Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #310932 > unrolled thread
| Started by | ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-07-27 15:44 +0000 |
| Last post | 2015-07-27 15:19 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 130 — 20 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-07-27 15:44 +0000
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2015-07-27 17:15 +0100
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-07-27 12:22 -0700
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-07-27 15:27 -0400
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-07-27 21:25 +0000
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-07-27 23:30 +0200
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-07-27 21:31 +0000
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-07-27 17:39 -0400
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-28 07:07 -0500
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2015-07-28 13:25 +0100
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-07-28 09:16 -0400
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-07-28 18:15 -0400
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-29 07:52 -0500
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-07-29 09:03 -0400
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-07-29 09:09 -0400
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-07-29 09:20 -0400
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-07-29 16:53 +0000
Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 22:09 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. ronb <ronbNOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 03:18 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 22:34 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-08-23 21:38 -0700
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-08-23 21:09 -0700
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. "Dr. John Grubor" <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-08-24 12:24 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-08-24 08:07 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 12:23 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-24 10:05 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-08-24 10:16 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-24 10:25 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-08-24 10:32 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-24 10:44 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 17:06 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-24 13:49 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> - 2015-08-24 13:58 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-08-24 13:19 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-08-24 14:14 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 19:29 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-24 15:56 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> - 2015-08-24 17:39 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-08-24 17:13 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> - 2015-08-24 18:35 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-08-25 09:23 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-08-24 15:30 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 20:32 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-08-24 22:39 +0200
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 21:03 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-08-24 23:09 +0200
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 21:18 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-24 17:28 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-08-24 23:28 +0200
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 21:39 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-08-24 23:46 +0200
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. ronb <ronbNOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 22:01 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> - 2015-08-24 18:05 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 22:56 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> - 2015-08-24 19:05 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-08-24 20:24 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 19:34 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-08-24 20:43 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-08-25 07:32 -0500
Turdv IS mentally ill. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-25 22:33 -0600
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 19:42 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. ronb <ronbNOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 00:47 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> - 2015-08-24 20:55 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-08-25 08:18 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 00:49 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 20:00 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-08-24 21:03 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> - 2015-08-24 21:07 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 20:11 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-08-24 21:16 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> - 2015-08-24 21:34 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-08-24 18:56 -0700
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 01:50 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> - 2015-08-24 21:06 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 20:13 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-25 22:36 -0600
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 01:49 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 22:07 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> - 2015-08-24 23:12 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 03:23 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-25 22:37 -0600
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. ronb <ronbNOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 04:16 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-25 22:35 -0600
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-08-24 16:14 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 21:40 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> - 2015-08-24 17:49 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-08-25 07:26 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 12:40 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-08-25 09:50 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> - 2015-08-24 17:42 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-25 22:40 -0600
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-08-24 16:11 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 21:41 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 19:16 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 00:50 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-08-24 21:16 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. ronb <ronbNOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 01:17 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 22:09 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 01:48 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-08-25 07:42 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-08-25 08:52 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 17:04 +0000
When are you going to check yourself in to the nearest rest home? GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-25 22:41 -0600
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-08-24 09:05 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-24 13:13 -0600
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 19:31 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-24 16:01 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 20:08 +0000
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-24 16:52 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-08-24 14:01 -0700
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-25 22:43 -0600
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> - 2015-08-24 17:51 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-08-24 17:15 -0500
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> - 2015-08-24 18:39 -0400
Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-24 15:57 -0400
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-07-29 14:31 +0100
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-29 11:28 -0500
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-07-29 13:21 -0400
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-07-29 13:26 -0400
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2015-07-30 12:26 +0100
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-07-28 18:13 -0400
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-07-28 20:07 -0400
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-07-29 08:44 -0400
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-07-29 09:03 -0400
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2015-07-28 08:57 +0100
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-07-28 10:30 -0400
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2015-07-27 09:19 -0700
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-07-27 13:38 -0400
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-07-27 14:28 -0400
Re: M$ "backs down" on W10 forced updates "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-07-27 15:19 -0400
Page 6 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 Next page →
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-25 08:52 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. |
| Message-ID | <mrhobf$mfg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #316748 |
On 8/25/2015 8:42 AM, shitvomit wrote: > Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > >> Nobody wrote: >>> >>> Lying Lloyd Parsons wrote: >>>> >>>> but you're perfectly willing to quote me from all those 'snipped, unread' >>>> posts. >> >> ??? > > "Lloyd" lives in a fantasy world, where everyone wants to read his > idiocy and lies. > >>> So you couldn't answer, "Lloyd." Thanks for proving me correct about you. >> >> He's a doddering old fool. > > Like many lying scum, "Lloyd" thinks that everyone else is like them. > They don't want to believe that many other people are simply better > people than they are. Which 'better people' are you referring to, turd?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-25 17:04 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. |
| Message-ID | <d43lhqFb529U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #316748 |
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 07:42:20 -0500, chrisv wrote: > Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > >> Nobody wrote: >>> >>> Lying Lloyd Parsons wrote: >>>> >>>> but you're perfectly willing to quote me from all those 'snipped, >>>> unread' >>>> posts. >> >>??? > > "Lloyd" lives in a fantasy world, where everyone wants to read his > idiocy and lies. > >>> So you couldn't answer, "Lloyd." Thanks for proving me correct about >>> you. >> >>He's a doddering old fool. > > Like many lying scum, "Lloyd" thinks that everyone else is like them. > They don't want to believe that many other people are simply better > people than they are. You certainly wouldn't fall in that 'better' group at all. -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-25 22:41 -0600 |
| Subject | When are you going to check yourself in to the nearest rest home? |
| Message-ID | <g5Gdnfbn94MU3kDInZ2dnUU7-a-dnZ2d@bresnan.com> |
| In reply to | #316657 |
On 08/24/15 19:16, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > Nobody wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> On 8/24/2015 7:23 AM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >>> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 08:07:58 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>> >>>> As for Lloyd, I gave up on that jerk long ago. I dislike people who >>>> simply want to dick with people all the time. Idiots. >>> >>> but you're perfectly willing to quote me from all those 'snipped, unread' >>> posts. > > ??? > >> So you couldn't answer, "Lloyd." Thanks for proving me correct about you. > > He's a doddering old fool. > -- When told the reason for daylight savings time the Old Indian said, "Only the government would believe that you could cut a foot off the top of a blanket, sew it to the bottom, and have a longer blanket."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-24 09:05 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. |
| Message-ID | <mrf4nc$o0k$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #316405 |
On 08/24/2015 08:07 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > Nobody wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> On 7/29/2015 11:53 AM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >>> On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:09:20 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>> >> [...] >> >>> Since Linux on the desktop has been nearly dead for over 20 years, >>> killing it off would be such a waste of time. >> >> Please tell everyone what Linux was like over twenty years ago, and what >> would have given it the ability to capture a large percentage of desktop >> users at that time. >> >> I don't expect any reasonable answer from you. I know you're just >> parroting troll lines about Linux. > > I remember when the Flounder troll was sneering at Linux's "0.24%" "market" > share. Back when Linux was about 3 in 1000 desktop users... now that's nothing to sneer about... > Now the "market" share is more like 1.6%, and that counts *only* > distros that are sold *commercially*. Lying sack of shit. All distros are counted. And it's more like 1.2%, at most. NetApps: 1.10% StatCounter: 1.12% WikiMedia: 1.18% W3Counter: 2.44% https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems#Web_clients > Linux desktops may not be in every home, but Linux desktops are doing quite > find in Microsoft's salted-earth territory. Where 12 out of 1000 users is "doing quite fine". > As for Lloyd, I gave up on that jerk long ago. I dislike people who simply > want to dick with people all the time. Idiots. You prefer lying assholes like shitv, and lying weirdos like Fraud 7.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-24 13:13 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. |
| Message-ID | <7uOdndw7fIp18UbInZ2dnUU7-V-dnZ2d@bresnan.com> |
| In reply to | #316405 |
On 08/24/15 06:07, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > Nobody wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> On 7/29/2015 11:53 AM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >>> On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:09:20 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>> >> [...] >> >>> Since Linux on the desktop has been nearly dead for over 20 years, >>> killing it off would be such a waste of time. >> >> Please tell everyone what Linux was like over twenty years ago, and what >> would have given it the ability to capture a large percentage of desktop >> users at that time. >> >> I don't expect any reasonable answer from you. I know you're just >> parroting troll lines about Linux. > > I remember when the Flounder troll was sneering at Linux's "0.24%" "market" > share. Now the "market" share is more like 1.6%, and that counts *only* > distros that are sold *commercially*. > > Linux desktops may not be in every home, but Linux desktops are doing quite > find in Microsoft's salted-earth territory. > > As for Lloyd, I gave up on that jerk long ago. I dislike people who simply > want to dick with people all the time. Idiots. > There ya go again, talking about other peoples dicks. -- When told the reason for daylight savings time the Old Indian said, "Only the government would believe that you could cut a foot off the top of a blanket, sew it to the bottom, and have a longer blanket."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-24 19:31 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. |
| Message-ID | <d419peFnh72U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #316507 |
On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:13:43 -0600, GreyCloud wrote: > On 08/24/15 06:07, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >> Nobody wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >> >>> On 7/29/2015 11:53 AM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >>>> On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:09:20 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>>> >>> [...] >>> >>>> Since Linux on the desktop has been nearly dead for over 20 years, >>>> killing it off would be such a waste of time. >>> >>> Please tell everyone what Linux was like over twenty years ago, and >>> what would have given it the ability to capture a large percentage of >>> desktop users at that time. >>> >>> I don't expect any reasonable answer from you. I know you're just >>> parroting troll lines about Linux. >> >> I remember when the Flounder troll was sneering at Linux's "0.24%" >> "market" >> share. Now the "market" share is more like 1.6%, and that counts >> *only* distros that are sold *commercially*. >> >> Linux desktops may not be in every home, but Linux desktops are doing >> quite find in Microsoft's salted-earth territory. >> >> As for Lloyd, I gave up on that jerk long ago. I dislike people who >> simply want to dick with people all the time. Idiots. >> > There ya go again, talking about other peoples dicks. What you see here is a bunch of pussies calling themselves "linux advocates" while never actually advocating a damned thing except killfiles and trolls. There are some notable exceptions. Peter hangs in there, Vallor does too along with good old Jedidiah. But the rest of them like to take potshots all the while claiming not to read posts from their killfiles yet always seem to be able to quote them. -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-24 16:01 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. |
| Message-ID | <mrft4d$88o$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #316520 |
On 2015-08-24 3:31 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: > On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:13:43 -0600, GreyCloud wrote: > >> On 08/24/15 06:07, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>> Nobody wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >>> >>>> On 7/29/2015 11:53 AM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:09:20 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>>>> >>>> [...] >>>> >>>>> Since Linux on the desktop has been nearly dead for over 20 years, >>>>> killing it off would be such a waste of time. >>>> >>>> Please tell everyone what Linux was like over twenty years ago, and >>>> what would have given it the ability to capture a large percentage of >>>> desktop users at that time. >>>> >>>> I don't expect any reasonable answer from you. I know you're just >>>> parroting troll lines about Linux. >>> >>> I remember when the Flounder troll was sneering at Linux's "0.24%" >>> "market" >>> share. Now the "market" share is more like 1.6%, and that counts >>> *only* distros that are sold *commercially*. >>> >>> Linux desktops may not be in every home, but Linux desktops are doing >>> quite find in Microsoft's salted-earth territory. >>> >>> As for Lloyd, I gave up on that jerk long ago. I dislike people who >>> simply want to dick with people all the time. Idiots. >>> >> There ya go again, talking about other peoples dicks. > > What you see here is a bunch of pussies calling themselves "linux > advocates" while never actually advocating a damned thing except killfiles > and trolls. There are some notable exceptions. Peter hangs in there, > Vallor does too along with good old Jedidiah. But the rest of them like > to take potshots all the while claiming not to read posts from their > killfiles yet always seem to be able to quote them. You've seen Peter the miserable, tap-dancing Klöwn advocate? I'm with you on vallor and JEDIDUMBASS though. -- A.M Your pet's opinion on technology is more valid than that of a Linux advocate
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-24 20:08 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. |
| Message-ID | <d41bubFoc40U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #316550 |
On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:01:57 -0400, A.M wrote: > On 2015-08-24 3:31 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:13:43 -0600, GreyCloud wrote: >> >>> On 08/24/15 06:07, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>>> Nobody wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >>>> >>>>> On 7/29/2015 11:53 AM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:09:20 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>>>>> >>>>> [...] >>>>> >>>>>> Since Linux on the desktop has been nearly dead for over 20 years, >>>>>> killing it off would be such a waste of time. >>>>> >>>>> Please tell everyone what Linux was like over twenty years ago, and >>>>> what would have given it the ability to capture a large percentage >>>>> of desktop users at that time. >>>>> >>>>> I don't expect any reasonable answer from you. I know you're just >>>>> parroting troll lines about Linux. >>>> >>>> I remember when the Flounder troll was sneering at Linux's "0.24%" >>>> "market" >>>> share. Now the "market" share is more like 1.6%, and that counts >>>> *only* distros that are sold *commercially*. >>>> >>>> Linux desktops may not be in every home, but Linux desktops are doing >>>> quite find in Microsoft's salted-earth territory. >>>> >>>> As for Lloyd, I gave up on that jerk long ago. I dislike people who >>>> simply want to dick with people all the time. Idiots. >>>> >>> There ya go again, talking about other peoples dicks. >> >> What you see here is a bunch of pussies calling themselves "linux >> advocates" while never actually advocating a damned thing except >> killfiles and trolls. There are some notable exceptions. Peter hangs >> in there, Vallor does too along with good old Jedidiah. But the rest >> of them like to take potshots all the while claiming not to read posts >> from their killfiles yet always seem to be able to quote them. > > You've seen Peter the miserable, tap-dancing Klöwn advocate? I'm with > you on vallor and JEDIDUMBASS though. While Peter is often wrong, and his attitude really sucks, he at least talks about Linux and technology. -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-24 16:52 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. |
| Message-ID | <mrg02g$o1e$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #316551 |
On 2015-08-24 4:08 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: > On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:01:57 -0400, A.M wrote: > >> On 2015-08-24 3:31 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >>> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:13:43 -0600, GreyCloud wrote: >>> >>>> On 08/24/15 06:07, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>>>> Nobody wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >>>>> >>>>>> On 7/29/2015 11:53 AM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >>>>>>> On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:09:20 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>> [...] >>>>>> >>>>>>> Since Linux on the desktop has been nearly dead for over 20 years, >>>>>>> killing it off would be such a waste of time. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please tell everyone what Linux was like over twenty years ago, and >>>>>> what would have given it the ability to capture a large percentage >>>>>> of desktop users at that time. >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't expect any reasonable answer from you. I know you're just >>>>>> parroting troll lines about Linux. >>>>> >>>>> I remember when the Flounder troll was sneering at Linux's "0.24%" >>>>> "market" >>>>> share. Now the "market" share is more like 1.6%, and that counts >>>>> *only* distros that are sold *commercially*. >>>>> >>>>> Linux desktops may not be in every home, but Linux desktops are doing >>>>> quite find in Microsoft's salted-earth territory. >>>>> >>>>> As for Lloyd, I gave up on that jerk long ago. I dislike people who >>>>> simply want to dick with people all the time. Idiots. >>>>> >>>> There ya go again, talking about other peoples dicks. >>> >>> What you see here is a bunch of pussies calling themselves "linux >>> advocates" while never actually advocating a damned thing except >>> killfiles and trolls. There are some notable exceptions. Peter hangs >>> in there, Vallor does too along with good old Jedidiah. But the rest >>> of them like to take potshots all the while claiming not to read posts >>> from their killfiles yet always seem to be able to quote them. >> >> You've seen Peter the miserable, tap-dancing Klöwn advocate? I'm with >> you on vallor and JEDIDUMBASS though. > > > While Peter is often wrong, and his attitude really sucks, he at least > talks about Linux and technology. He's German so I guess we shouldn't have expected him to be anything more than a bitter old crackpot. The German diet mainly consists of meat and beer and that doesn't result in pleasant people no matter how you slice it. However, he doesn't actually talk about Linux most of the time; it's usually a pathetic insult against Snit with the post ending in "Snit Michael Glasser." If we're lucky, he adds "Prescott Computer Guy" to that ending. Snit can basically say _ANYTHING_ even quote Linux articles and Peter the misery-inducing, tap-dancing Klöwn will claim that he can't read or that he's "dumber than [insert inanimate object here]." -- A.M Your pet's opinion on technology is more valid than that of a Linux advocate
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-24 14:01 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. |
| Message-ID | <D200D41C.584D4%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #316560 |
On 8/24/15, 1:52 PM, in article mrg02g$o1e$1@dont-email.me, "A.M" <.m@nsn.s>
wrote:
>>>> What you see here is a bunch of pussies calling themselves "linux
>>>> advocates" while never actually advocating a damned thing except
>>>> killfiles and trolls. There are some notable exceptions. Peter hangs
>>>> in there, Vallor does too along with good old Jedidiah. But the rest
>>>> of them like to take potshots all the while claiming not to read posts
>>>> from their killfiles yet always seem to be able to quote them.
>>>
>>> You've seen Peter the miserable, tap-dancing Klöwn advocate? I'm with
>>> you on vallor and JEDIDUMBASS though.
>>
>>
>> While Peter is often wrong, and his attitude really sucks, he at least
>> talks about Linux and technology.
>
> He's German so I guess we shouldn't have expected him to be anything
> more than a bitter old crackpot. The German diet mainly consists of meat
> and beer and that doesn't result in pleasant people no matter how you
> slice it. However, he doesn't actually talk about Linux most of the
> time; it's usually a pathetic insult against Snit with the post ending
> in "Snit Michael Glasser." If we're lucky, he adds "Prescott Computer
> Guy" to that ending.
>
> Snit can basically say _ANYTHING_ even quote Linux articles and Peter
> the misery-inducing, tap-dancing Klöwn will claim that he can't read or
> that he's "dumber than [insert inanimate object here]."
To Peter's credit, he is - as far as I know - the first herd member to show
understanding of PDF Services. Usually he and other herd members say it is
just Print to PDF, but Peter showed he knows it is more:
-----
PDF services *are* print to PDF with the added feature to send
the result not just to a file but to add it to iBooks etc jadda
jadda jadda
-----
Took him, literally, a few years to show understanding, but he is still the
first herd member I know of to do so. I commend him for it.
--
* OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-25 22:43 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. |
| Message-ID | <g5GdnfHn94Oe2UDInZ2dnUU7-a-dnZ2d@bresnan.com> |
| In reply to | #316550 |
On 08/24/15 14:01, A.M wrote: > On 2015-08-24 3:31 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:13:43 -0600, GreyCloud wrote: >> >>> On 08/24/15 06:07, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>>> Nobody wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >>>> >>>>> On 7/29/2015 11:53 AM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:09:20 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>>>>> >>>>> [...] >>>>> >>>>>> Since Linux on the desktop has been nearly dead for over 20 years, >>>>>> killing it off would be such a waste of time. >>>>> >>>>> Please tell everyone what Linux was like over twenty years ago, and >>>>> what would have given it the ability to capture a large percentage of >>>>> desktop users at that time. >>>>> >>>>> I don't expect any reasonable answer from you. I know you're just >>>>> parroting troll lines about Linux. >>>> >>>> I remember when the Flounder troll was sneering at Linux's "0.24%" >>>> "market" >>>> share. Now the "market" share is more like 1.6%, and that counts >>>> *only* distros that are sold *commercially*. >>>> >>>> Linux desktops may not be in every home, but Linux desktops are doing >>>> quite find in Microsoft's salted-earth territory. >>>> >>>> As for Lloyd, I gave up on that jerk long ago. I dislike people who >>>> simply want to dick with people all the time. Idiots. >>>> >>> There ya go again, talking about other peoples dicks. >> >> What you see here is a bunch of pussies calling themselves "linux >> advocates" while never actually advocating a damned thing except killfiles >> and trolls. There are some notable exceptions. Peter hangs in there, >> Vallor does too along with good old Jedidiah. But the rest of them like >> to take potshots all the while claiming not to read posts from their >> killfiles yet always seem to be able to quote them. > > You've seen Peter the miserable, tap-dancing Klöwn advocate? I'm with > you on vallor and JEDIDUMBASS though. > > But they claim I'm in their kill file. Just an admission that they can not refute what I debunk about their unreliable claims. -- When told the reason for daylight savings time the Old Indian said, "Only the government would believe that you could cut a foot off the top of a blanket, sew it to the bottom, and have a longer blanket."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-24 17:51 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. |
| Message-ID | <rxc2kw8n85yf$.wkjg74xejrhg.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #316520 |
On 24 Aug 2015 19:31:58 GMT, Lloyd Parsons wrote: > On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:13:43 -0600, GreyCloud wrote: > >> On 08/24/15 06:07, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>> Nobody wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >>> >>>> On 7/29/2015 11:53 AM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:09:20 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>>>> >>>> [...] >>>> >>>>> Since Linux on the desktop has been nearly dead for over 20 years, >>>>> killing it off would be such a waste of time. >>>> >>>> Please tell everyone what Linux was like over twenty years ago, and >>>> what would have given it the ability to capture a large percentage of >>>> desktop users at that time. >>>> >>>> I don't expect any reasonable answer from you. I know you're just >>>> parroting troll lines about Linux. >>> >>> I remember when the Flounder troll was sneering at Linux's "0.24%" >>> "market" >>> share. Now the "market" share is more like 1.6%, and that counts >>> *only* distros that are sold *commercially*. >>> >>> Linux desktops may not be in every home, but Linux desktops are doing >>> quite find in Microsoft's salted-earth territory. >>> >>> As for Lloyd, I gave up on that jerk long ago. I dislike people who >>> simply want to dick with people all the time. Idiots. >>> >> There ya go again, talking about other peoples dicks. > > What you see here is a bunch of pussies calling themselves "linux > advocates" while never actually advocating a damned thing except killfiles > and trolls. There are some notable exceptions. Peter hangs in there, > Vallor does too along with good old Jedidiah. But the rest of them like > to take potshots all the while claiming not to read posts from their > killfiles yet always seem to be able to quote them. Jeddiah is a goal post mover focusing on obtuse, at least to humans, arguments. Vallor is so fucking boring reading his posts literally puts me to sleep. Peter tries but the language barrier gets the best of him at times and it gets turned into a circus because of it. Not his fault though.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-24 17:15 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. |
| Message-ID | <slrnmtn5rb.992.jedi@nomad.mishnet> |
| In reply to | #316595 |
On 2015-08-24, Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> wrote:
> On 24 Aug 2015 19:31:58 GMT, Lloyd Parsons wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:13:43 -0600, GreyCloud wrote:
>>
>>> On 08/24/15 06:07, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>> Nobody wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/29/2015 11:53 AM, Lloyd Parsons wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:09:20 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>>> Since Linux on the desktop has been nearly dead for over 20 years,
>>>>>> killing it off would be such a waste of time.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please tell everyone what Linux was like over twenty years ago, and
>>>>> what would have given it the ability to capture a large percentage of
>>>>> desktop users at that time.
Yet it continues.
Who is a bigger loser? The person that uses something that is declared
worthless and dead or those that seek to torment them?
You really need to get a life.
[deletia]
>> What you see here is a bunch of pussies calling themselves "linux
>> advocates" while never actually advocating a damned thing except killfiles
>> and trolls. There are some notable exceptions. Peter hangs in there,
>> Vallor does too along with good old Jedidiah. But the rest of them like
>> to take potshots all the while claiming not to read posts from their
>> killfiles yet always seem to be able to quote them.
>
> Jeddiah is a goal post mover focusing on obtuse, at least to humans,
Is that the best you can do? Mis-apply rules from rhetoric?
You are getting boring.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-24 18:39 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. |
| Message-ID | <k4ejraxer5to.1lbb6cis74dan$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #316608 |
On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 17:15:07 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote: > On 2015-08-24, Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> wrote: >> On 24 Aug 2015 19:31:58 GMT, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:13:43 -0600, GreyCloud wrote: >>> >>>> On 08/24/15 06:07, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>>>> Nobody wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >>>>> >>>>>> On 7/29/2015 11:53 AM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >>>>>>> On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:09:20 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>> [...] >>>>>> >>>>>>> Since Linux on the desktop has been nearly dead for over 20 years, >>>>>>> killing it off would be such a waste of time. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please tell everyone what Linux was like over twenty years ago, and >>>>>> what would have given it the ability to capture a large percentage of >>>>>> desktop users at that time. > > Yet it continues. > > Who is a bigger loser? The person that uses something that is declared > worthless and dead or those that seek to torment them? > > You really need to get a life. > > [deletia] > >>> What you see here is a bunch of pussies calling themselves "linux >>> advocates" while never actually advocating a damned thing except killfiles >>> and trolls. There are some notable exceptions. Peter hangs in there, >>> Vallor does too along with good old Jedidiah. But the rest of them like >>> to take potshots all the while claiming not to read posts from their >>> killfiles yet always seem to be able to quote them. >> >> Jeddiah is a goal post mover focusing on obtuse, at least to humans, > > Is that the best you can do? Mis-apply rules from rhetoric? Same old obtuse answer while avoiding the truth. > You are getting boring. You are always boring, and obtuse, nebulous, or let's just say way out there where no man has been before,or ever wants to. You hide behind this confused mess of non-committal words and dwelling in the past (DOS) in order to make up for your lack of knowledge concerning the current real world.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-24 15:57 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Lloyd Parsons can't answer this. |
| Message-ID | <mrfssk$88o$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #316507 |
On 2015-08-24 3:13 PM, GreyCloud wrote: > On 08/24/15 06:07, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >> Nobody wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >> >>> On 7/29/2015 11:53 AM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >>>> On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:09:20 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>>> >>> [...] >>> >>>> Since Linux on the desktop has been nearly dead for over 20 years, >>>> killing it off would be such a waste of time. >>> >>> Please tell everyone what Linux was like over twenty years ago, and what >>> would have given it the ability to capture a large percentage of desktop >>> users at that time. >>> >>> I don't expect any reasonable answer from you. I know you're just >>> parroting troll lines about Linux. >> >> I remember when the Flounder troll was sneering at Linux's "0.24%" >> "market" >> share. Now the "market" share is more like 1.6%, and that counts *only* >> distros that are sold *commercially*. >> >> Linux desktops may not be in every home, but Linux desktops are doing >> quite >> find in Microsoft's salted-earth territory. >> >> As for Lloyd, I gave up on that jerk long ago. I dislike people who >> simply >> want to dick with people all the time. Idiots. >> > There ya go again, talking about other peoples dicks. He probably mentions them at the dinner table in front of his kids too. -- A.M Your pet's opinion on technology is more valid than that of a Linux advocate
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | William Poaster <wp@dev.null> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-29 14:31 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <571n8c-o86.ln1@user-1842.linux.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #311291 |
It was reported that chrisv posted: > Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > >>> -- >>> "2007 is going to be a miserable year for Linux because Vista is going >>> to sink any hope Linux has had for the desktop. Vista has been >>> geberating excitement for months with magazine articles, pre-orders >>> etc." - "Flatfish" >> >>LOL >> >>Flounder, indeed. > > Really, how embarrassing. > > We are still waiting for that "final nail in the Linux coffin" that > the trolls have been telling us is coming. I have permission to quote a Usenet poster who had been hearing all this kind of crap from anti-Linux people, wintrolls & windows users in general. He posted this about 8 or 9 years ago, asked that I don't post his full name (fair enough) so let us just call him "Dave". ---------------------------xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx--------------------------------- To the anti-Linux trolls, & windows users in general:- The world you inhabit is remarkably different than the one I inhabit. I live in the professional world, where below-amateur-grade software like the products of the Microsoft Corporation are viewed as a joke -- and a bad one at that -- completely unsuitable for use by anyone who is actually serious about high-quality computing and networking. I live in the Internet world. It's based on open standards and open software, with things like peer review and consensus playing important roles -- and things like FUD and embrace-and-extinguish recognized as selfish and destructive. I live in the anti-spam world, where people do not directly support spam by knowingly buying the goods and services sold by spammers. But aside from all that: this is why we have such very different world views: It's all a matter of experience and perspective: there are a LOT of people around now who accept things like "there are viruses that propagate via "SMTP" as normal. It never occurs to them to take a step back and ask "IS this normal?"...because if they did, the answer would be "Hell no, it's NOT normal, and we shouldn't accept it as normal". And *that*, more than anything else, is the damage that Microsoft has done to the Internet: it has conditioned an enormous number of people to accept things-as-they-are not just as the status quo (which, by definition, it IS) but as inevitable, unavoidable, and unchangeable. People like you. And you, and you, and you. [consider it directed at "you" if appropriate]. And as a result, today, despite some very clever things (firewalls, IDSs, and so on) the Internet is far less secure and stable as a whole than it was 15 or 20 years ago. And since the less secure the Internet is, the more opportunity there is for abusers of all types (including of course spammers). And so the spam problem will continue to get steadily worse until people stop accepting the status quo - until they stop accepting the very worst available applications and operating systems as "what everyone uses" and moreover "what everyone should use" and "what everyone must use". Many people don't want to face this. They want to keep slapping bandaids on the problem - bandaids like SPF and anti-virus software and DNSBLs and port 25 blocking and anti-adware software and domainkeys and proxypots and Bayesian classifiers and challenge-response and whitelists and a hundred other things. They seem to be blissfully unaware that we have ALREADY been slapping bandaids on the problem for over a decade and all that we have to show for it are a lot more places that are bleeding. Profusely. Yet they seem very, very determined to do everything possible to keep inventing and using more bandaids rather than taking a deep breath, gathering themselves, and doing the one thing that would help more than everything else combined. It really is quite fascinating to watch. Frustrating, but fascinating. ( Some clinical psychology student could probably wrangle a PhD thesis out of the mass exercise in avoidance that's going on. ) So, a prediction: spam will persist as long as Microsoft persists. It flourishes in the environment of insecurity that Microsoft provides like bacteria flourishes in a Petri dish full of agar. You can ridicule this all you like. It doesn't matter: I've heard it ALL before. Heard it 25+ years ago when those of us who were early adopters and promoters of wacky stuff like Berkeley Unix and this nutty "IP" thing were told it would never amount to anything, was just the crazed dream of a bunch of hippie hackers with no clue about the real world. Riiiiiiiiight. Oddly enough, *none* of the people who were *so* adamant at the time seem to have resurfaced long enough to admit that they were just about as wrong as it's possible to be. But they've been replaced with a similar crowd: they're busy now telling all the Linux folks the same kinds of things. Oh, this new crowd is just as short-sighted, ignorant, and foolish, but there's no point in telling them so. (See, I did learn something all those years ago.) So -- if you like -- tuck this note away and pull it out in, oh, say 2014, 2019 or whenever. See if you still want to ridicule it then. If you do, I shouldn't be too hard to find. (And if I'm dead? Please feel free to do so anyway; I'll be long past caring, and besides, if I'm that wildly wrong, I *should* be ridiculed, dead or alive. So be my guest.) --Dave D.-- --------------------xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx--------------------------------------- -- openSUSE 13.2 64-bit KDE 4.14.9 Kernel: 4.1.3-5.ga0f869c-desktop #1 SMP PREEMPT Mon Jul 27 10:23:02 UTC 2015 (a0f869c) x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux This message is virus free, as absolutely NO Micro$oft products were used in its preparation.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-29 11:28 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <u7uhra9padgqcobfhq0998kurbsslo1ln2@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #311307 |
>Yet they seem very, very determined to do everything possible to keep >inventing and using more bandaids rather than taking a deep breath, >gathering themselves, and doing the one thing that would help more >than everything else combined. ... Migrate to a more secure OS, like GNU/Linux. There was an article in the paper the other day about the $millions per year now being paid scumbags because of ransomware like CryptoWall. No where in the article was "Windows" mentioned. I guess it's just assumed that the victims were running Windows. Everyone does, right? Except a few Mac weirdos, of course. Can you imagine any other market so fscked-up, so devoid of choice, that it can just be assumed what product is having a problem? And, when that product has a problem, everyone just shrugs, because there's really no choice - it's the only product offered, it's the only one you've used, all the hardware and software is designed to work with it, etc. It's fscking sick, I tell 'ya! -- "if Dell, Compaq, IBM or Acer didn't like the deal they were getting with Microsoft they could have started selling computers with Ubuntu, Suse, Redhat, FreeBSD or BeOS." - trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-29 13:21 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mpb20g$es8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #311343 |
On 2015-07-29 12:28 PM, chrisv wrote: > >> Yet they seem very, very determined to do everything possible to keep >> inventing and using more bandaids rather than taking a deep breath, >> gathering themselves, and doing the one thing that would help more >> than everything else combined. > > ... Migrate to a more secure OS, like GNU/Linux. That's right, *Linux* powers the Android OS as well, which has 950 million of its devices vulnerable to a text message that will give an attacker complete access to personal information and control of the device. > There was an article in the paper the other day about the $millions > per year now being paid scumbags because of ransomware like > CryptoWall. > > No where in the article was "Windows" mentioned. I guess it's just > assumed that the victims were running Windows. Everyone does, right? > Except a few Mac weirdos, of course. > > Can you imagine any other market so fscked-up, so devoid of choice, > that it can just be assumed what product is having a problem? And, > when that product has a problem, everyone just shrugs, because there's > really no choice - it's the only product offered, it's the only one > you've used, all the hardware and software is designed to work with > it, etc. > > It's fscking sick, I tell 'ya! More mentally-stimulating thoughts by chrisv. -- A.M
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-29 13:26 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mpb29d$frj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #311363 |
"A.M" <.m@nsn.s> wrote in message news:mpb20g$es8$1@dont-email.me... > On 2015-07-29 12:28 PM, chrisv wrote: >> >>> Yet they seem very, very determined to do everything possible to keep >>> inventing and using more bandaids rather than taking a deep breath, >>> gathering themselves, and doing the one thing that would help more >>> than everything else combined. >> >> ... Migrate to a more secure OS, like GNU/Linux. Says the lifetime Windows user turdv who uses nothing other than Windows. > > That's right, *Linux* powers the Android OS as well, which has 950 > million of its devices vulnerable to a text message that will give an > attacker complete access to personal information and control of the > device. > This is just the latest of many Android vulnerabilities. It's probably the worst to date but it's certainly not the first and won't be the last. -- >Problem with Chromebooks in the enterprise - when IBM, HP, eBay, >Citi Bank, etc writes an email, internal document or spreadsheet >they don't want Google to see each and every word they write? "Didn't think you had the brains that God gave a cockroach, fsckwit. How about encrypting things that they don't want others to see?" turdv "thinks" that encryption will magically provide privacy on the docs and spreadsheets you edit, calculate and spell-check online. Google can spell-check your document but if it's encrypted they won't be able to read what they're spell-checking. Jan 21, 2013 Message-ID: <gh8rf81ca9gjjjrt1pghah4tc41t41068l@4ax.com>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-30 12:26 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mpd1i2$o0r$1@deskrabbit.motzarella.org> |
| In reply to | #311343 |
On 29/07/2015 17:28, chrisv wrote: > >> Yet they seem very, very determined to do everything possible to keep >> inventing and using more bandaids rather than taking a deep breath, >> gathering themselves, and doing the one thing that would help more >> than everything else combined. > > ... Migrate to a more secure OS, like GNU/Linux. User Agent Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 'nuf said....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web