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


Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #159496 > unrolled thread

Ransomware

Started by"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net>
First post2016-02-16 10:37 -0600
Last post2016-02-19 12:55 -0600
Articles 20 on this page of 317 — 37 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers


Contents

  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 3 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 16  Next page →


#159744

FromLawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx>
Date2016-02-18 19:10 -0600
Message-ID<87povtqzcz.fsf@redbull.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me>
In reply to#159733
JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> writes:
>>If they can't make their case some other way -- then the case does not
>>need making.
>
> That makes no sense. If the phone could contain info on additional
> terrorist activity then Apple should get off their collective ass and
> fix the phone so the info can be read. 
>
> Dead terrorists have no privacy for anyone to be tauting fake concern
> for.

Well - actually, yes -- privacy survives the person.  Your right to
privacy does not end when you die.

If it is my fate to die in a horrible explosion, I will die on my feet
as a free man, not on my knees as a slave to an oppressive state.

In case I did not make it clear -- the possibility of a bad actor, or
multiple bad actors working in concert to bring me (or other persons in
any number) harm is a minuscule price to pay for freedom.

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


#159754

Fromhancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Date2016-02-18 20:13 -0800
Message-ID<78f603b7-84bc-46ea-bae3-6120be36b220@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#159744
On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 8:10:22 PM UTC-5, Lawrence Statton wrote:

> Well - actually, yes -- privacy survives the person.  Your right to
> privacy does not end when you die.

I am not a lawyer, but I believe your right to privacy ends with death.
For instance, I think a will is public record.  The wills of famous
people were routinely published in the newspaper.  I'm pretty sure
protection against libel and slander end.

A dead terrorist or enemy compbatant has no right of privacy.  Indeed,
the rights of a captured terrorist or combatant are limited under the
Geneva Convention.  Uniformed regular soldiers have more rights than
an non-uniformed commando.



> If it is my fate to die in a horrible explosion, I will die on my feet
> as a free man, not on my knees as a slave to an oppressive state.

Frankly, I really do not want to die.


> In case I did not make it clear -- the possibility of a bad actor, or
> multiple bad actors working in concert to bring me (or other persons in
> any number) harm is a minuscule price to pay for freedom.

Death or serious physical harm is a loss of freedom.

My privacy and freedom as a citizen are very important to me.  But so
is my life.  If the cops came up to me and _honestly_ said they had 
good reason to believe someone was out to kill me and they wanted to 
see my emails to search out the killer, I would very likely let them.

Obviously, these are not simple issues.

Fifty years ago, our government told us our freedom was at stake, and
to preserve it, we would be conscripted into the military and sent off
to fight and possibly die in the jungles of a far away place.  Our 
government either flat out lied to us or was utterly incompetent, all
in the name of 'freedom'.

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


#159757

From"hgww" <hgww@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-19 15:26 +1100
Message-ID<dinjr0FhpclU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#159754

<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote in message 
news:78f603b7-84bc-46ea-bae3-6120be36b220@googlegroups.com...
> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 8:10:22 PM UTC-5, Lawrence Statton 
> wrote:
>
>> Well - actually, yes -- privacy survives the person.  Your right to
>> privacy does not end when you die.
>
> I am not a lawyer, but I believe your right to privacy ends with death.
> For instance, I think a will is public record.

Only in the stupid US system.  And you don't have to have one either.

> The wills of famous people were routinely published in the newspaper.
> I'm pretty sure protection against libel and slander end.

Yes, but that isnt privacy, that is libel and slander.

> A dead terrorist or enemy compbatant has no right of privacy.

Wrong.

> Indeed, the rights of a captured terrorist or combatant
> are limited under the Geneva Convention.

Separate matter entirely to privacy.

> Uniformed regular soldiers have more
> rights than an non-uniformed commando.

Not as far as privacy is concerned.

>> If it is my fate to die in a horrible explosion, I will die on my feet
>> as a free man, not on my knees as a slave to an oppressive state.

> Frankly, I really do not want to die.

You will anyway.

>> In case I did not make it clear -- the possibility of a bad actor, or
>> multiple bad actors working in concert to bring me (or other persons in
>> any number) harm is a minuscule price to pay for freedom.
>
> Death or serious physical harm is a loss of freedom.
>
> My privacy and freedom as a citizen are very important to me.  But so
> is my life.  If the cops came up to me and _honestly_ said they had
> good reason to believe someone was out to kill me and they wanted to
> see my emails to search out the killer, I would very likely let them.

I wouldn't be stupid enough to refuse that.

> Obviously, these are not simple issues.
>
> Fifty years ago, our government told us our freedom was at stake,

No they did not.

> and to preserve it,

They didn't say that either.

> we would be conscripted into the military and sent off
> to fight and possibly die in the jungles of a far away place.  Our
> government either flat out lied to us or was utterly incompetent, all
> in the name of 'freedom'.

It wasn't in the name of freedom.

Neither was Iraq or Afghanistan. 

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


#159803

FromJimP <solosam90@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-19 09:34 -0600
Message-ID<o7decbt81g7mdrifr4ktnv6fbgls9ghdca@4ax.com>
In reply to#159744
On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 19:10:20 -0600, Lawrence Statton
<lawrence@senguio.mx> wrote:
>JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> writes:
>>>If they can't make their case some other way -- then the case does not
>>>need making.
>>
>> That makes no sense. If the phone could contain info on additional
>> terrorist activity then Apple should get off their collective ass and
>> fix the phone so the info can be read. 
>>
>> Dead terrorists have no privacy for anyone to be tauting fake concern
>> for.
>
>Well - actually, yes -- privacy survives the person.  Your right to
>privacy does not end when you die.
>
>If it is my fate to die in a horrible explosion, I will die on my feet
>as a free man, not on my knees as a slave to an oppressive state.
>
>In case I did not make it clear -- the possibility of a bad actor, or
>multiple bad actors working in concert to bring me (or other persons in
>any number) harm is a minuscule price to pay for freedom.

I have no reasonable expectation of privacy after I die, I'll be dead.
And its the terrorists who are doing the supression.

While it is true that some government officials should b locked up for
doing things that are evil, I don't see this instance as being one of
them.

And if Apple upgrades the iPhone OS after providing the backdoor,
disabling the backdoor in all other iPhones, I don't see as anyone's
privacy is in trouble. I'm not in the slightest bit concerned with the
privacy of terrorists. The terrrorists chose to be that scummy way.
Bleep them and their alleged privacy.

-- 
JimP.

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


#159809

Fromscott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
Date2016-02-19 16:26 +0000
Message-ID<inHxy.5423$hN1.693@fx34.iad>
In reply to#159803
JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> writes:

>And if Apple upgrades the iPhone OS after providing the backdoor,
>disabling the backdoor in all other iPhones, I don't see as anyone's
>privacy is in trouble. I'm not in the slightest bit concerned with the
>privacy of terrorists. The terrrorists chose to be that scummy way.
>Bleep them and their alleged privacy.


The problem with this statement is that anyone can be branded a
terrorist by the government, generally with little to no recourse.

It's the same problem with Gitmo.   There is no recourse if
some military flunky declares someone a terrorist.  No writ of habeus
corpus, no trial, nothing.   You're taking the governments word a priori.

Orwell used "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to
fear" in 1984 to justify intrusive surveillance.  It has also been
attributed to Goebbels.

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


#159849

FromJimP <solosam90@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-19 14:58 -0600
Message-ID<3d0fcb5ls675l0m9gb9abgosnkd3labhq1@4ax.com>
In reply to#159809
On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 16:26:54 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

>JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>And if Apple upgrades the iPhone OS after providing the backdoor,
>>disabling the backdoor in all other iPhones, I don't see as anyone's
>>privacy is in trouble. I'm not in the slightest bit concerned with the
>>privacy of terrorists. The terrrorists chose to be that scummy way.
>>Bleep them and their alleged privacy.
>
>
>The problem with this statement is that anyone can be branded a
>terrorist by the government, generally with little to no recourse.
>
>It's the same problem with Gitmo.   There is no recourse if
>some military flunky declares someone a terrorist.  No writ of habeus
>corpus, no trial, nothing.   You're taking the governments word a priori.
>
>Orwell used "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to
>fear" in 1984 to justify intrusive surveillance.  It has also been
>attributed to Goebbels.

The two dead terrorists shot up a Christmas party. They didn't, as far
as we know, merely 'look suspicious'.

-- 
JimP.

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


#159863

FromDan Espen <despen@verizon.net>
Date2016-02-19 18:21 -0500
Message-ID<na87rt$vcg$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#159849
JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> writes:

> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 16:26:54 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
> wrote:
>
>>JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>>And if Apple upgrades the iPhone OS after providing the backdoor,
>>>disabling the backdoor in all other iPhones, I don't see as anyone's
>>>privacy is in trouble. I'm not in the slightest bit concerned with the
>>>privacy of terrorists. The terrrorists chose to be that scummy way.
>>>Bleep them and their alleged privacy.
>>
>>
>>The problem with this statement is that anyone can be branded a
>>terrorist by the government, generally with little to no recourse.
>>
>>It's the same problem with Gitmo.   There is no recourse if
>>some military flunky declares someone a terrorist.  No writ of habeus
>>corpus, no trial, nothing.   You're taking the governments word a priori.
>>
>>Orwell used "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to
>>fear" in 1984 to justify intrusive surveillance.  It has also been
>>attributed to Goebbels.
>
> The two dead terrorists shot up a Christmas party. They didn't, as far
> as we know, merely 'look suspicious'.

Two employees were engaged in a long term argument.
One left, came back with a gun and settled the argument for good.

Seeing  terrorists under the bed isn't going to help anyone.

-- 
Dan Espen

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


#159876

FromPeter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
Date2016-02-19 18:43 -0700
Message-ID<224095646.477625194.041880.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#159863
Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 16:26:54 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> writes:
>>> 
>>>> And if Apple upgrades the iPhone OS after providing the backdoor,
>>>> disabling the backdoor in all other iPhones, I don't see as anyone's
>>>> privacy is in trouble. I'm not in the slightest bit concerned with the
>>>> privacy of terrorists. The terrrorists chose to be that scummy way.
>>>> Bleep them and their alleged privacy.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The problem with this statement is that anyone can be branded a
>>> terrorist by the government, generally with little to no recourse.
>>> 
>>> It's the same problem with Gitmo.   There is no recourse if
>>> some military flunky declares someone a terrorist.  No writ of habeus
>>> corpus, no trial, nothing.   You're taking the governments word a priori.
>>> 
>>> Orwell used "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to
>>> fear" in 1984 to justify intrusive surveillance.  It has also been
>>> attributed to Goebbels.
>> 
>> The two dead terrorists shot up a Christmas party. They didn't, as far
>> as we know, merely 'look suspicious'.
> 
> Two employees were engaged in a long term argument.
> One left, came back with a gun and settled the argument for good.
> 
> Seeing  terrorists under the bed isn't going to help anyone.
> 

I think you're skipping over a few facts.  That was my first thought too,
except for the shooters ISIS connections.

-- 
Pete

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


#159904

FromDan Espen <despen@verizon.net>
Date2016-02-19 23:32 -0500
Message-ID<na8q3d$nu5$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#159876
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:

> Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
>> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 16:26:54 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> 
>>>>> And if Apple upgrades the iPhone OS after providing the backdoor,
>>>>> disabling the backdoor in all other iPhones, I don't see as anyone's
>>>>> privacy is in trouble. I'm not in the slightest bit concerned with the
>>>>> privacy of terrorists. The terrrorists chose to be that scummy way.
>>>>> Bleep them and their alleged privacy.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The problem with this statement is that anyone can be branded a
>>>> terrorist by the government, generally with little to no recourse.
>>>> 
>>>> It's the same problem with Gitmo.   There is no recourse if
>>>> some military flunky declares someone a terrorist.  No writ of habeus
>>>> corpus, no trial, nothing.   You're taking the governments word a priori.
>>>> 
>>>> Orwell used "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to
>>>> fear" in 1984 to justify intrusive surveillance.  It has also been
>>>> attributed to Goebbels.
>>> 
>>> The two dead terrorists shot up a Christmas party. They didn't, as far
>>> as we know, merely 'look suspicious'.
>> 
>> Two employees were engaged in a long term argument.
>> One left, came back with a gun and settled the argument for good.
>> 
>> Seeing  terrorists under the bed isn't going to help anyone.
>
> I think you're skipping over a few facts.  That was my first thought too,
> except for the shooters ISIS connections.

Simply fan worship.  What do you expect.  The story is that he'd been
having a ongoing battle with the guy for a long time.
When you look at motive, there's no need to assume an outside agency.

-- 
Dan Espen

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


#159894

Fromhancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Date2016-02-19 19:34 -0800
Message-ID<93a82345-629a-496d-a66d-3c0400ad1121@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#159849
On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 3:59:01 PM UTC-5, JimP wrote:

> The two dead terrorists shot up a Christmas party. They didn't, as far
> as we know, merely 'look suspicious'.

What apparently remains unknown at this point, and possibly even doubtful,
is whether they were actually hostile foreign "terrorists", that is, 
like the ones who attacked the WTC and Pentagon.  Or, whether this was a
case of workplace violence, or perhaps some nutjobs murdering others, like
almost all of the mass shootings in the U.S.  There were so many things
irrational/illogical about this particular tragedy that it almost screams
mental illness.

Presumably, they go through the computers and telephones of other
mass shooters.  But they do they ever find anything that they didn't
pretty much already know?  

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


#159913

From"hgww" <hgww@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-20 19:59 +1100
Message-ID<diqo7lFbgbrU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#159894

<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote in message 
news:93a82345-629a-496d-a66d-3c0400ad1121@googlegroups.com...
> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 3:59:01 PM UTC-5, JimP wrote:
>
>> The two dead terrorists shot up a Christmas party. They didn't, as far
>> as we know, merely 'look suspicious'.
>
> What apparently remains unknown at this point, and possibly even doubtful,
> is whether they were actually hostile foreign "terrorists", that is,
> like the ones who attacked the WTC and Pentagon.  Or, whether this was a
> case of workplace violence, or perhaps some nutjobs murdering others, like
> almost all of the mass shootings in the U.S.  There were so many things
> irrational/illogical about this particular tragedy that it almost screams
> mental illness.

And the data on their phone may well be useful to decide that.

> Presumably, they go through the computers and telephones of other
> mass shooters.  But they do they ever find anything that they didn't
> pretty much already know?

It would be very surprising if sometimes they didn't. 

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


#159919

From"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-20 07:25 -0500
Message-ID<MPG.313225387a95680e989f9c@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#159894
In article <93a82345-629a-496d-a66d-3c0400ad1121@googlegroups.com>, 
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says...
> 
> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 3:59:01 PM UTC-5, JimP wrote:
> 
> > The two dead terrorists shot up a Christmas party. They didn't, as far
> > as we know, merely 'look suspicious'.
> 
> What apparently remains unknown at this point, and possibly even doubtful,
> is whether they were actually hostile foreign "terrorists", that is, 
> like the ones who attacked the WTC and Pentagon.  Or, whether this was a
> case of workplace violence, or perhaps some nutjobs murdering others, like
> almost all of the mass shootings in the U.S.  There were so many things
> irrational/illogical about this particular tragedy that it almost screams
> mental illness.

Survival 101--don't tell somebody you want to kill soldiers and then try 
to buy a black-market machine gun.
 
> Presumably, they go through the computers and telephones of other
> mass shooters.  But they do they ever find anything that they didn't
> pretty much already know?  

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


#159946

FromJimP <solosam90@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-20 10:30 -0600
Message-ID<rr4hcbpncbqa22ppmm8f531hef1i0gad39@4ax.com>
In reply to#159894
On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 19:34:38 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

>On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 3:59:01 PM UTC-5, JimP wrote:
>
>> The two dead terrorists shot up a Christmas party. They didn't, as far
>> as we know, merely 'look suspicious'.
>
>What apparently remains unknown at this point, and possibly even doubtful,
>is whether they were actually hostile foreign "terrorists", that is, 

At least one of them was born in the U.S. But so have other terrorists
been born here. It appears they didn't see the freedoms here.

>like the ones who attacked the WTC and Pentagon.  Or, whether this was a
>case of workplace violence, or perhaps some nutjobs murdering others, like
>almost all of the mass shootings in the U.S.  There were so many things
>irrational/illogical about this particular tragedy that it almost screams
>mental illness.

The man was aparently contented until he went back home and visited
relatives, then met the woman he was shot up the party with.

>Presumably, they go through the computers and telephones of other
>mass shooters.  But they do they ever find anything that they didn't
>pretty much already know?  

No idea. But for some years now telephones, home computers, rooms of
apartments/homes, vehicles, etc. are gone through when someone shoots
up a place and they are arrested or killed.

This time one of the phones is locked in a way that doesn't allow the
police to do one of these searches.

That is the only difference fomr earlier shootouts.

-- 
JimP.

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


#159958

FromDave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
Date2016-02-20 10:58 -0600
Message-ID<naa5rp$1is$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#159946
On 2/20/2016 10:30 AM, JimP wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 19:34:38 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 3:59:01 PM UTC-5, JimP wrote:
>>
>>> The two dead terrorists shot up a Christmas party. They didn't, as far
>>> as we know, merely 'look suspicious'.
>>
>> What apparently remains unknown at this point, and possibly even doubtful,
>> is whether they were actually hostile foreign "terrorists", that is,
>
> At least one of them was born in the U.S. But so have other terrorists
> been born here. It appears they didn't see the freedoms here.
>
I don't think "the freedoms here" have much to do with terrorism, 
aside from the domestic terrorists who bomb churches, murder abortion 
clinic workers, or seize/blow up federal buildings. It's when the 
freedoms "here" involve overthrowing/propping up regimes or sending 
military to influence events "there" that we become viewed as the enemy.

>> like the ones who attacked the WTC and Pentagon.  Or, whether this was a
>> case of workplace violence, or perhaps some nutjobs murdering others, like
>> almost all of the mass shootings in the U.S.  There were so many things
>> irrational/illogical about this particular tragedy that it almost screams
>> mental illness.
>
> The man was aparently contented until he went back home and visited
> relatives, then met the woman he was shot up the party with.
>
>> Presumably, they go through the computers and telephones of other
>> mass shooters.  But they do they ever find anything that they didn't
>> pretty much already know?
>
> No idea. But for some years now telephones, home computers, rooms of
> apartments/homes, vehicles, etc. are gone through when someone shoots
> up a place and they are arrested or killed.
>
> This time one of the phones is locked in a way that doesn't allow the
> police to do one of these searches.
>
> That is the only difference fomr earlier shootouts.
>
Now we're hearing that the reason it's different is that they couldn't 
back up to the icloud because _after_ law enforcement seized the 
phone, some moron (FBI? Health Department? they're not saying) changed 
the icloud password. Good going, guys!

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


#159964

From"hgww" <hgww@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-21 04:25 +1100
Message-ID<dirlt6Fj5efU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#159958

"Dave Garland" <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote in message 
news:naa5rp$1is$1@dont-email.me...
> On 2/20/2016 10:30 AM, JimP wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 19:34:38 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 3:59:01 PM UTC-5, JimP wrote:
>>>
>>>> The two dead terrorists shot up a Christmas party. They didn't, as far
>>>> as we know, merely 'look suspicious'.
>>>
>>> What apparently remains unknown at this point, and possibly even 
>>> doubtful,
>>> is whether they were actually hostile foreign "terrorists", that is,
>>
>> At least one of them was born in the U.S. But so have other terrorists
>> been born here. It appears they didn't see the freedoms here.
>>
> I don't think "the freedoms here" have much to do with terrorism, aside 
> from the domestic terrorists who bomb churches, murder abortion clinic 
> workers, or seize/blow up federal buildings. It's when the freedoms "here" 
> involve overthrowing/propping up regimes or sending military to influence 
> events "there" that we become viewed as the enemy.

And rightly so with terminal stupidities like Iraq, Vietnam, Panama and 
Afghanistan.

>>> like the ones who attacked the WTC and Pentagon.  Or, whether this was a
>>> case of workplace violence, or perhaps some nutjobs murdering others, 
>>> like
>>> almost all of the mass shootings in the U.S.  There were so many things
>>> irrational/illogical about this particular tragedy that it almost 
>>> screams
>>> mental illness.
>>
>> The man was aparently contented until he went back home and visited
>> relatives, then met the woman he was shot up the party with.
>>
>>> Presumably, they go through the computers and telephones of other
>>> mass shooters.  But they do they ever find anything that they didn't
>>> pretty much already know?
>>
>> No idea. But for some years now telephones, home computers, rooms of
>> apartments/homes, vehicles, etc. are gone through when someone shoots
>> up a place and they are arrested or killed.
>>
>> This time one of the phones is locked in a way that doesn't allow the
>> police to do one of these searches.
>>
>> That is the only difference fomr earlier shootouts.
>>
> Now we're hearing that the reason it's different is that they couldn't 
> back up to the icloud because _after_ law enforcement seized the phone, 
> some moron (FBI? Health Department? they're not saying) changed the icloud 
> password. Good going, guys! 

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


#159976

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2016-02-20 19:56 +0000
Message-ID<naagct177r@news3.newsguy.com>
In reply to#159958
On 2016-02-20, Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:

> On 2/20/2016 10:30 AM, JimP wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 19:34:38 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 3:59:01 PM UTC-5, JimP wrote:
>>>
>>>> The two dead terrorists shot up a Christmas party. They didn't, as far
>>>> as we know, merely 'look suspicious'.
>>>
>>> What apparently remains unknown at this point, and possibly even doubtful,
>>> is whether they were actually hostile foreign "terrorists", that is,
>>
>> At least one of them was born in the U.S. But so have other terrorists
>> been born here. It appears they didn't see the freedoms here.

Either that or they didn't like people having that kind of freedom.

> I don't think "the freedoms here" have much to do with terrorism, 
> aside from the domestic terrorists who bomb churches, murder abortion 
> clinic workers, or seize/blow up federal buildings. It's when the 
> freedoms "here" involve overthrowing/propping up regimes or sending 
> military to influence events "there" that we become viewed as the enemy.

Those aren't freedoms, just prerogatives claimed by the government.

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored.  Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!

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


#159999

FromPeter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
Date2016-02-20 18:15 -0700
Message-ID<981652615.477708373.965935.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#159958
Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
> On 2/20/2016 10:30 AM, JimP wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 19:34:38 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> 
>>> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 3:59:01 PM UTC-5, JimP wrote:
>>> 
>>>> The two dead terrorists shot up a Christmas party. They didn't, as far
>>>> as we know, merely 'look suspicious'.
>>> 
>>> What apparently remains unknown at this point, and possibly even doubtful,
>>> is whether they were actually hostile foreign "terrorists", that is,
>> 
>> At least one of them was born in the U.S. But so have other terrorists
>> been born here. It appears they didn't see the freedoms here.
>> 
> I don't think "the freedoms here" have much to do with terrorism, 
> aside from the domestic terrorists who bomb churches, murder abortion 
> clinic workers, or seize/blow up federal buildings. It's when the 
> freedoms "here" involve overthrowing/propping up regimes or sending 
> military to influence events "there" that we become viewed as the enemy.
> 
>>> like the ones who attacked the WTC and Pentagon.  Or, whether this was a
>>> case of workplace violence, or perhaps some nutjobs murdering others, like
>>> almost all of the mass shootings in the U.S.  There were so many things
>>> irrational/illogical about this particular tragedy that it almost screams
>>> mental illness.
>> 
>> The man was aparently contented until he went back home and visited
>> relatives, then met the woman he was shot up the party with.
>> 
>>> Presumably, they go through the computers and telephones of other
>>> mass shooters.  But they do they ever find anything that they didn't
>>> pretty much already know?
>> 
>> No idea. But for some years now telephones, home computers, rooms of
>> apartments/homes, vehicles, etc. are gone through when someone shoots
>> up a place and they are arrested or killed.
>> 
>> This time one of the phones is locked in a way that doesn't allow the
>> police to do one of these searches.
>> 
>> That is the only difference fomr earlier shootouts.
>> 
> Now we're hearing that the reason it's different is that they couldn't 
> back up to the icloud because _after_ law enforcement seized the 
> phone, some moron (FBI? Health Department? they're not saying) changed 
> the icloud password. Good going, guys!
> 

Well, what did s/he change it too?  Pulling out a few fingernails migh aid
his recollection.

-- 
Pete

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


#160010

From"hgww" <hgww@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-21 13:26 +1100
Message-ID<dislibFqtidU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#159999

"Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:981652615.477708373.965935.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org...
> Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>> On 2/20/2016 10:30 AM, JimP wrote:
>>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 19:34:38 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 3:59:01 PM UTC-5, JimP wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The two dead terrorists shot up a Christmas party. They didn't, as far
>>>>> as we know, merely 'look suspicious'.
>>>>
>>>> What apparently remains unknown at this point, and possibly even 
>>>> doubtful,
>>>> is whether they were actually hostile foreign "terrorists", that is,
>>>
>>> At least one of them was born in the U.S. But so have other terrorists
>>> been born here. It appears they didn't see the freedoms here.
>>>
>> I don't think "the freedoms here" have much to do with terrorism,
>> aside from the domestic terrorists who bomb churches, murder abortion
>> clinic workers, or seize/blow up federal buildings. It's when the
>> freedoms "here" involve overthrowing/propping up regimes or sending
>> military to influence events "there" that we become viewed as the enemy.
>>
>>>> like the ones who attacked the WTC and Pentagon.  Or, whether this was 
>>>> a
>>>> case of workplace violence, or perhaps some nutjobs murdering others, 
>>>> like
>>>> almost all of the mass shootings in the U.S.  There were so many things
>>>> irrational/illogical about this particular tragedy that it almost 
>>>> screams
>>>> mental illness.
>>>
>>> The man was aparently contented until he went back home and visited
>>> relatives, then met the woman he was shot up the party with.
>>>
>>>> Presumably, they go through the computers and telephones of other
>>>> mass shooters.  But they do they ever find anything that they didn't
>>>> pretty much already know?
>>>
>>> No idea. But for some years now telephones, home computers, rooms of
>>> apartments/homes, vehicles, etc. are gone through when someone shoots
>>> up a place and they are arrested or killed.
>>>
>>> This time one of the phones is locked in a way that doesn't allow the
>>> police to do one of these searches.
>>>
>>> That is the only difference fomr earlier shootouts.
>>>
>> Now we're hearing that the reason it's different is that they couldn't
>> back up to the icloud because _after_ law enforcement seized the
>> phone, some moron (FBI? Health Department? they're not saying)
>> changed the icloud password. Good going, guys!

> Well, what did s/he change it too?  Pulling out a few fingernails migh aid
> his recollection.

That's not the problem. The problem is that change stopped
the phone doing an automatic backup to the cloud and so
they can't now attempt to get the data they want out of the
cloud which is easy for Apple to allow them to do brute
force attacks on to try and work out the original passcode and
so be able to decrypt what has been backed up to the cloud. 

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


#159962

From"hgww" <hgww@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-21 04:16 +1100
Message-ID<dirlb3Fj11gU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#159946

"JimP" <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:rr4hcbpncbqa22ppmm8f531hef1i0gad39@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 19:34:38 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>>On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 3:59:01 PM UTC-5, JimP wrote:
>>
>>> The two dead terrorists shot up a Christmas party. They didn't, as far
>>> as we know, merely 'look suspicious'.
>>
>>What apparently remains unknown at this point, and possibly even doubtful,
>>is whether they were actually hostile foreign "terrorists", that is,
>
> At least one of them was born in the U.S. But so have other terrorists
> been born here. It appears they didn't see the freedoms here.
>
>>like the ones who attacked the WTC and Pentagon.  Or, whether this was a
>>case of workplace violence, or perhaps some nutjobs murdering others, like
>>almost all of the mass shootings in the U.S.  There were so many things
>>irrational/illogical about this particular tragedy that it almost screams
>>mental illness.
>
> The man was aparently contented until he went back home and visited
> relatives, then met the woman he was shot up the party with.

They're mostly still into arranged marriages with the women
from back where they came from. Its been fascinating to watch
the kurds I know still doing that today, mostly marrying the kids
off as soon as they completely highschool.

There has been just one exception in the family I know well,
and even he was monstered into doing it when he was 30 or
so. That one failed, I haven't been able to get a straight story
out of them yet about what happened, whether her family
decided that he was much too old or he changed his mine
at the last minute, but that is because I haven't had a chance
to ask the one who always tells me the full story who is in
fact the latest to have got married off.

I keep ribbing the youngest who is only 13 every time they
head back to Turkey in a massive group so large that they
can't even do a single joint booking that if he doesn't watch
out they will marry him off this time too. Get one hell of a
scowl every time I rib him like that. I will be fascinating to
see how that pans out with him when he leaves school at
18 etc.

>>Presumably, they go through the computers and telephones of other
>>mass shooters.  But they do they ever find anything that they didn't
>>pretty much already know?
>
> No idea. But for some years now telephones, home computers, rooms of
> apartments/homes, vehicles, etc. are gone through when someone shoots
> up a place and they are arrested or killed.
>
> This time one of the phones is locked in a way that doesn't allow the
> police to do one of these searches.
>
> That is the only difference fomr earlier shootouts.

Indeed. 

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


#160000

FromPeter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
Date2016-02-20 18:15 -0700
Message-ID<1121493960.477708458.941322.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#159962
hgww <hgww@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> "JimP" <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:rr4hcbpncbqa22ppmm8f531hef1i0gad39@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 19:34:38 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> 
>>> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 3:59:01 PM UTC-5, JimP wrote:
>>> 
>>>> The two dead terrorists shot up a Christmas party. They didn't, as far
>>>> as we know, merely 'look suspicious'.
>>> 
>>> What apparently remains unknown at this point, and possibly even doubtful,
>>> is whether they were actually hostile foreign "terrorists", that is,
>> 
>> At least one of them was born in the U.S. But so have other terrorists
>> been born here. It appears they didn't see the freedoms here.
>> 
>>> like the ones who attacked the WTC and Pentagon.  Or, whether this was a
>>> case of workplace violence, or perhaps some nutjobs murdering others, like
>>> almost all of the mass shootings in the U.S.  There were so many things
>>> irrational/illogical about this particular tragedy that it almost screams
>>> mental illness.
>> 
>> The man was aparently contented until he went back home and visited
>> relatives, then met the woman he was shot up the party with.
> 
> They're mostly still into arranged marriages with the women
> from back where they came from. Its been fascinating to watch
> the kurds I know still doing that today, mostly marrying the kids
> off as soon as they completely highschool.
> 
> There has been just one exception in the family I know well,
> and even he was monstered into doing it when he was 30 or
> so. That one failed, I haven't been able to get a straight story
> out of them yet about what happened, whether her family
> decided that he was much too old or he changed his mine
> at the last minute, but that is because I haven't had a chance
> to ask the one who always tells me the full story who is in
> fact the latest to have got married off.
> 
> I keep ribbing the youngest who is only 13 every time they
> head back to Turkey in a massive group so large that they
> can't even do a single joint booking that if he doesn't watch
> out they will marry him off this time too. Get one hell of a
> scowl every time I rib him like that. I will be fascinating to
> see how that pans out with him when he leaves school at
> 18 etc.
> 

This is not new, or unique to middle-easternerners.  Many times men from
scandanavia, ireland, or italy, if they didn't already have a girl they
wanted to marry, would write back  to their relatives and ask them to find
a nice girl from their village for them to marry.  It took another
generation or so for intermarriage to become common.  Irish and Italian is
a standing joke.

-- 
Pete

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


Page 3 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 16  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers


csiph-web