: Ransomware usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-02-17 23:03 +0000
Re: Ransomware Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-02-17 16:43 -0800
Re: Ransomware jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-18 13:58 +0000
Re: Ransomware Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-19 12:55 -0600
Page 12 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 10 11 [12] 13 14 … 16 Next page →
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-19 12:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1943980961.477603888.315204.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #159839 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote: > On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 11:19:38 -0700 > Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Followup: The (EE) messages were issued by the X client. Much earlier in >> the log there was a _warning_ message that identified the problem. >> Designing good error messages is an art. > > What ? Sorry ? How ? > > TBF they were better than many much more verbose error messages > I've seen. > Verbose is the problem. The trick is to issue only the _relevant_ messages and filter the rest, but deciding what's relevant is tricky. There is a story about PL/C (Cornell's student PL/I compiler) that the compiler would try to do something with every program fed to it. In some cases a small error, maybe a missing comma or parenthesis, caused an error on every following statement, but the compiler doggedly ploughed ahead trying to compile. I guess that was common enough that the advice was to fix the first error and ignore all the rest, then try to re-compile. That was the case here where connecting the error message to the warning that indicated the actual error took some doing, since there were pages of information and warning messages in between. Probably if i had been more familiar with the problem I would have known where to look. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 17:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <945icblg7u2vl5lf8mvqiou32d05fm16eo@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #159846 |
On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 12:54:45 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
[snip]
>Verbose is the problem. The trick is to issue only the _relevant_ messages
>and filter the rest, but deciding what's relevant is tricky. There is a
>story about PL/C (Cornell's student PL/I compiler) that the compiler would
>try to do something with every program fed to it. In some cases a small
I used it a bit. It would.
>error, maybe a missing comma or parenthesis, caused an error on every
>following statement, but the compiler doggedly ploughed ahead trying to
>compile. I guess that was common enough that the advice was to fix the
I doubt this. A missing comma or parenthesis was a warning for a
statement and would not affect the following statement anyway.
>first error and ignore all the rest, then try to re-compile.
There are errors which cascade though. Maybe a nesting error? Or
a procedure declaration did not compile?
>That was the case here where connecting the error message to the warning
>that indicated the actual error took some doing, since there were pages of
>information and warning messages in between. Probably if i had been more
>familiar with the problem I would have known where to look.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-19 15:08 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <1p0fcbld2p763bme5f442hovq4l891irtb@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #159832 |
On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 11:19:38 -0700, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >> Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: >>> >>>> Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote: >>>>> Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> writes: >>>>>> In article <na5agu$u3m$1@dont-email.me>, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> Also notable, the forums for Ubuntu, Arch Linux, Fedora. Mozilla >>>>>>> makes a good showing too. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ubuntu and respbian both come up with links right there on the front >>>>>> page of the first boot screen. All the documentation you can >>>>>> reasonably as for is a network access away. >>>>> >>>>> Another example from my Fathers ubuntu system - last week he could >>>>> no longer get network access. How do you debug that without network >>>>> access (fortunately he has an ipad and another desktop system as a >>>>> backup)? >>>>> >>>>> It appears that either an update has hosed his ethernet device >>>>> driver or the ethernet chip has gone bad (again I'm diagnosing from >>>>> 2000 miles away). The link light on the switch and on the PHY on the >>>>> computer is illuminated, but ethtool shows 'link detected: no'. >>>>> >>>>> Attempting to read the kernel logs over the phone is fruitless when >>>>> the person on the other end has no idea what to look for. >>>>> >>>>> Solution is to order a usb-ethernet adapter and give that a try when >>>>> it arrives this weekend. >>>>> >>>> >>>> This stuff's a bitch. I don't know what the testing process is, but >>>> the developers can't possibly test all combinations of H/W and S/W. >>>> Windoze has such a large user base that a bad update will be smoked >>>> out quickly. Apple solves the problem by restricting the variety of >>>> hardware it runs on. >>>> Linux is pretty good, but a larger user base to help catch this stuff >>>> would be good. >>>> >>>> I spent a lot of time trying to get Fedora to run with a Radeon video >>>> chip. I posted several reports to bugzilla and tried a lot of >>>> different stuff myself. Finally a switch to Ubuntu solved my problem. >>> >>> You might have found the cause in /var/log/Xorg.0.log. Look for lines >>> containing "(EE)". >>> >> >> Did that, but the root cause was unclear. It first looked like a X >> problem. I finally realized it was a driver problem, but then spent a lot >> of time trying to nail it down and search for a (nonexistant) solution. >> >> > >Followup: The (EE) messages were issued by the X client. Much earlier in >the log there was a _warning_ message that identified the problem. >Designing good error messages is an art. Indeed. Back at university one the faculy had been using a free progam on the 286 desktops we had in the computer learning lab. He was in the Business department. It worked fine, but one day a student said something about she had broken the computer. Really freaked out about it. The error message, 'Drive C: is out of paper. Please insert paper into Drive C: !'. Which made no sense, the hard drive is sealed and no paper is installed in it. We came to the conclusion that the programmer had gotten tired of one particular error message, wrote their own, and forgot to change it back. My boss told the professor, he said to just reboot the computer ad run the program and it would be fine. If it happened again, let him know and he would call tbe company. -- JimP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-23 16:01 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <naikmn$si1$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #159786 |
"Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:528816624.477582927.161579.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org... > > [snip...] [snip...] > [snip...] > > I spent a lot of time trying to get Fedora to run with a Radeon video > chip. > I posted several reports to bugzilla and tried a lot of different stuff > myself. Finally a switch to Ubuntu solved my problem. > A cow-order at a PPoE put it like this: "We'll solve this problem by the method of substitution: if you can't do it, we'll get rid of you and substitute someone who can." -- numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-23 21:24 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.3136c63677d4ffe4989fa4@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #160161 |
In article <naikmn$si1$1@dont-email.me>, numerist@aquaporin4.com says... > > "Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:528816624.477582927.161579.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org... > > > > [snip...] [snip...] > > [snip...] > > > > I spent a lot of time trying to get Fedora to run with a Radeon video > > chip. > > I posted several reports to bugzilla and tried a lot of different stuff > > myself. Finally a switch to Ubuntu solved my problem. > > > > A cow-order Would that be a steak or a milkshake? > at a PPoE put it like this: > > "We'll solve this problem by the method of substitution: > if you can't do it, we'll get rid of you and substitute someone who can."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 04:58 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dip3epFtlpvU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #159781 |
"Scott Lurndal" <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote in message news:y%Exy.149$gn2.72@fx18.iad... > Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> writes: >>In article <na5agu$u3m$1@dont-email.me>, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> >>wrote: > >>>Also notable, the forums for Ubuntu, Arch Linux, Fedora. >>>Mozilla makes a good showing too. >> >>Ubuntu and respbian both come up with links right there on >>the front page of the first boot screen. All the documentation >>you can reasonably as for is a network access away. > > Another example from my Fathers ubuntu system - last week he > could no longer get network access. How do you debug that > without network access By using something that still has network access. (fortunately he has an ipad and another > desktop system as a backup)? And even without those, you can debug with someone else's system or the library etc. > It appears that either an update has hosed his ethernet device > driver or the ethernet chip has gone bad (again I'm diagnosing from > 2000 miles away). The link light on the switch and on the PHY on > the computer is illuminated, but ethtool shows 'link detected: no'. > > Attempting to read the kernel logs over the phone is fruitless > when the person on the other end has no idea what to look for. Sure, but there are ways to read stuff like that remotely. > Solution is to order a usb-ethernet adapter and give that a try when > it arrives this weekend.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-19 13:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <4XExy.148$gn2.43@fx18.iad> |
| In reply to | #159717 |
Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> writes: >"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: > >> That shows that reliable and non-harmful communication _can be_ >> possible. But you happened to know the secret word, stackexchange. >> Now visualize grandma in her living room surrounded by several big >> empty cardboard boxes and a bunch of little black wire ties, and no >> secret word. > >No secret knowledge required. > >Type in the subject, error message, whatever. >Google comes back and stackexchange presents itself. The problem is that "grandma" doesn't have the context to absorb the answer at stack exchange. You and I do. I've had my father on Ubuntu for years now, but when things go wrong, he's pretty much lost (former VP of Advertising for an Ag firm). One time an Ubuntu security update broke the graphics driver, the only symptom was inability to log in. I had to fly home to fix that one.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-19 14:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM00052C1FF2209805@aca432ec.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #159712 |
Dan Espen wrote: > Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> writes: > >> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:46:02 +0100, Morten Reistad >> <first@Last.name.invalid> wrote: >> >>>In article <PM00052C0B6D1C5E03@aca4282e.ipt.aol.com>, >>>jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >> >> [snip] >> >>>>The biggest problem is that there is no documentation available for the >>>>grandmother to know what she has to do to be a sysadmin. Most of the >>>>docs available are addressed to a user, not an owner, of a system. >> >>>Barb, you need to fast forward from ca 1996, when this was a valid >>>complaint. > > Pointless to tell her. She got the same answer multiple times over > the years I read her crap. Wooden head. I'mm the one here with the most experience in these matters. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 05:06 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dip3u7FtpoaU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #159790 |
"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message news:PM00052C1FF2209805@aca432ec.ipt.aol.com... > Dan Espen wrote: >> Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> writes: >> >>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:46:02 +0100, Morten Reistad >>> <first@Last.name.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>>In article <PM00052C0B6D1C5E03@aca4282e.ipt.aol.com>, >>>>jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>> >>> [snip] >>> >>>>>The biggest problem is that there is no documentation available for the >>>>>grandmother to know what she has to do to be a sysadmin. Most of the >>>>>docs available are addressed to a user, not an owner, of a system. >>> >>>>Barb, you need to fast forward from ca 1996, when this was a valid >>>>complaint. >> >> Pointless to tell her. She got the same answer multiple times over >> the years I read her crap. Wooden head. > > I'mm the one here with the most experience in these matters. BULLSHIT. You don’t have a fucking clue about how things have moved on and don’t even have a net service you can use either.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-19 10:11 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <din1csFdn78U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #159708 |
"Gene Wirchenko" <genew@telus.net> wrote in message news:3e5ccbhu2kg2dn3mfl7qm76gnoikngfaid@4ax.com... > On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:46:02 +0100, Morten Reistad > <first@Last.name.invalid> wrote: > >>In article <PM00052C0B6D1C5E03@aca4282e.ipt.aol.com>, >>jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > > [snip] > >>>The biggest problem is that there is no documentation available for the >>>grandmother to know what she has to do to be a sysadmin. Most of the >>>docs available are addressed to a user, not an owner, of a system. > >>Barb, you need to fast forward from ca 1996, when this was a valid >>complaint. >> >>Now you can pick and choose the materials you like. A lot of it is >>available on the net, and is well indexed. I usually just ask google, >>and get a list of at least a dozen good answers whenever I do. > > Why a dozen answers? Are they all the same? If so, then it > really just one answer. If they are different, how does a > non-technical person determine which is the correct answer? By trying them and seeing which fixes the problem. How does > such a person determine that any of the answers are good in the first > place? By trying them and seeing which fixes the problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-18 21:44 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <f2nhpc-st1.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #159708 |
In article <3e5ccbhu2kg2dn3mfl7qm76gnoikngfaid@4ax.com>, Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> wrote: >On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:46:02 +0100, Morten Reistad ><first@Last.name.invalid> wrote: > >>In article <PM00052C0B6D1C5E03@aca4282e.ipt.aol.com>, >>jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > >[snip] > >>>The biggest problem is that there is no documentation available for the >>>grandmother to know what she has to do to be a sysadmin. Most of the >>>docs available are addressed to a user, not an owner, of a system. > >>Barb, you need to fast forward from ca 1996, when this was a valid >>complaint. >> >>Now you can pick and choose the materials you like. A lot of it is >>available on the net, and is well indexed. I usually just ask google, >>and get a list of at least a dozen good answers whenever I do. > > Why a dozen answers? Are they all the same? If so, then it >really just one answer. If they are different, how does a >non-technical person determine which is the correct answer? How does >such a person determine that any of the answers are good in the first >place? Actually, Google does a pretty good job of keeping the top answers good. And, yes, they are different. There are at least three dozen ways to do stuff on *n*x, all working. And then there are three hundred ways of describing each of them correctly. Some are terse, some are verbose, some use simple language, some use lots of acronyms. Pick your. -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-19 14:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM00052C1FEDA7052E@aca432ec.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #159708 |
Gene Wirchenko wrote: > On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:46:02 +0100, Morten Reistad > <first@Last.name.invalid> wrote: > >>In article <PM00052C0B6D1C5E03@aca4282e.ipt.aol.com>, >>jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > > [snip] > >>>The biggest problem is that there is no documentation available for the >>>grandmother to know what she has to do to be a sysadmin. Most of the >>>docs available are addressed to a user, not an owner, of a system. > >>Barb, you need to fast forward from ca 1996, when this was a valid >>complaint. >> >>Now you can pick and choose the materials you like. A lot of it is >>available on the net, and is well indexed. I usually just ask google, >>and get a list of at least a dozen good answers whenever I do. > > Why a dozen answers? Are they all the same? If so, then it > really just one answer. If they are different, how does a > non-technical person determine which is the correct answer? How does > such a person determine that any of the answers are good in the first > place? Exactly. The above also assumes 1. the person knows the magic incantation to get those descriptions and 2. has access to the net. Setting up a computer system with security in mind requires some security _before_ the first access to the net occurs. Thanks for the objectivity :-). /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 05:13 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dip49nFtsruU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #159794 |
"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message news:PM00052C1FEDA7052E@aca432ec.ipt.aol.com... > Gene Wirchenko wrote: >> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:46:02 +0100, Morten Reistad >> <first@Last.name.invalid> wrote: >> >>>In article <PM00052C0B6D1C5E03@aca4282e.ipt.aol.com>, >>>jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >> >> [snip] >> >>>>The biggest problem is that there is no documentation available for the >>>>grandmother to know what she has to do to be a sysadmin. Most of the >>>>docs available are addressed to a user, not an owner, of a system. >> >>>Barb, you need to fast forward from ca 1996, when this was a valid >>>complaint. >>> >>>Now you can pick and choose the materials you like. A lot of it is >>>available on the net, and is well indexed. I usually just ask google, >>>and get a list of at least a dozen good answers whenever I do. >> >> Why a dozen answers? Are they all the same? If so, then it >> really just one answer. If they are different, how does a >> non-technical person determine which is the correct answer? How does >> such a person determine that any of the answers are good in the first >> place? > > Exactly. Nope, you try the alternatives you have found and see what works. > The above also assumes 1. the person knows > the magic incantation to get those descriptions There are no magic incantations involved in entering the error message into google and see what shows up. > and 2. has access to the net. That is always available, even if you have to borrow it or use the library when yours is temporarily unavailable. > Setting up a computer system with security in mind requires > some security _before_ the first access to the net occurs. Not anymore. You don’t have a fucking clue about the basics now. > Thanks for the objectivity :-). It isn't objectivity, it's just plain wrong.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-19 14:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM00052C1FE3C45F6E@aca432ec.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #159673 |
Morten Reistad wrote: > In article <PM00052C0B6D1C5E03@aca4282e.ipt.aol.com>, > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>Michael Black wrote: >>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016, Questor wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 00:20:49 +0100, Morten Reistad >><first@last.name.invalid> >>>> wrote: >>>>> My mom was very careful with the web sites she visited, and still her XP >>>>> machines had ~100 new instances of malware after a month. It got to be a >>>>> quite tall order to keep cleaning. >>>>> >>>>> There are lots of "spelling trapdoors" out there, like micros0ft.com, etc. >>>> >>>> Not letting your relatives run as admin makes cleanup a *lot* easier. >>>> >>>> >>> Someone locally, who is an actual system administrator, he set up Linux >>> for his grandmother (I think it was) and kept the root account for >>> himself. And he administers it remotely, just like at work on a big >>> system. >> >>The biggest problem is that there is no documentation available for the >>grandmother to know what she has to do to be a sysadmin. Most of the >>docs available are addressed to a user, not an owner, of a system. >> >>/BAH > > Barb, you need to fast forward from ca 1996, when this was a valid > complaint. > > Now you can pick and choose the materials you like. A lot of it is > available on the net, and is well indexed. I usually just ask google, > and get a list of at least a dozen good answers whenever I do. But you know magic incantations to acquire the answers. Taht's the problem with search-based documentation. There is no cookbook which tells a inexperienced _system owner_ what his/her responsibilities are. The tasks required by a user are different from the tasks required by a system owner. The same is true with a network administrator and network user. DEC's manuals split up these tasks with an intro for most of them. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-19 17:08 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <s8rjpc-fp4.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #159789 |
In article <PM00052C1FE3C45F6E@aca432ec.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >Morten Reistad wrote: >> In article <PM00052C0B6D1C5E03@aca4282e.ipt.aol.com>, >> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>Michael Black wrote: >>>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016, Questor wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 00:20:49 +0100, Morten Reistad >>><first@last.name.invalid> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> My mom was very careful with the web sites she visited, and still her XP >>>>>> machines had ~100 new instances of malware after a month. It got to be a >>>>>> quite tall order to keep cleaning. >>>>>> >>>>>> There are lots of "spelling trapdoors" out there, like micros0ft.com, >etc. >>>>> >>>>> Not letting your relatives run as admin makes cleanup a *lot* easier. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Someone locally, who is an actual system administrator, he set up Linux >>>> for his grandmother (I think it was) and kept the root account for >>>> himself. And he administers it remotely, just like at work on a big >>>> system. >>> >>>The biggest problem is that there is no documentation available for the >>>grandmother to know what she has to do to be a sysadmin. Most of the >>>docs available are addressed to a user, not an owner, of a system. >>> >>>/BAH >> >> Barb, you need to fast forward from ca 1996, when this was a valid >> complaint. >> >> Now you can pick and choose the materials you like. A lot of it is >> available on the net, and is well indexed. I usually just ask google, >> and get a list of at least a dozen good answers whenever I do. > >But you know magic incantations to acquire the answers. Taht's the >problem with search-based documentation. There is no cookbook >which tells a inexperienced _system owner_ what his/her >responsibilities are. The tasks required by a user are different >from the tasks required by a system owner. The same is true >with a network administrator and network user. > >DEC's manuals split up these tasks with an intro for most of them. DEC's manuals were (are?) fine technical documents, but they are for a reasonably educated audience. And there are only two versions, the deep technical manuals and the guides. The last 20 years have brought forward a plethora of Linux and *n*x documentation; from "*** for dummies" (which is a pretty good intro for granny, provided she can read elementary documentation) to the "kernel guides" which is for the deep kernel hacker. And everything in between. At least a score of different educational approaches. And there are youtube videos for a lot of this as well. And you need(ed) a lot more magic incantations to find stuff in DEC's (and everyone else's for that matter) manuals. Follow the links the system presents to you when it comes up for the first time (and every time it is booted thereafter, until you dispose of that screen). Yes, there is complexity here, but it is very nicely documented. Windows is not better in this respect. It has the advantage that the hardware vendors have a mandatory test regime to get to use windows on their iron, so this class of failures are fewer between. But just look for stuff like hardware installation, and the order in which windows drivers are loaded. Or not. This cross-effect between drivers is largely gone in *n*x, because the drivers are (mostly) under the control of the kernel developers. You really need to fast forward to 2016 here. Go visit a good technical bookstore, and look at the *n*x shelf. Or visit some oreilly.com or similar website. -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 15:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM00052C34A29341E4@aca405fb.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #159811 |
Morten Reistad wrote: > In article <PM00052C1FE3C45F6E@aca432ec.ipt.aol.com>, > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>Morten Reistad wrote: >>> In article <PM00052C0B6D1C5E03@aca4282e.ipt.aol.com>, >>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>>Michael Black wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016, Questor wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 00:20:49 +0100, Morten Reistad >>>><first@last.name.invalid> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> My mom was very careful with the web sites she visited, and still her XP >>>>>>> machines had ~100 new instances of malware after a month. It got to be a >>>>>>> quite tall order to keep cleaning. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There are lots of "spelling trapdoors" out there, like micros0ft.com, >>etc. >>>>>> >>>>>> Not letting your relatives run as admin makes cleanup a *lot* easier. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Someone locally, who is an actual system administrator, he set up Linux >>>>> for his grandmother (I think it was) and kept the root account for >>>>> himself. And he administers it remotely, just like at work on a big >>>>> system. >>>> >>>>The biggest problem is that there is no documentation available for the >>>>grandmother to know what she has to do to be a sysadmin. Most of the >>>>docs available are addressed to a user, not an owner, of a system. >>>> >>>>/BAH >>> >>> Barb, you need to fast forward from ca 1996, when this was a valid >>> complaint. >>> >>> Now you can pick and choose the materials you like. A lot of it is >>> available on the net, and is well indexed. I usually just ask google, >>> and get a list of at least a dozen good answers whenever I do. >> >>But you know magic incantations to acquire the answers. Taht's the >>problem with search-based documentation. There is no cookbook >>which tells a inexperienced _system owner_ what his/her >>responsibilities are. The tasks required by a user are different >>from the tasks required by a system owner. The same is true >>with a network administrator and network user. >> >>DEC's manuals split up these tasks with an intro for most of them. > > DEC's manuals were (are?) fine technical documents, but they > are for a reasonably educated audience. Not really. The only requirement was that someone could read English. >And there are only two > versions, the deep technical manuals and the guides. You forget that we were also training the public how to own and use computers. This involved all aspects of hard/software development, maintainance, security, regulation and operation. The reason DEC's manuals were so good is that we tried different approaches over the years and ended up with the documentation techniques which worked for everyone; this includes the ranges of IQ, rational thinking ability and personality styles. > > The last 20 years have brought forward a plethora of Linux and > *n*x documentation; from "*** for dummies" (which is a pretty good > intro for granny, provided she can read elementary documentation) > to the "kernel guides" which is for the deep kernel hacker. Those are for granny usage, not granny system owner. Every book I've read is either aimed at Unix gurus or a single user. None address teh granny who owns a machine and needs to do other things than web surf, email and store photos. > > And everything in between. At least a score of different educational > approaches. And there are youtube videos for a lot of this as well. > > And you need(ed) a lot more magic incantations to find stuff in > DEC's (and everyone else's for that matter) manuals. Follow the > links the system presents to you when it comes up for the first > time (and every time it is booted thereafter, until you dispose > of that screen). > > Yes, there is complexity here, but it is very nicely documented. > > Windows is not better in this respect. It has the advantage that > the hardware vendors have a mandatory test regime to get to use > windows on their iron, so this class of failures are fewer between. > But just look for stuff like hardware installation, and the order > in which windows drivers are loaded. Or not. I'm talking about Unix system owners; MS' approach is not interesting because their tradeoff is to keep the system owner stupid. > > This cross-effect between drivers is largely gone in *n*x, because > the drivers are (mostly) under the control of the kernel developers. > > You really need to fast forward to 2016 here. > > Go visit a good technical bookstore, and look at the *n*x shelf. > Or visit some oreilly.com or similar website. I have not looked in the last 5 years; I will try again. One of the reasons you cannot understand what I'm trying to talk about is because you already know too mych about Unix. Very few people can "play dumb" and be able to imagine what an inexperienced user needs. There may have been 4 or 5 people in all of DEC who could do this type of thinking. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-21 03:41 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dirjaeFig7aU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #159931 |
"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message news:PM00052C34A29341E4@aca405fb.ipt.aol.com... > Morten Reistad wrote: >> In article <PM00052C1FE3C45F6E@aca432ec.ipt.aol.com>, >> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>Morten Reistad wrote: >>>> In article <PM00052C0B6D1C5E03@aca4282e.ipt.aol.com>, >>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>>>Michael Black wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016, Questor wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 00:20:49 +0100, Morten Reistad >>>>><first@last.name.invalid> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> My mom was very careful with the web sites she visited, and still >>>>>>>> her > XP >>>>>>>> machines had ~100 new instances of malware after a month. It got to >>>>>>>> be > a >>>>>>>> quite tall order to keep cleaning. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There are lots of "spelling trapdoors" out there, like >>>>>>>> micros0ft.com, >>>etc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Not letting your relatives run as admin makes cleanup a *lot* >>>>>>> easier. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> Someone locally, who is an actual system administrator, he set up >>>>>> Linux >>>>>> for his grandmother (I think it was) and kept the root account for >>>>>> himself. And he administers it remotely, just like at work on a big >>>>>> system. >>>>> >>>>>The biggest problem is that there is no documentation available for the >>>>>grandmother to know what she has to do to be a sysadmin. Most of the >>>>>docs available are addressed to a user, not an owner, of a system. >>>>> >>>>>/BAH >>>> >>>> Barb, you need to fast forward from ca 1996, when this was a valid >>>> complaint. >>>> >>>> Now you can pick and choose the materials you like. A lot of it is >>>> available on the net, and is well indexed. I usually just ask google, >>>> and get a list of at least a dozen good answers whenever I do. >>> >>>But you know magic incantations to acquire the answers. Taht's the >>>problem with search-based documentation. There is no cookbook >>>which tells a inexperienced _system owner_ what his/her >>>responsibilities are. The tasks required by a user are different >>>from the tasks required by a system owner. The same is true >>>with a network administrator and network user. >>> >>>DEC's manuals split up these tasks with an intro for most of them. >> >> DEC's manuals were (are?) fine technical documents, but they >> are for a reasonably educated audience. > > Not really. Yes, really. > The only requirement was that someone could read English. Bullshit. They were completely useless for the sort of person who has decided that they can't use a 4 function calculator or a cellphone, even when they can read english fine. >>And there are only two >> versions, the deep technical manuals and the guides. > > You forget that we were also training the public how to own and > use computers. This involved all aspects of hard/software > development, maintainance, security, regulation and operation. And you can't do that with the sort of person who has decided that they can't use a 4 function calculator or a cellphone, even when they can read english fine. > The reason DEC's manuals were so good is that we tried different > approaches over the years and ended up with the documentation > techniques which worked for everyone; Like hell it did with the sort of person who has decided that they can't use a 4 function calculator or a cellphone, even when they can read english fine. > this includes the ranges of IQ, Like hell it did with the sort of person who has to be shown how to do things by someone else and who can't use something as basic as a 4 function calculator just using a manual. > rational thinking ability and personality styles. >> The last 20 years have brought forward a plethora of Linux and >> *n*x documentation; from "*** for dummies" (which is a pretty good >> intro for granny, provided she can read elementary documentation) >> to the "kernel guides" which is for the deep kernel hacker. > Those are for granny usage, not granny system owner. Wrong. > Every book I've read is either aimed at Unix gurus or a single user. Then you need to get out more and read some of the stuff on the web. > None address teh granny who owns a machine and needs > to do other things than web surf, email and store photos. BULLSHIT. Plenty go thru the choice of distros available, what some do better than others, perfect for the granny who is deciding which distro to use for doing that stuff you listed. >> And everything in between. At least a score of different educational >> approaches. And there are youtube videos for a lot of this as well. >> >> And you need(ed) a lot more magic incantations to find stuff in >> DEC's (and everyone else's for that matter) manuals. Follow the >> links the system presents to you when it comes up for the first >> time (and every time it is booted thereafter, until you dispose >> of that screen). >> >> Yes, there is complexity here, but it is very nicely documented. >> >> Windows is not better in this respect. It has the advantage that >> the hardware vendors have a mandatory test regime to get to use >> windows on their iron, so this class of failures are fewer between. >> But just look for stuff like hardware installation, and the order >> in which windows drivers are loaded. Or not. > > I'm talking about Unix system owners; MS' approach is not interesting > because their tradeoff is to keep the system owner stupid. Another pig ignorant lie. >> This cross-effect between drivers is largely gone in *n*x, because >> the drivers are (mostly) under the control of the kernel developers. >> >> You really need to fast forward to 2016 here. >> >> Go visit a good technical bookstore, and look at the *n*x shelf. >> Or visit some oreilly.com or similar website. > > I have not looked in the last 5 years; I will try again. > > One of the reasons you cannot understand what I'm trying to > talk about is because you already know too mych about Unix. BULLSHIT. > Very few people can "play dumb" and be able > to imagine what an inexperienced user needs. BULLSHIT. > There may have been 4 or 5 people in all > of DEC who could do this type of thinking. BULLSHIT. And now we have VASTLY more doing it every day on the web etc.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 18:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <666468419.477708007.127432.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #159931 |
jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > Morten Reistad wrote: >> In article <PM00052C1FE3C45F6E@aca432ec.ipt.aol.com>, >> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>> Morten Reistad wrote: >>>> In article <PM00052C0B6D1C5E03@aca4282e.ipt.aol.com>, >>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>>> Michael Black wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016, Questor wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 00:20:49 +0100, Morten Reistad >>>>> <first@last.name.invalid> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> My mom was very careful with the web sites she visited, and still her > XP >>>>>>>> machines had ~100 new instances of malware after a month. It got to be > a >>>>>>>> quite tall order to keep cleaning. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There are lots of "spelling trapdoors" out there, like micros0ft.com, >>> etc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Not letting your relatives run as admin makes cleanup a *lot* easier. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> Someone locally, who is an actual system administrator, he set up Linux >>>>>> for his grandmother (I think it was) and kept the root account for >>>>>> himself. And he administers it remotely, just like at work on a big >>>>>> system. >>>>> >>>>> The biggest problem is that there is no documentation available for the >>>>> grandmother to know what she has to do to be a sysadmin. Most of the >>>>> docs available are addressed to a user, not an owner, of a system. >>>>> >>>>> /BAH >>>> >>>> Barb, you need to fast forward from ca 1996, when this was a valid >>>> complaint. >>>> >>>> Now you can pick and choose the materials you like. A lot of it is >>>> available on the net, and is well indexed. I usually just ask google, >>>> and get a list of at least a dozen good answers whenever I do. >>> >>> But you know magic incantations to acquire the answers. Taht's the >>> problem with search-based documentation. There is no cookbook >>> which tells a inexperienced _system owner_ what his/her >>> responsibilities are. The tasks required by a user are different >>> from the tasks required by a system owner. The same is true >>> with a network administrator and network user. >>> >>> DEC's manuals split up these tasks with an intro for most of them. >> >> DEC's manuals were (are?) fine technical documents, but they >> are for a reasonably educated audience. > > Not really. The only requirement was that someone could read English. > >> And there are only two >> versions, the deep technical manuals and the guides. > > You forget that we were also training the public how to own and > use computers. This involved all aspects of hard/software > development, maintainance, security, regulation and operation. > > The reason DEC's manuals were so good is that we tried different > approaches over the years and ended up with the documentation > techniques which worked for everyone; this includes the ranges > of IQ, rational thinking ability and personality styles. > >> >> The last 20 years have brought forward a plethora of Linux and >> *n*x documentation; from "*** for dummies" (which is a pretty good >> intro for granny, provided she can read elementary documentation) >> to the "kernel guides" which is for the deep kernel hacker. > > Those are for granny usage, not granny system owner. Every book I've > read is either aimed at Unix gurus or a single user. None address > teh granny who owns a machine and needs to do other things than > web surf, email and store photos. > >> >> And everything in between. At least a score of different educational >> approaches. And there are youtube videos for a lot of this as well. >> >> And you need(ed) a lot more magic incantations to find stuff in >> DEC's (and everyone else's for that matter) manuals. Follow the >> links the system presents to you when it comes up for the first >> time (and every time it is booted thereafter, until you dispose >> of that screen). >> >> Yes, there is complexity here, but it is very nicely documented. >> >> Windows is not better in this respect. It has the advantage that >> the hardware vendors have a mandatory test regime to get to use >> windows on their iron, so this class of failures are fewer between. >> But just look for stuff like hardware installation, and the order >> in which windows drivers are loaded. Or not. > > I'm talking about Unix system owners; MS' approach is not interesting > because their tradeoff is to keep the system owner stupid. > >> >> This cross-effect between drivers is largely gone in *n*x, because >> the drivers are (mostly) under the control of the kernel developers. >> >> You really need to fast forward to 2016 here. >> >> Go visit a good technical bookstore, and look at the *n*x shelf. >> Or visit some oreilly.com or similar website. > > I have not looked in the last 5 years; I will try again. > > One of the reasons you cannot understand what I'm trying to > talk about is because you already know too mych about Unix. > Very few people can "play dumb" and be able to imagine > what an inexperienced user needs. There may have been 4 > or 5 people in all of DEC who could do this type of thinking. > What I haven't been able to find is a "bare metal" programming manual for Linux. Even the few Linux assembler books I've found assume use of libc. What I've found out I had to dig for. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-21 09:35 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <te9opc-8ma.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #159998 |
In article <666468419.477708007.127432.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >> Morten Reistad wrote: >>> In article <PM00052C1FE3C45F6E@aca432ec.ipt.aol.com>, >>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >> >> Those are for granny usage, not granny system owner. Every book I've >> read is either aimed at Unix gurus or a single user. None address >> teh granny who owns a machine and needs to do other things than >> web surf, email and store photos. >> >>> >>> And everything in between. At least a score of different educational >>> approaches. And there are youtube videos for a lot of this as well. >>> >>> And you need(ed) a lot more magic incantations to find stuff in >>> DEC's (and everyone else's for that matter) manuals. Follow the >>> links the system presents to you when it comes up for the first >>> time (and every time it is booted thereafter, until you dispose >>> of that screen). >>> >>> Yes, there is complexity here, but it is very nicely documented. >>> >>> Windows is not better in this respect. It has the advantage that >>> the hardware vendors have a mandatory test regime to get to use >>> windows on their iron, so this class of failures are fewer between. >>> But just look for stuff like hardware installation, and the order >>> in which windows drivers are loaded. Or not. >> >> I'm talking about Unix system owners; MS' approach is not interesting >> because their tradeoff is to keep the system owner stupid. >> >>> >>> This cross-effect between drivers is largely gone in *n*x, because >>> the drivers are (mostly) under the control of the kernel developers. >>> >>> You really need to fast forward to 2016 here. >>> >>> Go visit a good technical bookstore, and look at the *n*x shelf. >>> Or visit some oreilly.com or similar website. >> >> I have not looked in the last 5 years; I will try again. >> >> One of the reasons you cannot understand what I'm trying to >> talk about is because you already know too mych about Unix. >> Very few people can "play dumb" and be able to imagine >> what an inexperienced user needs. There may have been 4 >> or 5 people in all of DEC who could do this type of thinking. >> > > >What I haven't been able to find is a "bare metal" programming manual for >Linux. Even the few Linux assembler books I've found assume use of libc. >What I've found out I had to dig for. Kernel guides will tell you this, and also why using libc is a good idea. -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-21 10:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20160221101817.c9e898bd13bd2e7695735a1b@eircom.net> |
| In reply to | #159998 |
On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 18:15:39 -0700 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: > What I haven't been able to find is a "bare metal" programming manual for > Linux. Even the few Linux assembler books I've found assume use of > libc. What I've found out I had to dig for. Unless you're writing kernel code there is no bare metal, the lowest you get is the system calls - section 2 of the man pages should document them fully. But why avoid libc ? Even in kernel space there's a lot of library support you can count on. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 12 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 10 11 [12] 13 14 … 16 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web