Conficker updating itself
Jim
Uh-oh, more for the Windows users of the world to be concerned about.
--
Jim
Tommy Troll
In my mind this is right up there with the threat of a Mt. Everest
asteroid hitting the earth in the next 5 minutes.
Tom
Alan Baker
<d540dca3-840a-4ee3...@s19g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
Tommy Troll <tom_...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Even you don't actually believe that, Tom.
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
<http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
Jim
<d540dca3-840a-4ee3...@s19g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
Tommy Troll <tom_...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Go ahead tommie, be complacent. It's perfectly Ok in the land of the
win-lemmings.
--
Jim
Sermo Malifer
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7991422.stm
>
> Uh-oh, more for the Windows users of the world to be concerned about.
According to posts Snit made in COLA, even a nine year old girl can run
Windows without becoming infected with malware.
I don't believe him myself. He couldn't produce any examples either.
Lloyd Parsons
Sermo Malifer <sermom...@noemail.com> wrote:
Someone in COLA actually gives credence to Snit? :)
Here we don't. We just get to watch him and Carrol have their incessant
circle jerk.
Snit
AM:
You do not believe a single nine year old in the world is running Windows
without malware, even with help from others.
You simply are out of touch with reality.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Sermo Malifer
The captain of the Titanic held a similar opinion about the chances of
his ship sinking.
Sermo Malifer
I'm not the one who's making up stories about what other people believe.
M$ must appreciate your blind faith in them.
Snit
lloydparsons-F4E3...@news.individual.net on 4/10/09 8:07 AM:
Sermo is simply lying about me. He pointed to a poorly documented account
of a nine year old who was able to use Linux. Sermo, unlike *anyone* else,
was surprised that *a* nine year old could do this, even with help (the
article talked about her father being there to assist when needed). Sermo
then talked about Linux being so hard to install and work with that he
figured several regular posters to COLA would not be able to do so. That is
right: Sermo has so little faith in Linux he figured people who post to a
*Linux advocacy* group would not be able to even install it. He has,
however, no evidence of this - frankly I think he is just full of it.
Sermo then tried to falsely extrapolate from the poorly documented account
that nine year olds in general could do what was reported. I pointed out
the flaw with his logic, and gave him a similar scenario involving Windows -
if *a* nine year old can work with Windows without getting malware, based on
his logic, *any* nine year old can do so.
Now Sermoe is trying to make it sound like I have said nine year olds in
general run Windows without risk of malware.
Of course, Sermo *is* just trolling... but, still, logic and honesty are my
"tools" and that is what I am using to refute his absurdity, even though he
almost surely does not believe it himself. :)
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
AM:
Hee funny gaffaw hee grin haa haa haw snicker haw haa haa. Hee haa snort
lol. Lol oh my hee. Snicker oh my snort oh my haw haw snort. Hee hee ho
ho ho hee ha hee hee snicker. Chortle ho ho ho funny he gaffaw lol haa haa
he. Snort oh my funny hee funny! Haa chortle lol ha funny ha haa lmao.
Haw haw haa snort. Funny snicker hee he grin haw haw. Snort hee lmao
snort. Haa snort gaffaw ha haw haa haa lol haa snort. Haw haw grin haa haw
haw gaffaw grin snort. Hee grin hee ha snort haw snort. Hee chortle lmao
haw haw lmao. Snort he he hee ho ho ho he giggle hee hee chortle ho ho ho?
Lmao giggle snort? Haw hee haa hee hee snicker. Hee lol haa he haw hee
hee. Oh my haw snicker lol funny haa haa chortle oh my hee lmao! Ha lol
hee ha hee he haa giggle oh my hee snort. Giggle haa he funny snort hee.
Haw hee ha funny haw snicker chortle. Hee haw giggle haa haa hee haw haw
haw haw haw lol hee. Hee hee hee haa haa hee hee snort. Lmao ha snort hee
ha haw. Grin lol giggle oh my ha haa. Lmao oh my hee hee. Snort hee hee
haw haw. Snort haa haa oh my haa haa he funny giggle giggle giggle. Snort
grin ha? Haa haa gaffaw haw funny. Chortle ha ha gaffaw oh my haa snort
giggle giggle. Haw ho ho ho haa snort. Oh my snort haw chortle gaffaw.
Gaffaw haa funny. Haw grin he snort hee hee hee ha snicker. Lmao haw haw
haw haw oh my hee chortle haw haw! Hee ha ho ho ho ho ho ho haa funny lol
ho ho ho haw haa grin. Snicker gaffaw haw oh my ha gaffaw. Haw haw hee hee
hee haa haw haa haa funny haa haa haa. Chortle haw hee hee. Grin funny haa
haa chortle snort haw lmao haw haw hee ha haa. Hee ha lmao oh my ha haa hee
hee hee funny chortle! Ho ho ho hee hee haw funny haw haw? Haa gaffaw ha
hee ha hee! Hee lmao haw haw hee ha haw grin he. Lmao hee snort lol gaffaw
lol. Haw haw chortle haa hee hee hee funny oh my haw haw grin snort. Haw
haw gaffaw oh my haw haw haw lol ho ho ho giggle gaffaw. Haa haa hee hee
lol snort hee ha snort haw hee. Ha chortle haa haa snort chortle funny
chortle. Haw snort lmao. Snort ho ho ho snort giggle ho ho ho. Lol hee
hee haa haa haw ho ho ho grin. Chortle funny grin grin hee haa giggle snort
haa? Oh my gaffaw lmao gaffaw he. Haa snicker funny funny gaffaw snort
grin gaffaw haa haa! Ho ho ho hee snicker funny haw hee giggle hee grin.
Haw oh my he chortle gaffaw. Haa haa he haa ho ho ho snort giggle he hee ha
haw. Ho ho ho hee ha chortle hee ha haa haa hee haa hee ha. Hee ha lmao
giggle snort giggle lmao. Haa haa haa haa hee ha lol hee oh my. Hee haw
haw chortle giggle he chortle snort. Hee haa hee hee oh my haw snicker
funny. Funny oh my lmao snort? Lol snort haa oh my he haa lol chortle
funny. Haw haw lol snort snicker snicker ho ho ho haw haw haa haa hee ha!
Haw haw giggle snort snort grin haa giggle. Haa giggle hee gaffaw haa haa
lol hee hee haw ha. Hee snicker giggle. Giggle lmao hee ha he ha! Haw haw
ha lol lol haa hee ha chortle snicker hee hee. Haa snort lol hee ha hee
snort? Oh my giggle lmao hee hee. Ho ho ho gaffaw he lol. Oh my haw
snicker haa haa chortle haa lmao. Funny lol giggle gaffaw lmao snort lmao
haa lol. He chortle gaffaw oh my! Haa snicker gaffaw lmao hee ha. He hee
haw snicker grin chortle. Snort lmao chortle oh my snort ha. Haw funny he
snicker. Oh my snicker chortle snort hee lol lmao hee! Haa haa ha hee hee
hee hee haw haw lmao oh my haw snort. Lol ha chortle. Snort hee hee gaffaw
hee hee hee haa haa. Snort grin haw snort lol giggle lmao snicker haw haw
ho ho ho. Oh my hee haw haa haa snort gaffaw haa. Haw snicker lol funny ho
ho ho snicker ha? Chortle haw hee hee gaffaw. Haw haw ha grin lol gaffaw.
Haa haa hee ha oh my grin? Gaffaw haw ha lmao funny haa haa snicker. Hee
ha oh my grin lmao giggle giggle grin hee hee! Haw haw snort funny haa haa
haa haa. Snicker haa grin. Snort hee hee gaffaw haa funny oh my lol.
Giggle funny gaffaw.
> M$ must appreciate your blind faith in them.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Sermo Malifer
> Lloyd Parsons stated in post
> lloydparsons-F4E3...@news.individual.net on 4/10/09 8:07
> AM:
>
>> In article <grnn3j$9vp$7...@news.albasani.net>,
>> Sermo Malifer <sermom...@noemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 06:50:30 -0500, Jim wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7991422.stm
>>>>
>>>> Uh-oh, more for the Windows users of the world to be concerned about.
>>>
>>> According to posts Snit made in COLA, even a nine year old girl can
>>> run Windows without becoming infected with malware.
>>>
>>> I don't believe him myself. He couldn't produce any examples either.
>>
>> Someone in COLA actually gives credence to Snit? :)
>>
>> Here we don't. We just get to watch him and Carrol have their
>> incessant circle jerk.
>
> Sermo is simply lying about me.
No I'm not. Everything you posted here are lies though, and you know it.
> He pointed to a poorly documented
> account of a nine year old who was able to use Linux.
I pointed to a well documented story of a girl who's been using Linux
since she was two years old, and who installed a Linux server by herself
before she was ten years old.
I contrasted that to your constant whining about how Linux is a "mish
mash of competing and poorly implemented standards," and how the UI was
too "inconsistent."
One of Snit's big UI complaints: Ctrl+Q quits a program, but the menu
may say either "quit" or "exit!"
> Sermo, unlike
> *anyone* else, was surprised that *a* nine year old could do this,
No I wasn't. I was surprised you could still appear in public after you
were outdone by a little girl!
> even with help (the article talked about her father being there to
> assist when needed).
The article said her father was there *if* trouble should arise, not that
he assisted her.
> Sermo then talked about Linux being so hard to install
> and work with that he figured several regular posters to COLA would not
> be able to do so.
I then pointed out that Linux was easy enough for a little girl to
install and run, but to difficult for you and your fellow trolls to do
the same.
> That is right: Sermo has so little faith in Linux
That I use it every day, and I point with pride to a little girl who's
better at installing and using Linux than a troll like you will ever be!
> he
> figured people who post to a *Linux advocacy* group would not be able to
> even install it.
Those "people" being you and your fellow anti-Linux trolls!
> He has, however, no evidence of this -
You are the "evidence!"
> frankly I think
> he is just full of it.
IOW, you think I'm Snit.
> Sermo then tried to falsely extrapolate from the poorly documented
> account that nine year olds in general could do what was reported.
No I didn't, but you did, Liar.
> I pointed out the flaw with his logic,
If being correct is a "flaw."
> and gave him a similar scenario
> involving Windows - if *a* nine year old can work with Windows without
> getting malware, based on his logic, *any* nine year old can do so.
The case of the little girl installing a Linux server on her own is
real. Your "scenario" about Windows is fiction.
You have yet to show any nine year old installing and running Windows on
their own without becoming infected with malware.
> Now Sermoe is trying to make it sound like I have said nine year olds in
> general run Windows without risk of malware.
You did, but you can't even show one doing that!
> Of course, Sermo *is* just trolling...
You're projecting again.
> but, still, logic and honesty are
> my "tools" and that is what I am using to refute his absurdity, even
> though he almost surely does not believe it himself. :)
Yet more of your innumerable lies.
This group is a fit place for your circus. Keep it out of COLA.
Snit
AM:
> On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 08:50:14 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
>> Lloyd Parsons stated in post
>> lloydparsons-F4E3...@news.individual.net on 4/10/09 8:07
>> AM:
>>
>>> In article <grnn3j$9vp$7...@news.albasani.net>,
>>> Sermo Malifer <sermom...@noemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 06:50:30 -0500, Jim wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7991422.stm
>>>>>
>>>>> Uh-oh, more for the Windows users of the world to be concerned about.
>>>>
>>>> According to posts Snit made in COLA, even a nine year old girl can
>>>> run Windows without becoming infected with malware.
>>>>
>>>> I don't believe him myself. He couldn't produce any examples either.
>>>
>>> Someone in COLA actually gives credence to Snit? :)
>>>
>>> Here we don't. We just get to watch him and Carrol have their
>>> incessant circle jerk.
>>
>> Sermo is simply lying about me. He pointed to a poorly documented account of
>> a nine year old who was able to use Linux.
>
> I pointed to a well documented story of a girl who's been using Linux
> since she was two years old, and who installed a Linux server by herself
> before she was ten years old.
>
> I contrasted that to your constant whining about how Linux is a "mish
> mash of competing and poorly implemented standards," and how the UI was
> too "inconsistent."
How is that a contrast? I never said Linux was not at all usable - in fact,
I have noted it is. You simply made that up.
> One of Snit's big UI complaints: Ctrl+Q quits a program, but the menu
> may say either "quit" or "exit!"
Yes: Linux users have no choice for consistency on even some basic things
for their UI.
>> Sermo, unlike *anyone* else, was surprised that *a* nine year old could do
>> this, even with help (the article talked about her father being there to
>> assist when needed).
>>
> No I wasn't. I was surprised you could still appear in public after you were
> outdone by a little girl!
You keep making this claim of being "outdone"... but that is clearly a lie.
Why do you keep spreading it now that it has been shown you cannot support
it?
>> Sermo then talked about Linux being so hard to install and work with that he
>> figured several regular posters to COLA would not be able to do so.
>>
> I then pointed out that Linux was easy enough for a little girl to install and
> run, but to difficult for you and your fellow trolls to do the same.
Ignoring your name calling: notice how you are *still* making the claim that
Linux is so hard that several COLA regulars - people who post to a Linux
advocacy group - cannot even install it. While Linux has its many flaws,
for most technical people, which COLA posters tend to be, I see no reason
they could not install it.
You do.
You have less faith in Linux usability than I do.
>> That is right: Sermo has so little faith in Linux he figured people who post
>> to a *Linux advocacy* group would not be able to even install it.
>
> Those "people" being you and your fellow anti-Linux trolls!
Your belittling of people is irrelevant to the fact that you, not I, are the
one who deemed that people who post to a Linux advocacy group, as a whole,
cannot even install Linux! You have *no* faith in Linux usability.
>> He has, however, no evidence of this - frankly I think he is just full of it.
>>
>> Sermo then tried to falsely extrapolate from the poorly documented account
>> that nine year olds in general could do what was reported. I pointed out the
>> flaw with his logic, and gave him a similar scenario involving Windows - if
>> *a* nine year old can work with Windows without getting malware, based on his
>> logic, *any* nine year old can do so.
>
> The case of the little girl installing a Linux server on her own is
> real. Your "scenario" about Windows is fiction.
Do you deny that there is a single nine year old in the world running
Windows without malware?
> You have yet to show any nine year old installing and running Windows on
> their own without becoming infected with malware.
I have seen it many times. And, frankly, so has anyone else who is in touch
with computer users, AKA people in general (assuming you live in a modern
technological society)
>> Now Sermoe is trying to make it sound like I have said nine year olds in
>> general run Windows without risk of malware.
>>
>> Of course, Sermo *is* just trolling... but, still, logic and honesty are
>> my "tools" and that is what I am using to refute his absurdity, even
>> though he almost surely does not believe it himself. :)
>
> Yet more of your innumerable lies.
>
> This group is a fit place for your circus. Keep it out of COLA.
Can you at least *try* to support your BS?
No?
A shame!
But it is clear: you, and you alone, have so little faith in desktop Linux
that you believe people who post to Linux advocacy groups on a regular basis
are not, as a group, able to install Linux. Does anyone else believe Linux
to be as messed up as you clearly do?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Sermo Malifer
How could you not see the contrast?
> I never said Linux was not at all usable - in
> fact, I have noted it is.
You said that even a poor system could be used. Somehow a two year old
girl could use a system you believe is "poor."
> You simply made that up.
Yet another of your innumerable lies.
>> One of Snit's big UI complaints: Ctrl+Q quits a program, but the menu
>> may say either "quit" or "exit!"
>
> Yes: Linux users have no choice for consistency on even some basic
> things for their UI.
When I told you how to change those things, you ignored what I wrote and
pasted your lies in at the bottom of my post.
Thanks for confirming what I wrote, though.
>>> Sermo, unlike *anyone* else, was surprised that *a* nine year old
>>> could do this, even with help (the article talked about her father
>>> being there to assist when needed).
>>>
>> No I wasn't. I was surprised you could still appear in public after
>> you were outdone by a little girl!
>
> You keep making this claim of being "outdone"...
... and you keep proving it's true!
> but that is clearly a lie.
No, it's clearly the truth!
> Why do you keep spreading it
So that all may know of your burning shame!
> now that it has been shown you cannot
> support it?
I've supported it many times, and you've confirmed it yourself.
>>> Sermo then talked about Linux being so hard to install and work with
>>> that he figured several regular posters to COLA would not be able to
>>> do so.
>>>
>> I then pointed out that Linux was easy enough for a little girl to
>> install and run, but to difficult for you and your fellow trolls to do
>> the same.
>
> Ignoring your name calling: notice how you are *still* making the claim
> that Linux is so hard
I never claimed Linux is "so hard," Liar. I said you can't match the
Linux abilities of a little girl!
> that several COLA regulars - people who post to a
> Linux advocacy group - cannot even install it.
If "COLA regulars" means you and your fellow trolls.
> While Linux has its many flaws,
Which don't impede a two year old girl, but stop you dead in your tracks.
> for most technical people,
Such as nine year old girls.
> which COLA posters tend to be, I see no reason they could not install
> it.
As long as "they" means "not Snit!"
> You do.
You don't. But a little girl does.
> You have less faith in Linux usability than I do.
Yet another of your innumerable lies.
>>> That is right: Sermo has so little faith in Linux he figured people
>>> who post to a *Linux advocacy* group would not be able to even install
>>> it.
>>
>> Those "people" being you and your fellow anti-Linux trolls!
>
> Your belittling of people is irrelevant to the fact that you, not I, are
> the one who deemed that people who post to a Linux advocacy group,
"People" like you, who are anti-Linux trolls.
> as a whole, cannot even install Linux!
You and your fellow trolls prove that you can not.
> You have *no* faith in Linux usability.
I have complete faith in any little girl's ability to outdo you in the
use of Linux!
>>> He has, however, no evidence of this - frankly I think he is just full
>>> of it.
>>>
>>> Sermo then tried to falsely extrapolate from the poorly documented
>>> account that nine year olds in general could do what was reported. I
>>> pointed out the flaw with his logic, and gave him a similar scenario
>>> involving Windows - if *a* nine year old can work with Windows without
>>> getting malware, based on his logic, *any* nine year old can do so.
>>
>> The case of the little girl installing a Linux server on her own is
>> real. Your "scenario" about Windows is fiction.
>
> Do you deny that there is a single nine year old in the world running
> Windows without malware?
When are you going to document even a single case of this?
>> You have yet to show any nine year old installing and running Windows
>> on their own without becoming infected with malware.
>
> I have seen it many times.
Where's your proof?
> And, frankly, so has anyone else who is in
> touch with computer users, AKA people in general (assuming you live in a
> modern technological society)
IOW, you have no proof, just blind faith in M$.
>>> Now Sermoe is trying to make it sound like I have said nine year olds
>>> in general run Windows without risk of malware.
>>>
>>> Of course, Sermo *is* just trolling... but, still, logic and honesty
>>> are my "tools" and that is what I am using to refute his absurdity,
>>> even though he almost surely does not believe it himself. :)
>>
>> Yet more of your innumerable lies.
>>
>> This group is a fit place for your circus. Keep it out of COLA.
>
> Can you at least *try* to support your BS?
I have no BS to support.
> No?
>
> A shame!
The shame is all yours, because you're no match for a little girl!
> But it is clear: you, and you alone, have so little faith in desktop
> Linux that you believe people who post to Linux advocacy groups on a
> regular basis are not, as a group, able to install Linux. Does anyone
> else believe Linux to be as messed up as you clearly do?
Your lies will not hide the shame you feel at being outdone by a little
girl!
Steve Carroll
> On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 09:30:11 -0700, Snit wrote:
> > 9:11 AM:
>
> >> On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 08:50:14 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
> >>> Lloyd Parsons stated in post
> >>> AM:
>
> >>>> In article <grnn3j$9v...@news.albasani.net>,
Are you Edwin's cousin? ;)
Snit
AM:
...
>>> I pointed to a well documented story of a girl who's been using Linux
>>> since she was two years old, and who installed a Linux server by
>>> herself before she was ten years old.
>>>
>>> I contrasted that to your constant whining about how Linux is a "mish
>>> mash of competing and poorly implemented standards," and how the UI was
>>> too "inconsistent."
>>
>> How is that a contrast?
>
> How could you not see the contrast?
Well, I am not 10 and I am not a girl. So there is contrast there. But the
point you are pushing is that since she can use Linux, as can I, that there
is some contrast.
When pushed you simply lie about me... thus showing you have no *real* point
to make and are merely begging for attention.
>> I never said Linux was not at all usable - in fact, I have noted it is.
>
> You said that even a poor system could be used. Somehow a two year old
> girl could use a system you believe is "poor."
My kids, who are in that age range, use all sorts of poorly made tools.
>> You simply made that up.
>>
>>> One of Snit's big UI complaints: Ctrl+Q quits a program, but the menu
>>> may say either "quit" or "exit!"
>>
>> Yes: Linux users have no choice for consistency on even some basic
>> things for their UI.
>
> When I told you how to change those things, you ignored what I wrote and
> pasted your lies in at the bottom of my post.
If you really have such evidence then please point me to the distro that
actually offers users consistency! Wow! That would be excellent... I would
*love* to be proved wrong.
But, you and I know, you shan't do so. You will pretend you have, you will
tell me to find it myself, you will dodge, you will name call... but you
will not point to this mythological distro of Linux with a well designed and
consistent UI.
> Thanks for confirming what I wrote, though.
>
>>>> Sermo, unlike *anyone* else, was surprised that *a* nine year old
>>>> could do this, even with help (the article talked about her father
>>>> being there to assist when needed).
>>>>
>>> No I wasn't. I was surprised you could still appear in public after
>>> you were outdone by a little girl!
>>
>> You keep making this claim of being "outdone"... but that is clearly a lie.
>> Why do you keep spreading it now that it has been shown you cannot
>> support it?
>
> I've supported it many times, and you've confirmed it yourself.
But, oddly enough, you cannot find a single example. Wow: you *must* see
yourself as being completely incompetent.
>>>> Sermo then talked about Linux being so hard to install and work with
>>>> that he figured several regular posters to COLA would not be able to
>>>> do so.
>>>>
>>> I then pointed out that Linux was easy enough for a little girl to
>>> install and run, but to difficult for you and your fellow trolls to do
>>> the same.
>>
>> Ignoring your name calling: notice how you are *still* making the claim
>> that Linux is so hard
>
> I never claimed Linux is "so hard," Liar. I said you can't match the
> Linux abilities of a little girl!
You did not use those words... but you clearly have claimed, repeatedly,
that people who post to a Linux advocacy forum, as a whole, cannot even
install Linux.
That shows your complete lack of faith in Linux. You try to turn this
around by spewing insults, but that is just absurdity.
>> that several COLA regulars - people who post to a
>> Linux advocacy group - cannot even install it.
>>
>> While Linux has its many flaws, for most technical people, which COLA posters
>> tend to be, I see no reason they could not install it.
>>
>> You do.
>>
>> You have less faith in Linux usability than I do.
>
> Yet another of your innumerable lies.
I see no reason why people in COLA could not install and use Linux.
You do.
You have less faith in desktop Linux than I do. Simple. Yet you twist and
turn and run and spew insults to try to avoid this fact.
>>>> That is right: Sermo has so little faith in Linux he figured people
>>>> who post to a *Linux advocacy* group would not be able to even install
>>>> it.
>>>
>>> Those "people" being you and your fellow anti-Linux trolls!
>>
>> Your belittling of people is irrelevant to the fact that you, not I, are the
>> one who deemed that people who post to a Linux advocacy group, as a whole,
>> cannot even install Linux!
>>
>> You have *no* faith in Linux usability.
>
> I have complete faith in any little girl's ability to outdo you in the
> use of Linux!
See: as I noted, when you have no honest response you spew insults and lies.
Thanks for proving me correct about you, but I would prefer if you proved me
wrong!
>>>> He has, however, no evidence of this - frankly I think he is just full
>>>> of it.
>>>>
>>>> Sermo then tried to falsely extrapolate from the poorly documented
>>>> account that nine year olds in general could do what was reported. I
>>>> pointed out the flaw with his logic, and gave him a similar scenario
>>>> involving Windows - if *a* nine year old can work with Windows without
>>>> getting malware, based on his logic, *any* nine year old can do so.
>>>
>>> The case of the little girl installing a Linux server on her own is
>>> real. Your "scenario" about Windows is fiction.
>>
>> Do you deny that there is a single nine year old in the world running
>> Windows without malware?
>
> When are you going to document even a single case of this?
You did not answer the question:
Do you deny that there is a single nine year old in the world
running Windows without malware?
If you do not, then there is no need to document it. If you do, however,
then it will be fun to document it and show how wrong you are.
Being that you pushed yourself into a no-win situation, though, you will not
even answer the question. Oh well, it is not like you are the first
cowardly troll to infest Usenet.
>>> You have yet to show any nine year old installing and running Windows
>>> on their own without becoming infected with malware.
>>
>> I have seen it many times.
>>
>> And, frankly, so has anyone else who is in touch with computer users, AKA
>> people in general (assuming you live in a modern technological society)
>
> IOW, you have no proof, just blind faith in M$.
LOL! Yeah, *I* have blind faith in MS! LOL! You have *no* idea what you
are talking about - just spewing insults.
But it is interesting that you note the faith or lack thereof is in MS, and
not nine year olds... the exact opposite of what you tried to do when you
blamed *users* for your belief that they could not even install Linux.
I, as you, look to the OS: and it is clear you do not have enough faith in
Linux to think even highly technically competent people who post to Linux
advocacy forums can install it. Note: I do not agree with you.
>>>> Now Sermoe is trying to make it sound like I have said nine year olds
>>>> in general run Windows without risk of malware.
>>>>
>>>> Of course, Sermo *is* just trolling... but, still, logic and honesty
>>>> are my "tools" and that is what I am using to refute his absurdity,
>>>> even though he almost surely does not believe it himself. :)
>>>
>>> Yet more of your innumerable lies.
>>>
>>> This group is a fit place for your circus. Keep it out of COLA.
>>
>> Can you at least *try* to support your BS?
>>
>> No?
>>
>> A shame!
>>
>> But it is clear: you, and you alone, have so little faith in desktop
>> Linux that you believe people who post to Linux advocacy groups on a
>> regular basis are not, as a group, able to install Linux. Does anyone
>> else believe Linux to be as messed up as you clearly do?
>
> Your lies will not hide the shame you feel at being outdone by a little
> girl!
See how you lash out! Oh, you are such a predictable little troll. Please
do try to be a little more creative!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Sermo Malifer
> Sermo Malifer stated in post grnul3$htn$9...@news.albasani.net on 4/10/09
> 10:12 AM:
>
> ...
>>>> I pointed to a well documented story of a girl who's been using Linux
>>>> since she was two years old, and who installed a Linux server by
>>>> herself before she was ten years old.
>>>>
>>>> I contrasted that to your constant whining about how Linux is a "mish
>>>> mash of competing and poorly implemented standards," and how the UI
>>>> was too "inconsistent."
>>>
>>> How is that a contrast?
>>
>> How could you not see the contrast?
>
> Well, I am not 10 and I am not a girl. So there is contrast there.
There's a contrast in the abilities little girls have that you lack also.
> But
> the point you are pushing is that since she can use Linux, as can I,
No, as you can't.
> that there is some contrast.
She can, you can't.
> When pushed you simply lie about me... thus showing you have no *real*
> point to make and are merely begging for attention.
Yet more of your lies.
>>> I never said Linux was not at all usable - in fact, I have noted it
>>> is.
>>
>> You said that even a poor system could be used. Somehow a two year
>> old girl could use a system you believe is "poor."
>
> My kids, who are in that age range, use all sorts of poorly made tools.
You have to blame your tools for your poor performance even when they're
easy enough for a child to use!
>>> You simply made that up.
>>>
>>>> One of Snit's big UI complaints: Ctrl+Q quits a program, but the
>>>> menu may say either "quit" or "exit!"
>>>
>>> Yes: Linux users have no choice for consistency on even some basic
>>> things for their UI.
>>
>> When I told you how to change those things, you ignored what I wrote
>> and pasted your lies in at the bottom of my post.
>
> If you really have such evidence then please point me to the distro that
> actually offers users consistency! Wow!
Why should I bother to do that again?
> That would be excellent... I
> would *love* to be proved wrong.
You were several times already, and you know it.
> But, you and I know, you shan't do so. You will pretend you have, you
> will tell me to find it myself, you will dodge, you will name call...
> but you will not point to this mythological distro of Linux with a well
> designed and consistent UI.
Yet more of your lies.
>> Thanks for confirming what I wrote, though.
>>
>>>>> Sermo, unlike *anyone* else, was surprised that *a* nine year old
>>>>> could do this, even with help (the article talked about her father
>>>>> being there to assist when needed).
>>>>>
>>>> No I wasn't. I was surprised you could still appear in public after
>>>> you were outdone by a little girl!
>>>
>>> You keep making this claim of being "outdone"... but that is clearly a
>>> lie. Why do you keep spreading it now that it has been shown you
>>> cannot support it?
>>
>> I've supported it many times, and you've confirmed it yourself.
>
> But, oddly enough, you cannot find a single example.
Yet another of your lies.
> Wow: you *must*
> see yourself as being completely incompetent.
I'm not the one who lacks the skills of a two year old girl, that person
is YOU!
>>>>> Sermo then talked about Linux being so hard to install and work with
>>>>> that he figured several regular posters to COLA would not be able to
>>>>> do so.
>>>>>
>>>> I then pointed out that Linux was easy enough for a little girl to
>>>> install and run, but to difficult for you and your fellow trolls to
>>>> do the same.
>>>
>>> Ignoring your name calling: notice how you are *still* making the
>>> claim that Linux is so hard
>>
>> I never claimed Linux is "so hard," Liar. I said you can't match the
>> Linux abilities of a little girl!
>
> You did not use those words...
So you are a LIAR!
> but you clearly have claimed, repeatedly,
> that people who post to a Linux advocacy forum, as a whole, cannot even
> install Linux.
Where "people" means you and your fellow anti-Linux trolls.
> That shows your complete lack of faith in Linux.
That shows you're a complete liar.
> You try to turn this
> around by spewing insults, but that is just absurdity.
Where "you" means "Snit," the man who can not match the skills of a two
year old girl!
>>> that several COLA regulars - people who post to a Linux advocacy group
>>> - cannot even install it.
>>>
>>> While Linux has its many flaws, for most technical people, which COLA
>>> posters tend to be, I see no reason they could not install it.
>>>
>>> You do.
>>>
>>> You have less faith in Linux usability than I do.
>>
>> Yet another of your innumerable lies.
>
> I see no reason why people in COLA could not install and use Linux.
Neither do I. I see no reason why you shouldn't be able to match a
two year old girl in using Linux, but you can't just the same.
> You do.
You're lying again.
> You have less faith in desktop Linux than I do.
I have complete faith in even a two year old girl being able to run Linux
better than you can!
> Simple. Yet you twist
> and turn and run and spew insults to try to avoid this fact.
In the opinion of a man who's no match for a little girl!
>>>>> That is right: Sermo has so little faith in Linux he figured people
>>>>> who post to a *Linux advocacy* group would not be able to even
>>>>> install it.
>>>>
>>>> Those "people" being you and your fellow anti-Linux trolls!
>>>
>>> Your belittling of people is irrelevant to the fact that you, not I,
>>> are the one who deemed that people who post to a Linux advocacy group,
>>> as a whole, cannot even install Linux!
>>>
>>> You have *no* faith in Linux usability.
>>
>> I have complete faith in any little girl's ability to outdo you in the
>> use of Linux!
>
> See: as I noted, when you have no honest response you spew insults and
> lies.
I have posted nothing but truth, and the truth makes you burn with the
shame of your inadequacies!
> Thanks for proving me correct about you, but I would prefer if you
> proved me wrong!
Your lies have never been proved correct, and I have proved you wrong
many times!
>>>>> He has, however, no evidence of this - frankly I think he is just
>>>>> full of it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sermo then tried to falsely extrapolate from the poorly documented
>>>>> account that nine year olds in general could do what was reported. I
>>>>> pointed out the flaw with his logic, and gave him a similar scenario
>>>>> involving Windows - if *a* nine year old can work with Windows
>>>>> without getting malware, based on his logic, *any* nine year old can
>>>>> do so.
>>>>
>>>> The case of the little girl installing a Linux server on her own is
>>>> real. Your "scenario" about Windows is fiction.
>>>
>>> Do you deny that there is a single nine year old in the world running
>>> Windows without malware?
>>
>> When are you going to document even a single case of this?
>
> You did not answer the question:
You must be talking to yourself! Go back up and answer my question!
> Do you deny that there is a single nine year old in the world
> running Windows without malware?
I have no need to bother with your straw man, as I have already told you
numerous times!
> If you do not, then there is no need to document it. If you do,
> however, then it will be fun to document it and show how wrong you are.
>
> Being that you pushed yourself into a no-win situation, though, you will
> not even answer the question. Oh well, it is not like you are the first
> cowardly troll to infest Usenet.
Says the coward who refuses to document his claims!
>>>> You have yet to show any nine year old installing and running Windows
>>>> on their own without becoming infected with malware.
>>>
>>> I have seen it many times.
>>>
>>> And, frankly, so has anyone else who is in touch with computer users,
>>> AKA people in general (assuming you live in a modern technological
>>> society)
>>
>> IOW, you have no proof, just blind faith in M$.
>
> LOL! Yeah, *I* have blind faith in MS!
Sure you do! You think even a nine year old girl can be immune to
Windows malware, even though you can't name even one who is!
> LOL! You have *no* idea what
> you are talking about - just spewing insults.
You're lying again!
> But it is interesting that you note the faith or lack thereof is in MS,
> and not nine year olds... the exact opposite of what you tried to do
> when you blamed *users* for your belief that they could not even install
> Linux.
I blamed you for your inability to install and run Linux, a feat easily
accomplished by even little girls!
> I, as you, look to the OS: and it is clear you do not have enough faith
> in Linux to think even highly technically competent people who post to
> Linux advocacy forums can install it.
You're lying again!
> Note: I do not agree with you.
Your agreement would only be you agreeing with your own lies!
>>>>> Now Sermoe is trying to make it sound like I have said nine year
>>>>> olds in general run Windows without risk of malware.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course, Sermo *is* just trolling... but, still, logic and honesty
>>>>> are my "tools" and that is what I am using to refute his absurdity,
>>>>> even though he almost surely does not believe it himself. :)
>>>>
>>>> Yet more of your innumerable lies.
>>>>
>>>> This group is a fit place for your circus. Keep it out of COLA.
>>>
>>> Can you at least *try* to support your BS?
>>>
>>> No?
>>>
>>> A shame!
>>>
>>> But it is clear: you, and you alone, have so little faith in desktop
>>> Linux that you believe people who post to Linux advocacy groups on a
>>> regular basis are not, as a group, able to install Linux. Does anyone
>>> else believe Linux to be as messed up as you clearly do?
>>
>> Your lies will not hide the shame you feel at being outdone by a little
>> girl!
>
> See how you lash out! Oh, you are such a predictable little troll.
> Please do try to be a little more creative!
Try bringing your abilities up to those of a two year old girl!
Snit
AM:
You have *no* references for your stories about me. You simply make them up
as you beg for my attention. You repeatedly make accusations and spew
stories you cannot support. In the end, you cannot answer the most simple
of questions about your BS stories:
1) Why do you think it is surprising to *anyone* that a nine-year
old girl (who you bizarrely and offensively consider to be below
you on the evolutionary ladder) would not be able to use Linux,
especially with the help you keep dishonestly denying was available?
2) Why do you think Linux is so hard to install that several people
in COLA would not be able to do so (a claim you go back and forth
in making and then denying you made!)?
3) It is clear you do not get the well established benefits of a
consistent UI; but why are you against desktop Linux offer the
the choice of such a UI to people who do value higher quality?
Sigh: 100% predictable, you will not answer *any* question I just asked.
You will run... your whole goal is to beg for attention, not to make or
support a point.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Sermo Malifer
You can always tell when Snit has lost another argument. He resorts to
pasting in his boilerplate lies at the bottom of the post, as he did
above.
Snit
AM:
>> You have *no* references for your stories about me. You simply make
>> them up as you beg for my attention. You repeatedly make accusations and
>> spew stories you cannot support. In the end, you cannot answer the most
>> simple of questions about your BS stories:
>>
>> 1) Why do you think it is surprising to *anyone* that a nine-year
>> old girl (who you bizarrely and offensively consider to be below you
>> on the evolutionary ladder) would not be able to use Linux,
>> especially with the help you keep dishonestly denying was available?
>>
>> 2) Why do you think Linux is so hard to install that several people
>> in COLA would not be able to do so (a claim you go back and forth in
>> making and then denying you made!)?
>>
>> 3) It is clear you do not get the well established benefits of a
>> consistent UI; but why are you against desktop Linux offer the the
>> choice of such a UI to people who do value higher quality?
>>
>> Sigh: 100% predictable, you will not answer *any* question I just asked.
>> You will run... your whole goal is to beg for attention, not to make or
>> support a point.
>
> You can always tell when Snit has lost another argument. He resorts to
> pasting in his boilerplate lies at the bottom of the post, as he did
> above.
Ah, you consider it a "loss" for me to point out questions you cannot
answer... and have even dishonestly claim to have answered. Amazing.
Well, as I did say: when I was pointing out your lies in groups that were
not tied to your lies that was a win for you... so, sure, you can consider
such pointing out of your lies to be a "loss" for me. OK.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Sermo Malifer
Snit has now descended to his next to lowest level. He has completely
removed everything I've written and totally filled the post with nothing
but his lies.
He'll hit his lowest level when he starts responding to every post I make
to any thread by snipping out everything I wrote and pasting in endless
copies of his boilerplate lies.
Snit
AM:
...
> Snit has now descended to his next to lowest level. He has completely
> removed everything I've written and totally filled the post with nothing
> but his lies.
>
> He'll hit his lowest level when he starts responding to every post I make
> to any thread by snipping out everything I wrote and pasting in endless
> copies of his boilerplate lies.
Ah, my "next lowest level" is to note how you run from simple questions
about claims. OK. I shall also note that as you run from speaking of your
own claims, you also spew absurd insults and accusations. To note *that*
must make me completely evil in your view. Snicker. Anyway, here are the
questions which got you to freak out:
1) Why do you think it is surprising to *anyone* that a nine-year
old girl (who you bizarrely and offensively consider to be below
you on the evolutionary ladder) would not be able to use Linux,
especially with the help you keep dishonestly denying was available?
2) Why do you think Linux is so hard to install that several people
in COLA would not be able to do so (a claim you go back and forth
in making and then denying you made!)?
3) It is clear you do not get the well established benefits of a
consistent UI; but why are you against desktop Linux offer the
the choice of such a UI to people who do value higher quality?
You cannot help yourself but to prove me right when I said, of those
questions:
100% predictable, you will not answer *any* question I just
asked. You will run... your whole goal is to beg for
attention, not to make or support a point.
Poor Sermo: no matter how you try to twist and turn, no matter how many
insults and accusations you spew, you simply show how *right* I am about
you. But proving myself right, as fun as it is, is getting boring. I shall
likely stop giving you the attention you crave, at least on this issue, and
at least as much. In the end we both know you simply spewed BS stories with
the intention to insult, not to make a point. We both know you were just
trolling and lying... and it caught you off guard when I responded kindly
and merely asked you to support your claims. You expected me to respond
with the anger and dishonesty you show. Even when you "won" and I asked you
the questions in threads I should not, however, you could not get me to sink
to you level and lie.
And in that you lost. And in that you will always lose. My lowest points
are far, far higher than your best moments. And while you will deny this,
you and I both know that to be true: and you prove it with your every post.
Good day!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]