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

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #376480 > unrolled thread

BeOS. Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy

Contents

  BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> - 2016-10-16 04:09 +0000
    Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 00:23 -0700
    Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-10-16 18:01 +0000
      Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> - 2016-10-16 19:51 +0000
        Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-10-16 21:05 +0000
          Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 18:13 -0700
            Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics deplorable owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-10-17 01:31 +0000
            Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics fr314159@gmail.com - 2016-10-17 07:23 -0700
              Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-17 16:32 +0200
                Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-10-17 16:23 +0100
                Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-11-01 10:10 -0700
              Re: BeOS. Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2016-10-17 16:04 +0100
                Re: BeOS. Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics fr314159@gmail.com - 2016-10-17 08:45 -0700
                  Re: BeOS. Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2016-10-17 16:52 +0100
              Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics deplorable owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-10-17 18:19 +0000
                Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-17 14:22 -0600
                  Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-17 22:36 +0200
                    Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 13:56 -0700
                    Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 00:34 +0000
                      Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 17:46 -0700
                        Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-18 14:00 -0600
                          Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 13:14 -0700
                            Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 14:42 -0700
                              Re: BeOS. Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-19 13:02 -0400
                                Re: BeOS. Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 13:44 -0700
                                  Re: BeOS. Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-19 19:14 -0400
                            Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-19 13:57 -0600
                              Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 13:45 -0700
                  Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics deplorable owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-10-17 20:39 +0000
                    Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-17 17:19 -0600
                      Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics deplorable owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-10-18 02:04 +0000
                        Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-18 14:01 -0600
                          Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics deplorable owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-10-18 23:02 +0000
                Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> - 2016-10-17 22:56 +0000
                  Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics deplorable owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-10-17 23:32 +0000
                    Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> - 2016-10-18 19:14 +0000
                      Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-18 21:19 +0200
          Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics fr314159@gmail.com - 2016-10-17 07:17 -0700
            Re: BeOS. Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-17 11:31 -0400
              Re: BeOS. Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2016-10-17 16:53 +0100
              Re: BeOS. Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> - 2016-10-17 22:40 +0000
    Re: BeOS.  Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-18 07:42 -0500

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#376667

Steve Carroll wrote:

> On Monday, October 17, 2016 at 5:35:14 PM UTC-7, ronb wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 22:36:48 +0200, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>> 
>> > GreyCloud wrote:
>> > 
>> >> deplorable owl wrote:
>> >> 
>> >>> fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
>> >>>> On Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 9:13:32 PM UTC-4, Takuya Saitoh wrote:
>> >>>> 
>> >>>> 
>> >>>>> Idiot, leave multiuser OSes for servers
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>> Exactly.
>> >>>> 
>> >>>> A single workstation has a single user.  That is simple, sensible,
>> >>>> rational, and logical.
>> >>>> 
>> >>>> 
>> >>> A single workstation can be used by multiple users, moron.
>> >>> Why should these users be forced to share a home directory and login?
>> >>> 
>> >>> 
>> >>>> What does this idiot desire?  Does he want to bring back time-sharing
>> >>>> from the 1960's?
>> >>>> 
>> >>>> This multi-user crap is pure nonsense.  I have been running GNU/Linux
>> >>>> as a single-user system (root user) from the very beginning.
>> >>>> But still, a few programs give me trouble with their "don't run as
>> >>>> root" philosophy.  I just respond with: "Fuck you, asshole idiot."
>> >>>> 
>> >>>> Multi-users.  Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a dunce!
>> >>>> 
>> >>>> 
>> >>> Why do you need root access all the time, dunce?
>> >> 
>> >> It looks like a lot of the posters have left.
>> > 
>> > Yes. Dozens of Snit socks have disappeared
>> 
>> Strange how that happens, huh?
>> 
>> --
>> Zero tolerance for iCultists and WinDrones
> 
> He is still here forging me.

Yes, you are still forging steve carolls id, eh snit.

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

#376675

On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 1:00:55 PM UTC-7, GreyCloud wrote:
> Steve Carroll wrote:
> 
> > On Monday, October 17, 2016 at 5:35:14 PM UTC-7, ronb wrote:
> >> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 22:36:48 +0200, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
> >> 
> >> > GreyCloud wrote:
> >> > 
> >> >> deplorable owl wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >>> fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
> >> >>>> On Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 9:13:32 PM UTC-4, Takuya Saitoh wrote:
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>>>> Idiot, leave multiuser OSes for servers
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>> Exactly.
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>>> A single workstation has a single user.  That is simple, sensible,
> >> >>>> rational, and logical.
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>> A single workstation can be used by multiple users, moron.
> >> >>> Why should these users be forced to share a home directory and login?
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> 
> >> >>>> What does this idiot desire?  Does he want to bring back time-sharing
> >> >>>> from the 1960's?
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>>> This multi-user crap is pure nonsense.  I have been running GNU/Linux
> >> >>>> as a single-user system (root user) from the very beginning.
> >> >>>> But still, a few programs give me trouble with their "don't run as
> >> >>>> root" philosophy.  I just respond with: "Fuck you, asshole idiot."
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>>> Multi-users.  Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a dunce!
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>> Why do you need root access all the time, dunce?
> >> >> 
> >> >> It looks like a lot of the posters have left.
> >> > 
> >> > Yes. Dozens of Snit socks have disappeared
> >> 
> >> Strange how that happens, huh?
> >> 
> >> --
> >> Zero tolerance for iCultists and WinDrones
> > 
> > He is still here forging me.
> 
> Yes, you are still forging steve carolls id, eh snit.

That sad thing is how he thinks people are stupid enough to fall for it.

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

#376678

On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 2:14:58 PM UTC-6, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 1:00:55 PM UTC-7, GreyCloud wrote:
> > Steve Carroll wrote:
> > 
> > > On Monday, October 17, 2016 at 5:35:14 PM UTC-7, ronb wrote:
> > >> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 22:36:48 +0200, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
> > >> 
> > >> > GreyCloud wrote:
> > >> > 
> > >> >> deplorable owl wrote:
> > >> >> 
> > >> >>> fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
> > >> >>>> On Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 9:13:32 PM UTC-4, Takuya Saitoh wrote:
> > >> >>>> 
> > >> >>>> 
> > >> >>>>> Idiot, leave multiuser OSes for servers
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>> Exactly.
> > >> >>>> 
> > >> >>>> A single workstation has a single user.  That is simple, sensible,
> > >> >>>> rational, and logical.
> > >> >>>> 
> > >> >>>> 
> > >> >>> A single workstation can be used by multiple users, moron.
> > >> >>> Why should these users be forced to share a home directory and login?
> > >> >>> 
> > >> >>> 
> > >> >>>> What does this idiot desire?  Does he want to bring back time-sharing
> > >> >>>> from the 1960's?
> > >> >>>> 
> > >> >>>> This multi-user crap is pure nonsense.  I have been running GNU/Linux
> > >> >>>> as a single-user system (root user) from the very beginning.
> > >> >>>> But still, a few programs give me trouble with their "don't run as
> > >> >>>> root" philosophy.  I just respond with: "Fuck you, asshole idiot."
> > >> >>>> 
> > >> >>>> Multi-users.  Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a dunce!
> > >> >>>> 
> > >> >>>> 
> > >> >>> Why do you need root access all the time, dunce?
> > >> >> 
> > >> >> It looks like a lot of the posters have left.
> > >> > 
> > >> > Yes. Dozens of Snit socks have disappeared
> > >> 
> > >> Strange how that happens, huh?
> > >> 
> > >> --
> > >> Zero tolerance for iCultists and WinDrones
> > > 
> > > He is still here forging me.
> > 
> > Yes, you are still forging steve carolls id, eh snit.
> 
> That sad thing is how he thinks people are stupid enough to fall for it.

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org

hQEMA2brmWp7kbAKAQgAqkti5kY+Zbc7iY3kzHD5gyFsDA4CwkjI2ztMQPvDTdyp
7p9OoIkDERYIKqcbtuTHeGfWNVbIUvQRE/Qrnm/P9AzfZpvAvkEoW0Ch1nOO4M4o
jpdxOlOegdm+aZKl0ZCHn8DDb3/zattNOBK5OecuA31NSHTfNxGhO354aefI8UG/
oidFFz137z16kgQuz6IdK1X9UFIE/jvF8pNgYfVgZDcmkbuq54lEvu9e88ksSh0d
9KrZPPZch++s1mKbPsuwCxquzpx2taPmZK+Xj7KvAzBPzRN5H9KIWs/Z7y31aChI
ibZE3IJhroUQ7zaSnILPTHFA7l4O/QqLi8X+D1lkhIUCDAOyU9aUwV0riwEP/R6R
zbuOPWC8F1odnxIAjQ+6Z9KOCzzTMTXn/3cmmV11fP9GiOnt5YX0MiiiVzxtrk+Y
vBaKXWOID4aLrkiIeJ/N95kEN9H8yAdDpbEzBXd/w/KTEe35FcJkmQu+uGKevcTp
/WXChVNquGo0wxzL0CDS8XgsK1HOgApsPdkfeuVeEDXlCxSevqP3m+nQWdiqo2e6
WaPmIgWGIPjRgbsEsAI/N1MAPOEEo6jQrLVKt1TBT81QO6bbE8ORM5Bx3tw1xoLA
dUt6TUIwhV/lGtJhfg/AjO09x/u+1AU4cQHHKBZ0olND6IpSEek/wCgxEPb+qMDa
MYigSaq89CMphGqw6DmRoF6EsoAdTRg3w45bz18DkByYiDJBiDtJXXvrHJVsAcYx
YS1SAlKFszsqJP7sfhPLP6Pa6DBiIs1AAac2g/Jr9C1nbbFHTwaxwgwo+TbFdw/P
da6AC9CV436/6oHiIx/EeZs1ij8GngAEodDfrdEyb25XEpwQbxF29PkVuZxzgtYM
M3X5ASY4AC6o4UuIVT6aHY4fiaoTdnSMMUY/fEq4qWBmKXbdGvG0kWr4hWq5BIdc
FvyL4S4Ij/pPFvkYjeoW061aMO6Wnqup+xiGxNhYExjVKkFHlQZEb4SIqr+PH6fV
El4s4Upb2eJXiu5noQ81a7P3UDoADdEbwdECt2G/hQEOA+KmBqQIb9R2EAP/WT4P
KDtmnm11N9/357hDfdk3Dc29oK49RpvG8k7saVPBUswlOJFUX0GFgrsKgU6BLXnI
grfduelOlEQ3PcMooNwy6rv2rdmu08q94T7Cu4zLyA4oapQ37065wGqSF4NphCUo
j6hWt4CjYfmPxvjcMY5npmfAcfoEvv3l3y6vor4EAJEpoYcTKbCYMUKNAzsaUVLA
KRG4Io9jpyY0i6aBp2+fk2big2CebfkuexzJA22OI/gng1m/6fSc/TCBxKU/MkOw
PdBktuGf4c1aejzY9S5Udv3V4g+nCp0R9V/ioZCpVscDxY02lt3re0tZy2VH2F8M
RkSYamkEnou1X3A6jBpKhQEMA4wFfgf/rr+uAQf+NxXtNrk4rOGkdXYSO4iMqqL6
9wxp9D/dIiBxH8Ij/Matolg+HzI4bIKO54LVVtTgfP3y9S+cHdIuKL2GJKOE5Phs
XJFNh6F6tjXVPyxlt4uBHV5R1gX3Kj7pMqzBandK0Jo1KJN+kk4JRYTNzu0p7fYs
HdO1buPa0BiyuXpX90TLePmNKrAYR/3bltbMVTjothE7lLO2GLnCmMDyBZopo7rS
nihePxJF3Is2P0buyCrtiQTZXG+PJsNIikck7SmxKev+90ZcSwN9ESJxHIPx8qCC
dDQDhD9vUqKunvD7ZZC/qVn9tc4wyMczvykM46DPZ0/kcjn66ia9Dp6OvFI/D4UB
DAPPKWGD0DtMRQEH/iYE/XuQxpaPXgX0prC0RRhZPPt2UtNMF60CF26pyecDSLF6
PhJeA6WfMkbwjZTiG7fvzoZpNcbdJCRCqVFp6MXmi09Hsm9sXcxUcbRGBnxOoIDg
g14284TpEp8gFzLCpQxK4ooF1MhVrA8Go2H7vKtbF8TTFBb46fqLnVc4U1Nq92VC
+1OLjQJzxZIAtsZ3TCserF6ZmvKDGtuy2PWZkMGeXZdUvvWEyTdh5I2ct+4ZJlE6
t3okjdMT6EnJbRrsTxXBeAq3cGrISoP6RQ25hfYVKrX3bUFpH2CuHOKhDzhJT4Ps
rdbvDHOr2K6B87GVrntl7QuGc2oy2vmnfovAsOCFAQwDuemRRq+SXGEBB/wMb+Fg
ON6cWzdZ6KR6hF5MrO/Boq+O/NjDT/RUzXTFElf/X6OEpzuXEZZs2ZcAzc1lZ3id
VkzNM57cA8Et6MXqGIKP32pNnED3X1x/CShOhxUfZzzDHguSEQdsQdtzvC8JEbHe
Fr4rPlUrVgxlYaigIerXnyIcB1LKHjPqIcnOtpr3sJcjuIbh3AlrpPD56wcmecAr
ZVGxrU65/d1u+SlzELbrMOSJO0jUH5uavdKa7rTqRBJhLTVnax1yQTDOpP4vqsAj
ExlHIhZd9kSRAjTIK18+4mFZ/1aB+wD5MIbG60+7kp49VCMqOt0RrXJ8FTbTOiTf
SKEz83Xsg9UMLEvIhQIMA+W+Ippu/VtHAQ/+NrV7B0kCy+6plS9I4TsXyxid6BpY
riyG5q/i0Kk/iTSF20ugfeLpnMwGHa9tgZ4h9zeYQaTbj9+HARX/v9phbyO3Cl+z
+8vhp0DF+B1CM4ws7qkPBsK3fVys+ZbwaqyAhg/9v2pWKaQLXvswNYT4IBWSPXJ+
gQAeXjUcBP9Poru2roHNurDqafV5dvp2GmcAMAAN1ADEQObKWVjAFkmAVV4Dqlyk
Ceo0F1rRV9e+A/2WhYVpsE69PpkoC6E7A3aI1nFGInNZGN+4mWOOgKmt0iefyyfF
+uKxQhNmp0Bw4njVcsyxRR9elltrDJctBfDOsYOm02+A5Itjv4himU1hlkPkTNVg
2aVzzzu9+1094t7qsrNEWUT/3eFLbW2NsbOan9mUmkgyZvo+L884iyqaF2Bn7i7+
s6M5YNa7MMI791gCTV7ZuKfeFIVpm7PQuNG3I9mVXo+nqLupv7C74L7h4v8DgJrZ
sRBFBo6Qh6unam457Fl9gNDC/XF4i+S12MOTTYLLJ4cWTyCosG3Q53lWQv8xGWut
5zKtAI6CHs/BTYk13W4R1qd6KpQY5mYodIcmjRcvTaEbeOu6V6YoMPlDOnVibmzH
mU3Z9tgEc1ol1qVG+yT9+6CTfBfrFJ1w7bSo/xyLf0zVhlsRJ8ksDbWOTcYpfBb7
c+BeY2f6jqsqUnaFAgwDOi96DCHBqrsBEACWUeIK0BLWIss77F2byvFJ3k8r1wMg
hNYrIELoCwuoniSJj30MQYkeerTzAuDshsAtb/WxUHX72IbROlYs4/KDaqSq8IIm
rS33iUumpL28+lYhEYNqFSyByBnlBYQ8KTCD5oCpRSXRnEA8VunmEIMugbJPQBXZ
xkMI7Ton728QfgKH3KSCuYa7WIt2fO9fDybJwJWYQ6wCNXv1EoZAYNkoDq9cZH6C
rJ8Y9/BXop0HSY1JYcn5g7HYUNuoTclS+rXTMDuuOR3GJOW25IzR5acc0TlD9fVn
jOeD0qqfLyu6jdL4ZZhmsUXgm8u0+mVFkr3rqlm/hPFi5jBOeVPLiiLek5GsLIm7
6/gXhyHn2wncoG81Mlelh6IezcXPbgMKIxdBg7sYptwyUdZGKV8wFTP2314+lEwJ
eneqForzuoZsrD1xgM6Vyl0OUyXCo3eYYJfPTYzX9evWJpVdfGjDh+direW2znXb
sKQ6iAUd3kL5jwJ0I4ygw8f/9FsWTxl6WTiqM153dXxVibHcvLUpX5uvp1Yv3LEX
6e7ov8jW1ybEA51YKDFt3fx+7/ktoSRn56v0JDqwkOjJA1x+kT+SgatS/aNqkyVD
29p+RpFxYxphIKVtGT+qdbbKcgYp6WJ1oIIl+oST/fZELRDhdr1qNY7BojyHyOfB
+0N5CgH4JMpfw9KWAatQ6UG8d2aiWo3OQziX4d7ko7SDfIVVFwmqLXvVlwT8xNNg
fYzlNESXKIGgtOfPIHngk8SKRtSrw48p6d1SydevxjJEhbPbdBeayITJro1yLZpu
ws2gc73kZdLXd6O58EaXhIeSPHVGTGQvymFJsO5hmsdpVKvCRIBc+4lVxIFs8p9y
o2c49ElyFOHcVqwd6i6ECH4k
=NV6a
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----

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

#376725 — Re: BeOS. Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics

On 10/18/2016 5:42 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:

> ********* *BEGIN ENCRYPTED or SIGNED PART* *********
> 
> The sad thing is that you're like a little kid hiding behind the couch who falsely believes no one can see him.
> 
> ********** *END ENCRYPTED or SIGNED PART* **********


That's what the bottom of your post looked like in my TBird reader, in
which I'm using the Enigmail add-on.

I've never seen a similar post, so can I assume you included me in your
list of recipients, by using the public key I posted to Slimer Oct 6?

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

#376787 — Re: BeOS. Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics

On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 at 11:02:05 AM UTC-6, DFS wrote:
> On 10/18/2016 5:42 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> 
> > ********* *BEGIN ENCRYPTED or SIGNED PART* *********
> > 
> > The sad thing is that you're like a little kid hiding behind the couch who falsely believes no one can see him.
> > 
> > ********** *END ENCRYPTED or SIGNED PART* **********
> 
> 
> That's what the bottom of your post looked like in my TBird reader, in
> which I'm using the Enigmail add-on.
> 
> I've never seen a similar post, so can I assume you included me in your
> list of recipients, by using the public key I posted to Slimer Oct 6?

I did include you. So TB puts it right inline... pretty cool!

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

#376822 — Re: BeOS. Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics

On 10/19/2016 04:44 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 at 11:02:05 AM UTC-6, DFS wrote:
>> On 10/18/2016 5:42 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>
>>> ********* *BEGIN ENCRYPTED or SIGNED PART* *********
>>>
>>> The sad thing is that you're like a little kid hiding behind the couch who falsely believes no one can see him.
>>>
>>> ********** *END ENCRYPTED or SIGNED PART* **********
>>
>>
>> That's what the bottom of your post looked like in my TBird reader, in
>> which I'm using the Enigmail add-on.
>>
>> I've never seen a similar post, so can I assume you included me in your
>> list of recipients, by using the public key I posted to Slimer Oct 6?
>
> I did include you. So TB puts it right inline... pretty cool!


I haven't sent any encrypted posts yet.  I might try just one, to you, 
in this thread, to see if I can make it work right.

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

#376769

Steve Carroll wrote:

> On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 1:00:55 PM UTC-7, GreyCloud wrote:
>> Steve Carroll wrote:
>> 
>> > On Monday, October 17, 2016 at 5:35:14 PM UTC-7, ronb wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 22:36:48 +0200, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> > GreyCloud wrote:
>> >> > 
>> >> >> deplorable owl wrote:
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>> fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> >>>> On Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 9:13:32 PM UTC-4, Takuya Saitoh wrote:
>> >> >>>> 
>> >> >>>> 
>> >> >>>>> Idiot, leave multiuser OSes for servers
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>> Exactly.
>> >> >>>> 
>> >> >>>> A single workstation has a single user.  That is simple, sensible,
>> >> >>>> rational, and logical.
>> >> >>>> 
>> >> >>>> 
>> >> >>> A single workstation can be used by multiple users, moron.
>> >> >>> Why should these users be forced to share a home directory and login?
>> >> >>> 
>> >> >>> 
>> >> >>>> What does this idiot desire?  Does he want to bring back time-sharing
>> >> >>>> from the 1960's?
>> >> >>>> 
>> >> >>>> This multi-user crap is pure nonsense.  I have been running GNU/Linux
>> >> >>>> as a single-user system (root user) from the very beginning.
>> >> >>>> But still, a few programs give me trouble with their "don't run as
>> >> >>>> root" philosophy.  I just respond with: "Fuck you, asshole idiot."
>> >> >>>> 
>> >> >>>> Multi-users.  Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a dunce!
>> >> >>>> 
>> >> >>>> 
>> >> >>> Why do you need root access all the time, dunce?
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> It looks like a lot of the posters have left.
>> >> > 
>> >> > Yes. Dozens of Snit socks have disappeared
>> >> 
>> >> Strange how that happens, huh?
>> >> 
>> >> --
>> >> Zero tolerance for iCultists and WinDrones
>> > 
>> > He is still here forging me.
>> 
>> Yes, you are still forging steve carolls id, eh snit.
> 
> That sad thing is how he thinks people are stupid enough to fall for it.

He who, snit?

Isn't there a med that takes care of talking to yourself?

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

#376788

On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 at 1:57:54 PM UTC-6, GreyCloud wrote:
> Steve Carroll wrote:
> 
> > On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 1:00:55 PM UTC-7, GreyCloud wrote:
> >> Steve Carroll wrote:
> >> 
> >> > On Monday, October 17, 2016 at 5:35:14 PM UTC-7, ronb wrote:
> >> >> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 22:36:48 +0200, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> > GreyCloud wrote:
> >> >> > 
> >> >> >> deplorable owl wrote:
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >>> fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
> >> >> >>>> On Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 9:13:32 PM UTC-4, Takuya Saitoh wrote:
> >> >> >>>> 
> >> >> >>>> 
> >> >> >>>>> Idiot, leave multiuser OSes for servers
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>> Exactly.
> >> >> >>>> 
> >> >> >>>> A single workstation has a single user.  That is simple, sensible,
> >> >> >>>> rational, and logical.
> >> >> >>>> 
> >> >> >>>> 
> >> >> >>> A single workstation can be used by multiple users, moron.
> >> >> >>> Why should these users be forced to share a home directory and login?
> >> >> >>> 
> >> >> >>> 
> >> >> >>>> What does this idiot desire?  Does he want to bring back time-sharing
> >> >> >>>> from the 1960's?
> >> >> >>>> 
> >> >> >>>> This multi-user crap is pure nonsense.  I have been running GNU/Linux
> >> >> >>>> as a single-user system (root user) from the very beginning.
> >> >> >>>> But still, a few programs give me trouble with their "don't run as
> >> >> >>>> root" philosophy.  I just respond with: "Fuck you, asshole idiot."
> >> >> >>>> 
> >> >> >>>> Multi-users.  Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a dunce!
> >> >> >>>> 
> >> >> >>>> 
> >> >> >>> Why do you need root access all the time, dunce?
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> It looks like a lot of the posters have left.
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > Yes. Dozens of Snit socks have disappeared
> >> >> 
> >> >> Strange how that happens, huh?
> >> >> 
> >> >> --
> >> >> Zero tolerance for iCultists and WinDrones
> >> > 
> >> > He is still here forging me.
> >> 
> >> Yes, you are still forging steve carolls id, eh snit.
> > 
> > That sad thing is how he thinks people are stupid enough to fall for it.
> 
> He who, snit?
> 
> Isn't there a med that takes care of talking to yourself?

Like all meds, eventually they lose their ability to do their job.

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

#376550

GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> wrote:
> deplorable owl wrote:
> 
>> fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 9:13:32 PM UTC-4, Takuya Saitoh wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Idiot, leave multiuser OSes for servers
>>>>
>>> 
>>> Exactly.
>>> 
>>> A single workstation has a single user.  That is simple, sensible,
>>> rational, and logical.
>>> 
>> 
>> A single workstation can be used by multiple users, moron.
>> Why should these users be forced to share a home directory
>> and login?
>> 
>> 
>>> What does this idiot desire?  Does he want to bring back time-sharing
>>> from the 1960's?
>>> 
>>> This multi-user crap is pure nonsense.  I have been running GNU/Linux
>>> as a single-user system (root user) from the very beginning.
>>> But still, a few programs give me trouble with their "don't run
>>> as root" philosophy.  I just respond with: "Fuck you, asshole idiot."
>>> 
>>> Multi-users.  Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a dunce!
>>> 
>> 
>> Why do you need root access all the time, dunce?
> 
> It looks like a lot of the posters have left.  Is there another group that 
> allows linux discussions?  Prefer that over this lame newsgroup that is 
> practicing an odd form of Orwellian group think.
> 

Probably.  I don't do much usenet besides here, and that's just for
relaxation/humor.  Just started Vol. 2 of Shelby Foote's Civil War
trilogy.  "Magnificent" is an understatement.

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

#376561

deplorable owl wrote:

> GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> wrote:
>> deplorable owl wrote:
>> 
>>> fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 9:13:32 PM UTC-4, Takuya Saitoh wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Idiot, leave multiuser OSes for servers
>>>>>
>>>> 
>>>> Exactly.
>>>> 
>>>> A single workstation has a single user.  That is simple, sensible,
>>>> rational, and logical.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> A single workstation can be used by multiple users, moron.
>>> Why should these users be forced to share a home directory
>>> and login?
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> What does this idiot desire?  Does he want to bring back time-sharing
>>>> from the 1960's?
>>>> 
>>>> This multi-user crap is pure nonsense.  I have been running GNU/Linux
>>>> as a single-user system (root user) from the very beginning.
>>>> But still, a few programs give me trouble with their "don't run
>>>> as root" philosophy.  I just respond with: "Fuck you, asshole idiot."
>>>> 
>>>> Multi-users.  Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a dunce!
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Why do you need root access all the time, dunce?
>> 
>> It looks like a lot of the posters have left.  Is there another group that
>> allows linux discussions?  Prefer that over this lame newsgroup that is
>> practicing an odd form of Orwellian group think.
>> 
> 
> Probably.  I don't do much usenet besides here, and that's just for
> relaxation/humor.  Just started Vol. 2 of Shelby Foote's Civil War
> trilogy.  "Magnificent" is an understatement.

I haven't read that.  I'll have to look into that one.

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

#376574

GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> wrote:
> deplorable owl wrote:
> 
>> GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> wrote:
>>> deplorable owl wrote:
>>> 
>>>> fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 9:13:32 PM UTC-4, Takuya Saitoh wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Idiot, leave multiuser OSes for servers
>>>>>>
>>>>> 
>>>>> Exactly.
>>>>> 
>>>>> A single workstation has a single user.  That is simple, sensible,
>>>>> rational, and logical.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> A single workstation can be used by multiple users, moron.
>>>> Why should these users be forced to share a home directory
>>>> and login?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> What does this idiot desire?  Does he want to bring back time-sharing
>>>>> from the 1960's?
>>>>> 
>>>>> This multi-user crap is pure nonsense.  I have been running GNU/Linux
>>>>> as a single-user system (root user) from the very beginning.
>>>>> But still, a few programs give me trouble with their "don't run
>>>>> as root" philosophy.  I just respond with: "Fuck you, asshole idiot."
>>>>> 
>>>>> Multi-users.  Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a dunce!
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Why do you need root access all the time, dunce?
>>> 
>>> It looks like a lot of the posters have left.  Is there another group that
>>> allows linux discussions?  Prefer that over this lame newsgroup that is
>>> practicing an odd form of Orwellian group think.
>>> 
>> 
>> Probably.  I don't do much usenet besides here, and that's just for
>> relaxation/humor.  Just started Vol. 2 of Shelby Foote's Civil War
>> trilogy.  "Magnificent" is an understatement.
> 
> I haven't read that.  I'll have to look into that one.
> 

Get it.  You'll thank me.  The guy is one hell of a writer.

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

#376668

deplorable owl wrote:

> GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> wrote:
>> deplorable owl wrote:
>> 
>>> GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> wrote:
>>>> deplorable owl wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 9:13:32 PM UTC-4, Takuya Saitoh wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Idiot, leave multiuser OSes for servers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Exactly.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> A single workstation has a single user.  That is simple, sensible,
>>>>>> rational, and logical.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> A single workstation can be used by multiple users, moron.
>>>>> Why should these users be forced to share a home directory
>>>>> and login?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> What does this idiot desire?  Does he want to bring back time-sharing
>>>>>> from the 1960's?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> This multi-user crap is pure nonsense.  I have been running GNU/Linux
>>>>>> as a single-user system (root user) from the very beginning.
>>>>>> But still, a few programs give me trouble with their "don't run
>>>>>> as root" philosophy.  I just respond with: "Fuck you, asshole idiot."
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Multi-users.  Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a dunce!
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Why do you need root access all the time, dunce?
>>>> 
>>>> It looks like a lot of the posters have left.  Is there another group that
>>>> allows linux discussions?  Prefer that over this lame newsgroup that is
>>>> practicing an odd form of Orwellian group think.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Probably.  I don't do much usenet besides here, and that's just for
>>> relaxation/humor.  Just started Vol. 2 of Shelby Foote's Civil War
>>> trilogy.  "Magnificent" is an understatement.
>> 
>> I haven't read that.  I'll have to look into that one.
>> 
> 
> Get it.  You'll thank me.  The guy is one hell of a writer.

Does he cover Lincolns battles with the bankers?

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

#376680

GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> wrote:
> deplorable owl wrote:
> 
>> GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> wrote:
>>> deplorable owl wrote:
>>> 
>>>> GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> wrote:
>>>>> deplorable owl wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 9:13:32 PM UTC-4, Takuya Saitoh wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Idiot, leave multiuser OSes for servers
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Exactly.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> A single workstation has a single user.  That is simple, sensible,
>>>>>>> rational, and logical.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> A single workstation can be used by multiple users, moron.
>>>>>> Why should these users be forced to share a home directory
>>>>>> and login?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> What does this idiot desire?  Does he want to bring back time-sharing
>>>>>>> from the 1960's?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> This multi-user crap is pure nonsense.  I have been running GNU/Linux
>>>>>>> as a single-user system (root user) from the very beginning.
>>>>>>> But still, a few programs give me trouble with their "don't run
>>>>>>> as root" philosophy.  I just respond with: "Fuck you, asshole idiot."
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Multi-users.  Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a dunce!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Why do you need root access all the time, dunce?
>>>>> 
>>>>> It looks like a lot of the posters have left.  Is there another group that
>>>>> allows linux discussions?  Prefer that over this lame newsgroup that is
>>>>> practicing an odd form of Orwellian group think.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Probably.  I don't do much usenet besides here, and that's just for
>>>> relaxation/humor.  Just started Vol. 2 of Shelby Foote's Civil War
>>>> trilogy.  "Magnificent" is an understatement.
>>> 
>>> I haven't read that.  I'll have to look into that one.
>>> 
>> 
>> Get it.  You'll thank me.  The guy is one hell of a writer.
> 
> Does he cover Lincolns battles with the bankers?
> 

Not so far (Vol 1 covered through late 1862).  It's about 2% politics and
98% generals, battles, and prelude to battles.  Good stuff.  Nice coverage
of naval activity also, in terms of both coastal blockade and inland
river battles.

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

#376557

On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 18:19:57 +0000, deplorable owl wrote:


> 
> A single workstation can be used by multiple users, moron.
> Why should these users be forced to share a home directory
> and login?
> 

Why should anyone else need to use my workstation?

Computers are cheap.  Let them buy their own workstation.

All this "multi-user" crap was started in the 1960's when
CPU cycles were EXPENSIVE.  But those days have sunk like
a brick.

> 
> Why do you need root access all the time, dunce?
>

Because root is the only user that need be, idiot.

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

#376563

Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 18:19:57 +0000, deplorable owl wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> A single workstation can be used by multiple users, moron.
>> Why should these users be forced to share a home directory
>> and login?
>> 
> 
> Why should anyone else need to use my workstation?
> 
> Computers are cheap.  Let them buy their own workstation.
> 

You said:

  "A single workstation has a single user.  That is simple, sensible,
   rational, and logical."

Since when does this "single workstation" belong to you?  Maybe it's
in the genetics lab where it is used by a number of scientists; or it's
in the product design lab where it is shared my multiple engineers; or
it's in an architecture firm.  Contrary to what passes for experience in
Fabtard Land (AKA Mom's basement), there are actually people out there
using Linux for more than generating mailing lists with Libre Office or
coding low-level intimacy with the pixels in their porn collection.

> All this "multi-user" crap was started in the 1960's when
> CPU cycles were EXPENSIVE.  But those days have sunk like
> a brick.
> 
>> 
>> Why do you need root access all the time, dunce?
>>
> 
> Because root is the only user that need be, idiot.
> 

More likely you can't read the manpage for useradd.
 

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

#376657

On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 23:32:32 +0000, deplorable owl wrote:

> 
> Since when does this "single workstation" belong to you?  Maybe it's
> in the genetics lab where it is used by a number of scientists; or it's
> in the product design lab where it is shared my multiple engineers; or
> it's in an architecture firm.
>

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  Maybe in the 1970's, but
certainly not today (nor for the past twenty fucking years).

Any engineering firm that shares a computer with several engineers
is not an efficient firm.  In fact, any engineer that did NOT have
his own personal workstation would certainly resign his position citing
primitive conditions as the reason.  Any "sharing" is done with shared
disk drives.

Can you imagine an assembly line where the basic tools have to
be shared?  Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a fiasco that would be!

In the modern world, a single workstation implies a single user.

On my personal GNU/Linux system, I can boot directly into a bash
shell with no ridiculous logins or ridiculous multi-users.  Only
a small few programs, none of which is essential, strictly adhere
to that antiquated multi-user crap.

You are a dinosaur.  You need to give it up and go extinct.

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

#376658

Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks wrote:

> 
> In the modern world, a single workstation implies a single user.
> 
> On my personal GNU/Linux system, I can boot directly into a bash
> shell with no ridiculous logins or ridiculous multi-users.  Only
> a small few programs, none of which is essential, strictly adhere
> to that antiquated multi-user crap.
> 
> You are a dinosaur.  You need to give it up and go extinct.

What does that make you? After all, you are back to MSDOS. Even with the 
missing security

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

#376519

On Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 5:06:00 PM UTC-4, Octavian W. Lagrange wrote:

> 
> BeOS failed because ...
>

You still don't get it.  What's the matter?  Do you have mental
problems?

BeOS filed suit against Microshit, as did a LOT of companies,
for unfair monopolistic practices.

Microshit, rather than risk airing their dirty laundry in a public
court room, settled out of court.

Therefore, officially, Microshit was not shown to be criminal,
but unofficially their criminal practices are well known.

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

#376526 — Re: BeOS. Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics

On 10/17/2016 10:17 AM, fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 5:06:00 PM UTC-4, Octavian W. Lagrange wrote:
> 
>>
>> BeOS failed because ...
>>
> 
> You still don't get it.  What's the matter?  Do you have mental
> problems?
> 
> BeOS filed suit against Microshit, as did a LOT of companies,
> for unfair monopolistic practices.
> 
> Microshit, rather than risk airing their dirty laundry in a public
> court room, settled out of court.
> 
> Therefore, officially, Microshit was not shown to be criminal,
> but unofficially their criminal practices are well known.


What does this have to do with Linux advocacy, you hysterical moron?

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

#376530 — Re: BeOS. Another Victim of Microshit Criminal Tactics

On 17/10/2016 16:31, DFS wrote:
> On 10/17/2016 10:17 AM, fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 5:06:00 PM UTC-4, Octavian W. Lagrange wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> BeOS failed because ...
>>>
>>
>> You still don't get it.  What's the matter?  Do you have mental
>> problems?
>>
>> BeOS filed suit against Microshit, as did a LOT of companies,
>> for unfair monopolistic practices.
>>
>> Microshit, rather than risk airing their dirty laundry in a public
>> court room, settled out of court.
>>
>> Therefore, officially, Microshit was not shown to be criminal,
>> but unofficially their criminal practices are well known.
> 
> 
> What does this have to do with Linux advocacy, you hysterical moron?
> 
> 
> 

Simple, bashing Microsoft is advocating Linux (Well in his crazed mind
it is)

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

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy

csiph-web