Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Why do the low IQ iKooks like nospam always lie to cover up Apple's faults?
42 views
Skip to first unread message
Andy Burnelli
Mar 8, 2022, 6:12:15 PM3/8/22
to
Why do the low IQ iKooks like nospam always lie to cover up Apple's faults?
nospam wrote:
>> You claiming that it was Google who made Apple do it doesn't make that true.
>
> i never said any such thing.
We found the truth and you were so confident, but oh so very dead wrong.
*Is 2FA/2SV permanent the instant you set it up for a Google Account?*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/y5qWOLL5R4A>
The answer is nospam was either ignorant, or he lied, as Google does _not_
make 2FA/2SV permanent based on multiple inputs in that thread.
Apple does.
Google doesn't.
Given how confident nospam was in being dead wrong, either
a. nospam was either completely ignorant of what he brazenly claimed,
b. Or, he simply lied (hoping we'd never notice that he lied).
(Pick one.)
> security is very important, and unlike you, both apple and google take
> it very seriously.
Seriously nospam, face it that you have a very low IQ, and just accept it.
a. Yet again you brazenly lied to cover up what you _hate_ about Apple,
b. Or, you simply were oh so confident in what turns out to be dead wrong.
(Pick one.)
>> All I care about is the factual truth.
>
> no you don't. all you care about is lying and trolling.
The way it's obvious you have a very low IQ nospam is that when you're
caught dead wrong, you claim everyone else is lying and trolling.
And yet it was _you_ who claimed Google 2SV/2FA was permanent.
Why?
I don't know why.
I suspect you _hate_ that Apple fucks people with their permanent 2FA.
Nonetheless, you were Dunning Kruger left of the first quartile line.
a. You were so very confident in being so very dead wrong, or,
b. You simply lied, hoping nobody would notice.
(pick one)
You always blame someone else for Apple fucking the customer, nospam.
In this case, you blamed Google - as if Apple has no free will, nospam.
--
I don't care all child-like low-IQ iKooks are uneducated & of low self
esteem; but due to that, they feel the need to fabricate excuses for Apple.
nospam wrote:
>> You claiming that it was Google who made Apple do it doesn't make that true.
>
> i never said any such thing.
We found the truth and you were so confident, but oh so very dead wrong.
*Is 2FA/2SV permanent the instant you set it up for a Google Account?*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/y5qWOLL5R4A>
The answer is nospam was either ignorant, or he lied, as Google does _not_
make 2FA/2SV permanent based on multiple inputs in that thread.
Apple does.
Google doesn't.
Given how confident nospam was in being dead wrong, either
a. nospam was either completely ignorant of what he brazenly claimed,
b. Or, he simply lied (hoping we'd never notice that he lied).
(Pick one.)
> security is very important, and unlike you, both apple and google take
> it very seriously.
Seriously nospam, face it that you have a very low IQ, and just accept it.
a. Yet again you brazenly lied to cover up what you _hate_ about Apple,
b. Or, you simply were oh so confident in what turns out to be dead wrong.
(Pick one.)
>> All I care about is the factual truth.
>
> no you don't. all you care about is lying and trolling.
The way it's obvious you have a very low IQ nospam is that when you're
caught dead wrong, you claim everyone else is lying and trolling.
And yet it was _you_ who claimed Google 2SV/2FA was permanent.
Why?
I don't know why.
I suspect you _hate_ that Apple fucks people with their permanent 2FA.
Nonetheless, you were Dunning Kruger left of the first quartile line.
a. You were so very confident in being so very dead wrong, or,
b. You simply lied, hoping nobody would notice.
(pick one)
You always blame someone else for Apple fucking the customer, nospam.
In this case, you blamed Google - as if Apple has no free will, nospam.
--
I don't care all child-like low-IQ iKooks are uneducated & of low self
esteem; but due to that, they feel the need to fabricate excuses for Apple.
Andy Burnelli
Mar 8, 2022, 6:17:33 PM3/8/22
to
Yet again the low IQ iKooks like nospam brazenly lied to cover up what they
_hate_ about Apple, which, in this case, is permanent 2FA.
The low IQ iKook nospam oh so confidently claimed Google did it to.
And yet, he lied.
*2FA issues*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/V-dguRb5om0>
Why?
You tell me why the low IQ iKooks always lie to cover up Apple's faults.
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/V-dguRb5om0/m/YDhAIM_LBQAJ>
What's interesting is the iKooks don't expect anyone to look up their
claims, which means they're all of rather low IQ and quite uneducated.
_hate_ about Apple, which, in this case, is permanent 2FA.
The low IQ iKook nospam oh so confidently claimed Google did it to.
And yet, he lied.
*2FA issues*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/V-dguRb5om0>
Why?
You tell me why the low IQ iKooks always lie to cover up Apple's faults.
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/V-dguRb5om0/m/YDhAIM_LBQAJ>
What's interesting is the iKooks don't expect anyone to look up their
claims, which means they're all of rather low IQ and quite uneducated.
Hank Rogers
Mar 8, 2022, 6:19:07 PM3/8/22
to
Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Why do the low IQ iKooks like nospam always lie to cover up Apple's
> faults?
>
It would help a lot if you posted some pictures of newer books.
> Why do the low IQ iKooks like nospam always lie to cover up Apple's
> faults?
>
ikooks may be dummies, but they'd appreciate new books.
Hank Rogers
Mar 8, 2022, 7:24:00 PM3/8/22
to
Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Yet again the low IQ iKooks like nospam brazenly lied to cover up
> what they
> _hate_ about Apple, which, in this case, is permanent 2FA.
>
> The low IQ iKook nospam oh so confidently claimed Google did it to.
> And yet, he lied.
>
> *2FA issues*
> <https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/V-dguRb5om0>
>
> Why?
> You tell me why the low IQ iKooks always lie to cover up Apple's
> faults.
> <https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/V-dguRb5om0/m/YDhAIM_LBQAJ>
>
>
> What's interesting is the iKooks don't expect anyone to look up their
> claims, which means they're all of rather low IQ and quite uneducated.
Nope, it just means you're smarter than an iKook.
> Yet again the low IQ iKooks like nospam brazenly lied to cover up
> what they
> _hate_ about Apple, which, in this case, is permanent 2FA.
>
> The low IQ iKook nospam oh so confidently claimed Google did it to.
> And yet, he lied.
>
> *2FA issues*
> <https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/V-dguRb5om0>
>
> Why?
> You tell me why the low IQ iKooks always lie to cover up Apple's
> faults.
> <https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/V-dguRb5om0/m/YDhAIM_LBQAJ>
>
>
> What's interesting is the iKooks don't expect anyone to look up their
> claims, which means they're all of rather low IQ and quite uneducated.
Andy Burnelli
Mar 9, 2022, 9:09:08 PM3/9/22
to
...w♂妤比 wrote:
> Richmond wrote:
>> Andy Burnelli <sp...@nospam.com> writes:
>>
>>> We already know that Apple 2FA is permanent, where the judge in a
>>> lawsuit against Apple said it's your own fault for accepting the
>>> agreement in the first place, so Apple has every right in the world to
>>> make it permanent. *The 2FA permanence was "expressly authorized by
>>> the Plaintiffs* *when they updated the [Apple] software"*
>>>
>>> My only question here isn't about Apple but about Google: Does Google
>>> _also_ make 2FA/2SV permanent?
>>>
>>> i.e., If you accept it, can you _never_ back out (ever!) for any
>>> reason?
>>
>> I've had it switched on since 2014 and there is an option to switch it
>> off in the google account settings. (I am not going to try it though).
>>
>
> Turning on, then off or and susbsequent toggling on/off is functional in
> the Google account.
> - Manage your Google Account/Security/Signing in to Google/2-Step
> Verification
> - Note: To access the option, a prompt to enter password may be
> required. Additionally once enabled(turned on, with SMS text to a phone)
> signing in prompts for entry of a correct password before sending the
> 2SV authorization code to the phone.
> - The device(e.g. pc), when accessing the account via the web may
> provide an option to 'Trust' the device for future access - retention
> for same may be dependent on locally stored browser cookies and possibly
> in addition to Google storing recent activity.
Thanks for having tested this and clearly for having looked it up for us!
The question came up because one of the iKooks rationalized that the reason
Apple doesn't let you turn off 2FA once you turn it on is Google made them.
*As if Apple has no free will.*
That iKook was _insistent_ that Google _also_ did what Apple clearly does.
Q: Can I turn off two-factor authentication after I've turned it on?
A: No. After the trial period, it's permanent (like as in forever).
<https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204915>
The facts show despite the iKook's supreme confidence in being dead wrong,
yet again their _entire_ belief system is based on _zero_ facts.
Why did the iKook nospam claim that Google 2SF/2FA was permanent?
He said it with such confidence too.
Note this is Dunning Kruger first quartile behavior of the iKooks to be both
so wrong, and at the same time in being so confident in being so very wrong.
Like the lemon-juice bank robber was.
--
I don't care that iKooks are child-like with a low-IQ & no education & low
self esteem; but due to that, they're so confident in being so very wrong.
> Richmond wrote:
>> Andy Burnelli <sp...@nospam.com> writes:
>>
>>> We already know that Apple 2FA is permanent, where the judge in a
>>> lawsuit against Apple said it's your own fault for accepting the
>>> agreement in the first place, so Apple has every right in the world to
>>> make it permanent. *The 2FA permanence was "expressly authorized by
>>> the Plaintiffs* *when they updated the [Apple] software"*
>>>
>>> My only question here isn't about Apple but about Google: Does Google
>>> _also_ make 2FA/2SV permanent?
>>>
>>> i.e., If you accept it, can you _never_ back out (ever!) for any
>>> reason?
>>
>> I've had it switched on since 2014 and there is an option to switch it
>> off in the google account settings. (I am not going to try it though).
>>
>
> Turning on, then off or and susbsequent toggling on/off is functional in
> the Google account.
> - Manage your Google Account/Security/Signing in to Google/2-Step
> Verification
> - Note: To access the option, a prompt to enter password may be
> required. Additionally once enabled(turned on, with SMS text to a phone)
> signing in prompts for entry of a correct password before sending the
> 2SV authorization code to the phone.
> - The device(e.g. pc), when accessing the account via the web may
> provide an option to 'Trust' the device for future access - retention
> for same may be dependent on locally stored browser cookies and possibly
> in addition to Google storing recent activity.
Thanks for having tested this and clearly for having looked it up for us!
The question came up because one of the iKooks rationalized that the reason
Apple doesn't let you turn off 2FA once you turn it on is Google made them.
*As if Apple has no free will.*
That iKook was _insistent_ that Google _also_ did what Apple clearly does.
Q: Can I turn off two-factor authentication after I've turned it on?
A: No. After the trial period, it's permanent (like as in forever).
<https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204915>
The facts show despite the iKook's supreme confidence in being dead wrong,
yet again their _entire_ belief system is based on _zero_ facts.
Why did the iKook nospam claim that Google 2SF/2FA was permanent?
I don't know why.
I just know he did.
He said it with such confidence too.
Note this is Dunning Kruger first quartile behavior of the iKooks to be both
so wrong, and at the same time in being so confident in being so very wrong.
Like the lemon-juice bank robber was.
--
I don't care that iKooks are child-like with a low-IQ & no education & low
self esteem; but due to that, they're so confident in being so very wrong.
Andy Burnelli
Mar 10, 2022, 1:23:21 PM3/10/22
to
...winston wrote:
>>Thanks for having tested this and clearly for having looked it up for us!
>
> You're welcome.
>>Thanks for having tested this and clearly for having looked it up for us!
>
I love when people politely and purposefully helpfully _help_ each other!
> - took about 3 minutes to test on/off - not a big issue
Well, I will never (never never never!) use 2FA/2SV, so it would be a "big
issue" for me, just as it would for me to do anything I hate to do.
So I, for one, kindly thank you for testing given it's important that Google
not be like Apple in making a switch like that permanent (as in forever).
> I suspect many will go looking for Google's settings in a mail
> account's settings, instead of the account's higher level settings.
> Thus the reason to clarify where the feature is found.
This is also a kind hearted purposefully helpful PSA which is appreciated.
> 2FA works quite well for my Apple ID
I'm sure it works.
The point is that you can _never_ turn it off once you turn it on.
As the judge said, if you want to turn Apple 2FA off, don't complain to her
because you are the one who "installed the software" (her words, not mine).
For Apple when you accept 2FA, it's permanent.
For Google, it's not.
As an aside, why the iKook nospam insisted that it was is always beyond me
as I've never met people, in the flesh, so confident in being so wrong.
These strange iKooks are no different than the lemon-juice bank robber was.
(It's _why_ they're iKooks after all.)
> For Google, only a GMail email account at this end...and for the purpose and
> use of that email account 2FV on or off isn't a big difference.
> For Desktop, laptop and tablet once trusted and from a non-signed-in
> starting position it's the same sign-in(just username/pw) with 2FV on or
> off.
>
> An iPhone using the Outlook iOs app which meets the upcoming Google
> authorization is also a non issue.
>
> For those that need to wear a tin foil hat to compute or post in this group,
> best they enable 2FV/2FA, if not, just add more foil.
There seem to be only three options after May 30th, 2022:
1. 2FA/2SV
2. OAUth
3. App passwords (which requires at least once using 2FA/2SV)
For me, on Windows, that means Thunderbird (with OAUTH2).
For me, on Android, that means something other than K-9 Mail.
For me, on iOS, Apple already locked me out so 2 of my 3 iPads are dead.
> For all other persons, in the long run - 2FA/2FV could very well be the norm
> and expected access route in the future.
If there was a way to do 2FA/2SV without losing your privacy, I'd not be
against it, as I care more about my privacy than my security.
That makes sense if you look at what the _real_ threat is, and not what the
(rather clever) advertisers _want_ you to think the real threat is.
As a simple but obvious example, Apple has crappy security and crappy
privacy in the iPhone, but they went hog wild playing up their Face-ID
gimmick.
Why?
a. Because people are stupid. They believe in Marketing gimmicks.
b. Or... all people who own iPhones actually do live in the slums.
(Pick one.)
People believe that their face is so unique that it is perfect security.
Fine. But...
The real threat isn't someone grabbing your phone out of your hands.
Apple assumes everyone with an iPhone lives in the Harlem slums, or the
Oakland ghettos, or the Bronx Projects.
Sure, if you live in the projects, of course you would want to secure your
iPhone from someone sneaking up from behind and snatching it out of your
hands.
But I don't live in the slums.
I don't even lock my car or my home front door.
And my driveway gate is often left wide open.
Since I don't live in a ghetto, my threat isn't someone snatching my iPhone
out of my hands despite Apple being _desperate_ to convince me it is.
> Note: 2SV and 2FA are not the same
> More info can be found here. Once understood, it's a reasonable write-up
> <https://rublon.com/blog/2fa-2sv-difference/>
Well, I read the discussion by a bunch of people where it's "practically"
the same but "slightly different" so I simply lumped both together since I'm
not using either one unless they put a gun to my head.
When/if 2SV/2FA is designed in the future to add privacy instead of just
security, then (and only then) will I bother to consider it.
Personally, I think the marketing people have everyone thinking the real
threat is that they live in the slums, which just isn't the case for me.
Andy Burnelli
Mar 22, 2022, 8:08:30 PM3/22/22
to
They did it again this week, where both Alan Baker and Jolly Roger
brazenly fabricated imaginary iOS functionality that doesn't exist.
Who is _that_ stupid to think we wouldn't check?
REFERENCE: Oct 10, 2017, 8:50:05 AM
*It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/PZuec56EWB0>
REFERENCE: Oct 13, 2019, 4:42:03 PM
*What freeware graphical Wi-Fi debugging tools do you use on Android*
*& iOS to graph signal strength for available APs over time?*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/QlDr3oeZExA>
REFERENCE: Feb 27, 2022, 7:40:43 PM
*One reason iOS is crippled compared to Android*
*is there are no iOS graphical Wi-Fi debuggers*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.sys.mac.system/c/ZnkwZkstzlQ>
REFERENCE: Wed, 16 Mar 2022 14:26:22
*Want to check WiFi signal strength over time on your iOS device?*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.sys.mac.system/c/36qAVc7QXpE/m/-sIXvCTgAwAJ>
brazenly fabricated imaginary iOS functionality that doesn't exist.
Who is _that_ stupid to think we wouldn't check?
REFERENCE: Oct 10, 2017, 8:50:05 AM
*It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/PZuec56EWB0>
REFERENCE: Oct 13, 2019, 4:42:03 PM
*What freeware graphical Wi-Fi debugging tools do you use on Android*
*& iOS to graph signal strength for available APs over time?*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/QlDr3oeZExA>
REFERENCE: Feb 27, 2022, 7:40:43 PM
*One reason iOS is crippled compared to Android*
*is there are no iOS graphical Wi-Fi debuggers*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.sys.mac.system/c/ZnkwZkstzlQ>
REFERENCE: Wed, 16 Mar 2022 14:26:22
*Want to check WiFi signal strength over time on your iOS device?*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.sys.mac.system/c/36qAVc7QXpE/m/-sIXvCTgAwAJ>
Andy Burnelli
May 13, 2022, 9:18:56 PM5/13/22
to
nospam wrote:
>> Having a college education in and of itself sets me apart from the iKooks.
>
> whatever you supposedly had was wasted.
I know you nospam, perhaps far better than you know yourself.
What's interesting is decades ago I had heard about the flame wars between
the Apple (usually Mac) aficionados and those on the Windows side, but I
wasn't part of them (as I was usint tin/rn and the like on SunOS/Solaris in
the beginning) until I got my iPads to test out how well they worked with
Linux and asked the child-like Apple newsgroups for guidance & help.
Having been already familiar with the adult OS newsgroups (mostly Linux and
Windows), I had _expected_ the people on the iOS newsgroup to be adults.
To their inestimable credit, some were helpful such as Michele Steiner (who
started m.p.m.i, I think) & David Empson, but wholly unprepossessing
child-like people like you were also here, unfortunately, & you still are.
My first questions were about the iPad all of a sudden no longer working
with Linux simply by an iOS update (lesson learned the very first time),
where I came here to ask for help from those who supposedly know iOS.
The answers that you and the other child-like iKooks provided were always
not only wrong, but purposefully unhelpful (as if you literally _hated_ the
fact that the Apple product offended you when it turned out to be broken).
Rest assured, this attitude that the mother ship can do no wrong is _only_
found on the child-like Apple newsgroups - not Linux or Windows or Android.
Only the Apple newsgroups.
What at first confused me is how wrong people like you always were, where I
couldn't figure out (at first) in any given post if you were just
incredibly stupid or if you were simply a despicable brazen liar, since you
couldn't possibly _believe_ a word you said when people asked for help.
a. You'd deny everything they experienced
b. You'd claim you told them how (and yet, you didn't and you can't)
c. You'd fabricate masses of app functionality that simply doesn't exist
d. You'd tell people they have no right to any functionality they'd expect
etc.
It's when you and Jolly Roger & Lewis _repeatedly & _purposefully_
(sadistically so!) sent numerous innocent people on brutally perverse
doomed-to-fail barbarous wild-goose chases simply because all you iKooks
hated to admit iOS couldn't do something, that I realized you are a truly
disgusting and brutally vicious human being (much like Putin is).
It bothers you not a whit that you don't own a "nice" bone in your body.
All you iKooks are despicable worthless pieces of shit, personality wise.
a. You all _hate_ that Apple products are never what Apple said they were
b. So you brazenly _fabricate_ imaginary functionality that doesn't exist
c. Simply because you can't admit to _yourself_ that iOS is crippled.
And then, much like Putin does, you _repeat_ your brazen fabrications of
functionality that, by then, there's zero chance that you're not lying.
That's when I learned how viciously despicable you iKooks truly are.
The fact that iOS is crippled isn't what makes you all pieces of shit.
It's the fact you will brazenly lie about it because you hate that fact.
You don't give a shit that you sent innocent people on wild goose chases.
That's the clearest indicator of all that you iKooks are pieces of shit.
There's not a single sincere purposefully helpful "nice" bone in your body.
--
Jolly Roger, Lewis, nospam, Joerg Lorenz, Alan Baker, Rod Speed, Snit et al
>> Having a college education in and of itself sets me apart from the iKooks.
>
> whatever you supposedly had was wasted.
I know you nospam, perhaps far better than you know yourself.
What's interesting is decades ago I had heard about the flame wars between
the Apple (usually Mac) aficionados and those on the Windows side, but I
wasn't part of them (as I was usint tin/rn and the like on SunOS/Solaris in
the beginning) until I got my iPads to test out how well they worked with
Linux and asked the child-like Apple newsgroups for guidance & help.
Having been already familiar with the adult OS newsgroups (mostly Linux and
Windows), I had _expected_ the people on the iOS newsgroup to be adults.
To their inestimable credit, some were helpful such as Michele Steiner (who
started m.p.m.i, I think) & David Empson, but wholly unprepossessing
child-like people like you were also here, unfortunately, & you still are.
My first questions were about the iPad all of a sudden no longer working
with Linux simply by an iOS update (lesson learned the very first time),
where I came here to ask for help from those who supposedly know iOS.
The answers that you and the other child-like iKooks provided were always
not only wrong, but purposefully unhelpful (as if you literally _hated_ the
fact that the Apple product offended you when it turned out to be broken).
Rest assured, this attitude that the mother ship can do no wrong is _only_
found on the child-like Apple newsgroups - not Linux or Windows or Android.
Only the Apple newsgroups.
What at first confused me is how wrong people like you always were, where I
couldn't figure out (at first) in any given post if you were just
incredibly stupid or if you were simply a despicable brazen liar, since you
couldn't possibly _believe_ a word you said when people asked for help.
a. You'd deny everything they experienced
b. You'd claim you told them how (and yet, you didn't and you can't)
c. You'd fabricate masses of app functionality that simply doesn't exist
d. You'd tell people they have no right to any functionality they'd expect
etc.
It's when you and Jolly Roger & Lewis _repeatedly & _purposefully_
(sadistically so!) sent numerous innocent people on brutally perverse
doomed-to-fail barbarous wild-goose chases simply because all you iKooks
hated to admit iOS couldn't do something, that I realized you are a truly
disgusting and brutally vicious human being (much like Putin is).
It bothers you not a whit that you don't own a "nice" bone in your body.
All you iKooks are despicable worthless pieces of shit, personality wise.
a. You all _hate_ that Apple products are never what Apple said they were
b. So you brazenly _fabricate_ imaginary functionality that doesn't exist
c. Simply because you can't admit to _yourself_ that iOS is crippled.
And then, much like Putin does, you _repeat_ your brazen fabrications of
functionality that, by then, there's zero chance that you're not lying.
That's when I learned how viciously despicable you iKooks truly are.
The fact that iOS is crippled isn't what makes you all pieces of shit.
It's the fact you will brazenly lie about it because you hate that fact.
You don't give a shit that you sent innocent people on wild goose chases.
That's the clearest indicator of all that you iKooks are pieces of shit.
There's not a single sincere purposefully helpful "nice" bone in your body.
--
Jolly Roger, Lewis, nospam, Joerg Lorenz, Alan Baker, Rod Speed, Snit et al
0 new messages