Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
This is how things really work...
55 views
Skip to first unread message
wiki trix
Jan 27, 2013, 12:41:28 PM1/27/13
to
Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Jan 27, 2013, 11:12:45 PM1/27/13
to
On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> Who would known?
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
> Who would known?
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
Harry K
Jan 27, 2013, 11:29:59 PM1/27/13
to
On Jan 27, 8:12�pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
Ya got that right. Want me to watch or read something ya better tell
me what its about.
Harry K
me what its about.
Harry K
wiki trix
Jan 28, 2013, 6:20:57 AM1/28/13
to
spoiler. YMMV.
Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Jan 28, 2013, 6:35:41 AM1/28/13
to
wiki trix
Jan 28, 2013, 6:36:55 AM1/28/13
to
On Jan 27, 11:12�pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
wiki trix
Jan 28, 2013, 6:50:57 AM1/28/13
to
On Jan 28, 6:35�am, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
contain words, huh?
Not sure what your problem is. If the post title does not look
interesting to you, then don't watch the video link. Duh.
orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> On Monday, 28 January 2013 11:20:57 UTC, wiki trix �wrote:
> > On Jan 27, 11:29 pm, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 27, 8:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> > > orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
>
> > > > > Who would known?
>
> > > > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>
> > > > Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
> > > > little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
> > > > value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>
> > > Ya got that right. Want me to watch or read something ya better tell
> > > me what its about.
>
> > What makes you think I want you to watch it? Some preople prefer no
> > spoiler. YMMV.
>
> This here is a forum of written words. �Use words, huh?
Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words. BTW, the video does
> On Monday, 28 January 2013 11:20:57 UTC, wiki trix �wrote:
> > On Jan 27, 11:29 pm, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 27, 8:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> > > orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
>
> > > > > Who would known?
>
> > > > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>
> > > > Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
> > > > little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
> > > > value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>
> > > Ya got that right. Want me to watch or read something ya better tell
> > > me what its about.
>
> > What makes you think I want you to watch it? Some preople prefer no
> > spoiler. YMMV.
>
> This here is a forum of written words. �Use words, huh?
contain words, huh?
Not sure what your problem is. If the post title does not look
interesting to you, then don't watch the video link. Duh.
wiki trix
Jan 28, 2013, 6:54:08 AM1/28/13
to
left speechless. If you watch it, you can let me know what words you
could come up with to describe it. I could not.
Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Jan 28, 2013, 7:15:48 AM1/28/13
to
(I know you aren't Stephen Hawking, and, don't change your screen name -
we'll still know that it isn't him.)
wiki trix
Jan 28, 2013, 7:29:50 AM1/28/13
to
On Jan 28, 7:15�am, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
link. What Stephen Hawking would have to do with that point is not at
all clear. You seem to have a problem that is far less interesting
than the link I provided.
orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> On Monday, 28 January 2013 11:50:57 UTC, wiki trix �wrote:
> > On Jan 28, 6:35 am, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> > orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> > > This here is a forum of written words. �Use words, huh?
>
> > Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words. BTW, the video does
> > contain words, huh?
> > Not sure what your problem is. If the post title does not look
> > interesting to you, then don't watch the video link. Duh.
>
> If it was posted by Stephen Hawking then I'd be interested.
> (I know you aren't Stephen Hawking, and, don't change your screen name -
> we'll still know that it isn't him.)
Hey Rocket Scientologist... nobody is forcing you to click on any
> On Monday, 28 January 2013 11:50:57 UTC, wiki trix �wrote:
> > On Jan 28, 6:35 am, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> > orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> > > This here is a forum of written words. �Use words, huh?
>
> > Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words. BTW, the video does
> > contain words, huh?
> > Not sure what your problem is. If the post title does not look
> > interesting to you, then don't watch the video link. Duh.
>
> If it was posted by Stephen Hawking then I'd be interested.
> (I know you aren't Stephen Hawking, and, don't change your screen name -
> we'll still know that it isn't him.)
link. What Stephen Hawking would have to do with that point is not at
all clear. You seem to have a problem that is far less interesting
than the link I provided.
Harry K
Jan 28, 2013, 11:04:44 AM1/28/13
to
least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
You are in a formum involved in "information", you don't want us to
know what it is about, you fail at managing to pass on "information"
as noone with any sense will clickon an unknown link.
Harry K
Harry K
Jan 28, 2013, 11:05:23 AM1/28/13
to
Harry K
Harry K
Jan 28, 2013, 11:06:01 AM1/28/13
to
Harry K
chris thompson
Jan 28, 2013, 11:12:36 AM1/28/13
to
your message and hit "RETURN" about 20 times. It's not hard, you know.
Chris
wiki trix
Jan 28, 2013, 11:48:54 AM1/28/13
to
On Jan 28, 11:04�am, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
> On Jan 28, 4:29 am, wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 28, 7:15 am, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
>
> > orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> > > On Monday, 28 January 2013 11:50:57 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> > > > On Jan 28, 6:35 am, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> > > > orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > This here is a forum of written words. Use words, huh?
>
> > > > Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words. BTW, the video does
> > > > contain words, huh?
> > > > Not sure what your problem is. If the post title does not look
> > > > interesting to you, then don't watch the video link. Duh.
>
> > > If it was posted by Stephen Hawking then I'd be interested.
> > > (I know you aren't Stephen Hawking, and, don't change your screen name -
> > > we'll still know that it isn't him.)
>
> > Hey Rocket Scientologist... nobody is forcing you to click on any
> > link. What Stephen Hawking would have to do with that point is not at
> > all clear. You seem to have a problem that is far less interesting
> > than the link I provided.
>
> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
It is youtube, you idiot.
> On Jan 28, 4:29 am, wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 28, 7:15 am, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
>
> > orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> > > On Monday, 28 January 2013 11:50:57 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> > > > On Jan 28, 6:35 am, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> > > > orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > This here is a forum of written words. Use words, huh?
>
> > > > Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words. BTW, the video does
> > > > contain words, huh?
> > > > Not sure what your problem is. If the post title does not look
> > > > interesting to you, then don't watch the video link. Duh.
>
> > > If it was posted by Stephen Hawking then I'd be interested.
> > > (I know you aren't Stephen Hawking, and, don't change your screen name -
> > > we'll still know that it isn't him.)
>
> > Hey Rocket Scientologist... nobody is forcing you to click on any
> > link. What Stephen Hawking would have to do with that point is not at
> > all clear. You seem to have a problem that is far less interesting
> > than the link I provided.
>
> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
wiki trix
Jan 28, 2013, 11:50:41 AM1/28/13
to
On Jan 28, 11:12�am, chris thompson <chris.linthomp...@gmail.com>
This thread is a lot of chatter about nothing. If you do not want to
click on the link, then bloody well do not click on the link.
click on the link, then bloody well do not click on the link.
Mark Isaak
Jan 28, 2013, 11:53:42 AM1/28/13
to
No different from littering, it seems to me.
As for spoilers, they have been found to enhance people's enjoyment of
the story.
--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) curioustaxonomy (dot) net
"It is certain, from experience, that the smallest grain of natural
honesty and benevolence has more effect on men's conduct, than the most
pompous views suggested by theological theories and systems." - D. Hume
wiki trix
Jan 28, 2013, 12:41:30 PM1/28/13
to
On Jan 28, 11:53�am, Mark Isaak <eci...@curioustax.onomy.net> wrote:
> On 1/28/13 3:20 AM, wiki trix wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 27, 11:29 pm, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
> >> On Jan 27, 8:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
>
> >> orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> >>>> Who would known?
>
> >>>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>
> >>> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
> >>> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
> >>> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>
> >> Ya got that right. �Want me to watch or read something ya better tell
> >> me what its about.
>
> > What makes you think I want you to watch it? Some preople prefer no
> > spoiler. YMMV.
>
> Consider the ethics of making posts that you don't want anyone to read.
I never made a post that I don't want anyone to read. I made a post
> On 1/28/13 3:20 AM, wiki trix wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 27, 11:29 pm, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
> >> On Jan 27, 8:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
>
> >> orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> >>>> Who would known?
>
> >>>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>
> >>> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
> >>> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
> >>> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>
> >> Ya got that right. �Want me to watch or read something ya better tell
> >> me what its about.
>
> > What makes you think I want you to watch it? Some preople prefer no
> > spoiler. YMMV.
>
> Consider the ethics of making posts that you don't want anyone to read.
that some adventurous people may want to read, and I want those people
to read it.
> � No different from littering, it seems to me.
What seems to you will not be clear unless you think more clearly.
Bob Casanova
Jan 28, 2013, 1:35:12 PM1/28/13
to
On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:48:54 -0800 (PST), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
<wiki...@gmail.com>:
<snip>
>> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
>> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
>It is youtube, you idiot.
Apparently. So? YouTube, including faked pages, has been a
favored venue for malware delivery in the past...
http://blog.trendmicro.com/trendlabs-security-intelligence/a-new-youtube-malware-tool/
http://www.techradar.com/us/news/mobile-computing/laptops/internet/web/youtube-poses-major-malware-threat-132894
http://www.pcworld.com/article/133232/article.html
http://www.scmagazine.com/scores-of-spoofed-youtube-pages-lead-to-malware/article/172043/
....and I suspect that hasn't changed. But since we've had
this discussion in the past I also suspect you'll again
discount any potential problem.
--
Bob C.
"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
<wiki...@gmail.com>:
<snip>
>> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
>> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
>It is youtube, you idiot.
favored venue for malware delivery in the past...
http://blog.trendmicro.com/trendlabs-security-intelligence/a-new-youtube-malware-tool/
http://www.techradar.com/us/news/mobile-computing/laptops/internet/web/youtube-poses-major-malware-threat-132894
http://www.pcworld.com/article/133232/article.html
http://www.scmagazine.com/scores-of-spoofed-youtube-pages-lead-to-malware/article/172043/
....and I suspect that hasn't changed. But since we've had
this discussion in the past I also suspect you'll again
discount any potential problem.
--
Bob C.
"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
wiki trix
Jan 28, 2013, 2:36:35 PM1/28/13
to
On Jan 28, 1:35�pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:48:54 -0800 (PST), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
> <wikit...@gmail.com>:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:48:54 -0800 (PST), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
>
> >On Jan 28, 11:04�am, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
> >> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
> >It is youtube, you idiot.
>
> Apparently. So? YouTube, including faked pages, has been a
> favored venue for malware delivery in the past...
Then don't use the internet. Look... any link could be a threat. I
> >On Jan 28, 11:04�am, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
> >> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
> >It is youtube, you idiot.
>
> Apparently. So? YouTube, including faked pages, has been a
> favored venue for malware delivery in the past...
provided a link. If you do not want to click on a link, that is your
choice. What do you want me to do about it? Should nobody provide a
link to anything?
Catpain 'Merca
Jan 28, 2013, 3:48:25 PM1/28/13
to
wiki trix <wiki...@gmail.com> wrote in news:a6bc7803-cf5b-4947-9f8d-
a4f157...@qi8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com:
I refuse to follow this link because I refuse to be the odd man out in this
thread.
So I copied the string "EYsH9BXcflU" into my clipboard, checked it for
viruses and trojans and bad programming and then pasted the string into
Google's search textbox. Google came up with 4 results in 0.17 seconds, but
fortunately the first entry in the results from Google appeared to be a
reference to youtube. This happy result saved me hours of delving into the
remaining 3 Google results.
As luck would have it, only last week had I completed my concrete URL Test
Bunker for a similar project. (It's taken a fair bit of sharp sand and
cement, steel rods and most of my backyard, but I think for safe surfing, it
will prove its worth) I placed an old Intel box running a new installation
(no personal information on the system)of Windnose XP with 3 subshells of
virtual XP machines at the heart of the bunker and positioned the screen
behind repeated laminations of hardened glass and plexiglass. Then I
positioned the manipulating robots ready to operate the wireless mouse and
keyboard. I then started up the following virus checking programs:
AhnLab-V3
AntiVir
Antiy-AVL
Avast
Avast5
AVG
BitDefender
CAT-QuickHeal
ClamAV
Commtouch
Comodo
DrWeb
Emsisoft
eSafe
eTrust-Vet
F-Prot
F-Secure
Fortinet
GData
Ikarus
Jiangmin
K7AntiVirus
Kaspersky
McAfee
McAfee-GW-Edition
Microsoft
NOD32
Norman
nProtect
Panda
PCTools
Prevx
Rising
Sophos
SUPERAntiSpyware
Symantec
TheHacker
TrendMicro
TrendMicro-HouseCall
VBA32
VIPRE
ViRobot
VirusBuster
Using the manipulating robots, I bravely fired up my browser, repeated the
Google search and clicked on the youtube link.
Turns out it was a video of a lady who seems more than a little confused
about nuclear physics and cosmology. But then again, who isn't :-)
Catpain Merca
--
.
a4f157...@qi8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com:
I refuse to follow this link because I refuse to be the odd man out in this
thread.
So I copied the string "EYsH9BXcflU" into my clipboard, checked it for
viruses and trojans and bad programming and then pasted the string into
Google's search textbox. Google came up with 4 results in 0.17 seconds, but
fortunately the first entry in the results from Google appeared to be a
reference to youtube. This happy result saved me hours of delving into the
remaining 3 Google results.
As luck would have it, only last week had I completed my concrete URL Test
Bunker for a similar project. (It's taken a fair bit of sharp sand and
cement, steel rods and most of my backyard, but I think for safe surfing, it
will prove its worth) I placed an old Intel box running a new installation
(no personal information on the system)of Windnose XP with 3 subshells of
virtual XP machines at the heart of the bunker and positioned the screen
behind repeated laminations of hardened glass and plexiglass. Then I
positioned the manipulating robots ready to operate the wireless mouse and
keyboard. I then started up the following virus checking programs:
AhnLab-V3
AntiVir
Antiy-AVL
Avast
Avast5
AVG
BitDefender
CAT-QuickHeal
ClamAV
Commtouch
Comodo
DrWeb
Emsisoft
eSafe
eTrust-Vet
F-Prot
F-Secure
Fortinet
GData
Ikarus
Jiangmin
K7AntiVirus
Kaspersky
McAfee
McAfee-GW-Edition
Microsoft
NOD32
Norman
nProtect
Panda
PCTools
Prevx
Rising
Sophos
SUPERAntiSpyware
Symantec
TheHacker
TrendMicro
TrendMicro-HouseCall
VBA32
VIPRE
ViRobot
VirusBuster
Using the manipulating robots, I bravely fired up my browser, repeated the
Google search and clicked on the youtube link.
Turns out it was a video of a lady who seems more than a little confused
about nuclear physics and cosmology. But then again, who isn't :-)
Catpain Merca
--
.
David Canzi
Jan 28, 2013, 3:48:40 PM1/28/13
to
attention?
--
David Canzi | "Rudeness is the weak man's imitation
| of strength." -- Eric Hoffer
wiki trix
Jan 28, 2013, 4:01:02 PM1/28/13
to
On Jan 28, 3:48�pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> wiki trix �<wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Jan 27, 11:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> >orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> >> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> >> > Who would known?
>
> >> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>
> >> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
> >> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
> >> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>
> >I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>
> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
> attention?
Far from it.
>
> >On Jan 27, 11:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> >orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> >> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> >> > Who would known?
>
> >> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>
> >> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
> >> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
> >> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>
> >I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>
> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
> attention?
Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Jan 28, 2013, 4:53:44 PM1/28/13
to
has turned as it has.
I'm familiar with a Usenet poster whose game appears to be to provoke
his opponents - which apparently is everybody - into doing more typing,
and thinking, than he does, which seems to count as winning. The content
matters only as a means to this end. So I ignore him, mostly, as a
reader, but sometimes I make replies that will be of interest to
other people - partly to avoid having them get sucked into the game.
I don't use his scoring system as a measure of success; why would I?
And now there comes to mind a science-fiction fable about a young man
who experienced a spontaneous alteration of his mental processes and
became non-verbal and devoted to instantaneous responses to normal
natural urges; gratification of appetites, fighting apparent
opponents, or fleeing from stronger opponents and other dangers.
And his family went to court to say that if the institution where he
was kept couldn't cure him then he should be placed in their,
the family's care. And in the court he suddenly spoke eloquently,
saying that actually his new state of mind is fine and he just
doesn't need to think or speak in order to be comfortable with
his wants, until right now where he finds he has to take time to
explain this so that things can stay as they are. Which happens.
In turn I think of the fable of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde - whose
obsession with no one's needs other than his own led to his
unfortunate outcome.
And also of the kid that never speaks until age four and suddenly
says "This soup is too hot", and, when asked why he has not spoken
before, he says, "Everything was okay till now."
David Canzi
Jan 28, 2013, 6:06:45 PM1/28/13
to
wiki trix
Jan 28, 2013, 11:19:44 PM1/28/13
to
On Jan 28, 6:06�pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
telemarketing is entirely ludicrous.
> wiki trix �<wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jan 28, 3:48 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> >> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >On Jan 27, 11:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> >> >orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> >> >> > Who would known?
>
> >> >> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>
> >> >> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
> >> >> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
> >> >> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>
> >> >I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>
> >> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
> >> attention?
>
> >Far from it.
>
> Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
Oh please� the link I provided is entirely voluntary. An analogy to
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jan 28, 3:48 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> >> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >On Jan 27, 11:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> >> >orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> >> >> > Who would known?
>
> >> >> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>
> >> >> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
> >> >> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
> >> >> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>
> >> >I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>
> >> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
> >> attention?
>
> >Far from it.
>
> Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
telemarketing is entirely ludicrous.
Harry K
Jan 28, 2013, 11:45:01 PM1/28/13
to
(to use your term)
Harry K
Harry K
Jan 28, 2013, 11:50:30 PM1/28/13
to
On Jan 28, 12:48�pm, "Catpain 'Merca" <catpainme...@gmail.com> wrote:
> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in news:a6bc7803-cf5b-4947-9f8d-
> a4f157180...@qi8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com:
LOL. And the bottom line seems to be a subject of little interest to
anyone except wiki trix.
Harry K
> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in news:a6bc7803-cf5b-4947-9f8d-
> a4f157180...@qi8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com:
anyone except wiki trix.
Harry K
Glenn
Jan 29, 2013, 12:42:29 AM1/29/13
to
"wiki trix" <wiki...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:c39504a8-5be5-41fb...@zw6g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 28, 6:06 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> > wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >On Jan 28, 3:48 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> > >> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >> >On Jan 27, 11:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> > >> >orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> > >> >> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> > >> >> > Who would known?
> >
> > >> >> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
> >
> > >> >> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
> > >> >> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
> > >> >> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
> >
> > >> >I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
> >
> > >> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
> > >> attention?
> >
> > >Far from it.
> >
> > Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
>
> Oh please� the link I provided is entirely voluntary. An analogy to
> > wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >On Jan 28, 3:48 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> > >> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >> >On Jan 27, 11:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> > >> >orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> > >> >> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> > >> >> > Who would known?
> >
> > >> >> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
> >
> > >> >> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
> > >> >> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
> > >> >> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
> >
> > >> >I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
> >
> > >> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
> > >> attention?
> >
> > >Far from it.
> >
> > Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
>
> telemarketing is entirely ludicrous.
>
Meaningless, this is how things really work. Would that you known.
Nashton
Jan 29, 2013, 8:07:37 AM1/29/13
to
the elephant in the room (how life actually started) is never addressed
and if it is, you get the usual "I can't hear you as my fingers are in
my ears."
I am siding with you on this one. The self importance and gassbaggery
oozes from many posters in here, Robert Carnegie included, whom can't
help himself but attempt to appear superior to everyone else by making
it clear that he is a moderator of this ng, as if anyone gives a shit.
>
wiki trix
Jan 29, 2013, 8:13:56 AM1/29/13
to
wiki trix
Jan 29, 2013, 8:15:20 AM1/29/13
to
On Jan 29, 12:42�am, "Glenn" <glennshel...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "wiki trix" <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:c39504a8-5be5-41fb...@zw6g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
> "wiki trix" <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:c39504a8-5be5-41fb...@zw6g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
> > On Jan 28, 6:06 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> > > wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >On Jan 28, 3:48 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> > > >> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> >On Jan 27, 11:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> > > >> >orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> > > >> >> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> > > >> >> > Who would known?
>
> > > >> >> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>
> > > >> >> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
> > > >> >> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
> > > >> >> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>
> > > >> >I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>
> > > >> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
> > > >> attention?
>
> > > >Far from it.
>
> > > Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
>
> > Oh please� the link I provided is entirely voluntary. An analogy to
> > > wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >On Jan 28, 3:48 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> > > >> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> >On Jan 27, 11:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> > > >> >orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> > > >> >> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> > > >> >> > Who would known?
>
> > > >> >> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>
> > > >> >> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
> > > >> >> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
> > > >> >> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>
> > > >> >I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>
> > > >> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
> > > >> attention?
>
> > > >Far from it.
>
> > > Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
>
> > telemarketing is entirely ludicrous.
>
> Meaningless, this is how things really work. Would that you known.
Was that supposed to mean something?
>
> Meaningless, this is how things really work. Would that you known.
Nashton
Jan 29, 2013, 8:14:24 AM1/29/13
to
On 13-01-29 12:19 AM, wiki trix wrote:
literally live on the Usenet, posting thousands upon thousands of posts
every year only to lash out on you because you provided a link to a
Youtube video and then claim that you have wasted their "precious" time.
> On Jan 28, 6:06 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 28, 3:48 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>>>> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Jan 27, 11:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
>>>>> orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
>>>>>>> Who would known?
>>
>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>>
>>>>>> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
>>>>>> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
>>>>>> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>>
>>>>> I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>>
>>>> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
>>>> attention?
>>
>>> Far from it.
>>
>> Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
>
> Oh please� the link I provided is entirely voluntary. An analogy to
> telemarketing is entirely ludicrous.
>
What is really hilarious is the fact that many of these posters
>> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 28, 3:48 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>>>> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Jan 27, 11:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
>>>>> orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
>>>>>>> Who would known?
>>
>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>>
>>>>>> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
>>>>>> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
>>>>>> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>>
>>>>> I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>>
>>>> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
>>>> attention?
>>
>>> Far from it.
>>
>> Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
>
> Oh please� the link I provided is entirely voluntary. An analogy to
> telemarketing is entirely ludicrous.
>
literally live on the Usenet, posting thousands upon thousands of posts
every year only to lash out on you because you provided a link to a
Youtube video and then claim that you have wasted their "precious" time.
Nashton
Jan 29, 2013, 8:20:55 AM1/29/13
to
On 13-01-29 12:50 AM, Harry K wrote:
> On Jan 28, 12:48 pm, "Catpain 'Merca" <catpainme...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in news:a6bc7803-cf5b-4947-9f8d-
>> a4f157180...@qi8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com:
>>
<snip>
> On Jan 28, 12:48 pm, "Catpain 'Merca" <catpainme...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in news:a6bc7803-cf5b-4947-9f8d-
>> a4f157180...@qi8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>
>> Using the manipulating robots, I bravely fired up my browser, repeated the
>> Google search and clicked on the youtube link.
>>
>> Turns out it was a video of a lady who seems more than a little confused
>> about nuclear physics and cosmology. But then again, who isn't :-)
>>
>> Catpain Merca
>> --
>> .
>
> LOL. And the bottom line seems to be a subject of little interest to
> anyone except wiki trix.
>
> Harry K
>
The bottom line is the idiocy in the statement that you somehow imagine
>> Using the manipulating robots, I bravely fired up my browser, repeated the
>> Google search and clicked on the youtube link.
>>
>> Turns out it was a video of a lady who seems more than a little confused
>> about nuclear physics and cosmology. But then again, who isn't :-)
>>
>> Catpain Merca
>> --
>> .
>
> LOL. And the bottom line seems to be a subject of little interest to
> anyone except wiki trix.
>
> Harry K
>
that you can speak for every poster that followed the link.
Legend in your own mind....
Nashton
Jan 29, 2013, 8:22:13 AM1/29/13
to
On 13-01-29 1:42 AM, Glenn wrote:
>
> "wiki trix" <wiki...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:c39504a8-5be5-41fb...@zw6g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>> On Jan 28, 6:06 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>>> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>>>
>>>>> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
>>>>> attention?
>>>
>>>> Far from it.
>>>
>>> Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
>>
>> Oh please� the link I provided is entirely voluntary. An analogy to
>
> "wiki trix" <wiki...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:c39504a8-5be5-41fb...@zw6g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>> On Jan 28, 6:06 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>>> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>>>
>>>>> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
>>>>> attention?
>>>
>>>> Far from it.
>>>
>>> Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
>>
>> telemarketing is entirely ludicrous.
>>
> Meaningless, this is how things really work. Would that you known.
>
I just lost 2 seconds of my time trying to figure out your gibberish.
>>
> Meaningless, this is how things really work. Would that you known.
>
I want them back!
jillery
Jan 29, 2013, 9:05:49 AM1/29/13
to
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 09:22:13 -0400, Nashton <na...@na.ca> wrote:
>On 13-01-29 1:42 AM, Glenn wrote:
>>
>> "wiki trix" <wiki...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:c39504a8-5be5-41fb...@zw6g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Jan 28, 6:06 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>>>> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>>>>>>> I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>>>>
>>>>>> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
>>>>>> attention?
>>>>
>>>>> Far from it.
>>>>
>>>> Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
>>>
>>> Oh please� the link I provided is entirely voluntary. An analogy to
>On 13-01-29 1:42 AM, Glenn wrote:
>>
>> "wiki trix" <wiki...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:c39504a8-5be5-41fb...@zw6g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Jan 28, 6:06 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>>>> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>>>>>>> I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>>>>
>>>>>> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
>>>>>> attention?
>>>>
>>>>> Far from it.
>>>>
>>>> Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
>>>
>>> telemarketing is entirely ludicrous.
>>>
>> Meaningless, this is how things really work. Would that you known.
>>
>
>I just lost 2 seconds of my time trying to figure out your gibberish.
>I want them back!
Go back to the village from whence you came.
>>>
>> Meaningless, this is how things really work. Would that you known.
>>
>
>I just lost 2 seconds of my time trying to figure out your gibberish.
>I want them back!
Harry K
Jan 29, 2013, 10:30:31 AM1/29/13
to
link has been posted..repeatedly. Go look for it and maybe this time
you won't miss it.
Harry K
wiki trix
Jan 29, 2013, 11:44:38 AM1/29/13
to
On Jan 29, 8:14 am, Nashton <n...@na.ca> wrote:
> On 13-01-29 12:19 AM, wiki trix wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 28, 6:06 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> >> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> On Jan 28, 3:48 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> >>>> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Jan 27, 11:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> >>>>> orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> >>>>>>> Who would known?
>
> >>>>>>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>
> >>>>>> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
> >>>>>> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
> >>>>>> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>
> >>>>> I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>
> >>>> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
> >>>> attention?
>
> >>> Far from it.
>
> >> Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
>
> > Oh please the link I provided is entirely voluntary. An analogy to
> On 13-01-29 12:19 AM, wiki trix wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 28, 6:06 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> >> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> On Jan 28, 3:48 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> >>>> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Jan 27, 11:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> >>>>> orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> >>>>>>> Who would known?
>
> >>>>>>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>
> >>>>>> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
> >>>>>> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
> >>>>>> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>
> >>>>> I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>
> >>>> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
> >>>> attention?
>
> >>> Far from it.
>
> >> Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
>
> > telemarketing is entirely ludicrous.
>
> What is really hilarious is the fact that many of these posters
> literally live on the Usenet, posting thousands upon thousands of posts
> every year only to lash out on you because you provided a link to a
> Youtube video and then claim that you have wasted their "precious" time.
Nashton.... I guess I must agree with you here. But I hope it is not
>
> What is really hilarious is the fact that many of these posters
> literally live on the Usenet, posting thousands upon thousands of posts
> every year only to lash out on you because you provided a link to a
> Youtube video and then claim that you have wasted their "precious" time.
habit forming.
wiki trix
Jan 29, 2013, 11:47:27 AM1/29/13
to
for what exactly?
Bob Casanova
Jan 29, 2013, 12:22:41 PM1/29/13
to
On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:36:35 -0800 (PST), the following
Perhaps following his suggestion would be appropriate,
rather than posting a link with zero info?
My comment wasn't about the problem per se, but about your
condescending dismissal of the concerns expressed by Harry
K, a dismissal which implied that his comments were paranoid
and completely without merit, and that he was an idiot to be
concerned in the slightest.
>> ....and I suspect that hasn't changed. But since we've had
>> this discussion in the past I also suspect you'll again
>> discount any potential problem.
....as you did.
appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
<wiki...@gmail.com>:
rather than posting a link with zero info?
My comment wasn't about the problem per se, but about your
condescending dismissal of the concerns expressed by Harry
K, a dismissal which implied that his comments were paranoid
and completely without merit, and that he was an idiot to be
concerned in the slightest.
>> ....and I suspect that hasn't changed. But since we've had
>> this discussion in the past I also suspect you'll again
>> discount any potential problem.
Bob Casanova
Jan 29, 2013, 12:26:03 PM1/29/13
to
On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 20:19:44 -0800 (PST), the following
....as is answering the phone with zero information regarding
the caller.
> An analogy to
>telemarketing is...
....therefore appropriate.
>On Jan 28, 6:06 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Jan 28, 3:48 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>> >> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> >On Jan 27, 11:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
>> >> >orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>> >> >> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
>> >> >> > Who would known?
>>
>> >> >> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>>
>> >> >> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
>> >> >> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
>> >> >> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>>
>> >> >I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>>
>> >> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
>> >> attention?
>>
>> >Far from it.
>>
>> Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
>
>Oh please… the link I provided is entirely voluntary.
>> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Jan 28, 3:48 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>> >> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> >On Jan 27, 11:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
>> >> >orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>> >> >> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
>> >> >> > Who would known?
>>
>> >> >> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>>
>> >> >> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
>> >> >> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
>> >> >> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>>
>> >> >I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>>
>> >> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
>> >> attention?
>>
>> >Far from it.
>>
>> Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
>
....as is answering the phone with zero information regarding
the caller.
> An analogy to
>telemarketing is...
....therefore appropriate.
Bob Casanova
Jan 29, 2013, 12:27:27 PM1/29/13
to
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 09:05:49 -0500, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
But does the village *deserve* the return of their idiot?
in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
wiki trix
Jan 29, 2013, 12:33:32 PM1/29/13
to
On Jan 29, 12:22 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:36:35 -0800 (PST), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
> <wikit...@gmail.com>:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:36:35 -0800 (PST), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
low that you may as well not access the internet if it worries you.
Nobody forced anyone to click on the youtube link. As for me providing
more information about the link, which seems to be the issue we are
addressing here... well that would provide no extra assurance that the
link was any safer than if I had not. What is your point here?
wiki trix
Jan 29, 2013, 12:36:24 PM1/29/13
to
On Jan 29, 12:26 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 20:19:44 -0800 (PST), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
> <wikit...@gmail.com>:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 20:19:44 -0800 (PST), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jan 28, 6:06 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> >> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >On Jan 28, 3:48 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> >> >> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> >On Jan 27, 11:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> >> >> >orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> >> >> >> > Who would known?
>
> >> >> >> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>
> >> >> >> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
> >> >> >> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
> >> >> >> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>
> >> >> >I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>
> >> >> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
> >> >> attention?
>
> >> >Far from it.
>
> >> Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
>
> >Oh please the link I provided is entirely voluntary.
>
> ....as is answering the phone with zero information regarding
> the caller.
>
> > An analogy to
> >telemarketing is...
>
> ....therefore appropriate.
Nope. More like TV stations. You only watch shows that you actully
>
>
>
>
> >On Jan 28, 6:06 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> >> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >On Jan 28, 3:48 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> >> >> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> >On Jan 27, 11:12 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> >> >> >orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 17:41:28 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> >> >> >> > Who would known?
>
> >> >> >> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
>
> >> >> >> Not people who aren't inclined to view Internet videos posted with
> >> >> >> little explanation by folks who aren't reliably respectful of the
> >> >> >> value of other folk's time and attention - that's for sure!
>
> >> >> >I owe you nothing of the sort. Go jump in a lake.
>
> >> >> You don't owe others respect for the value of their time and
> >> >> attention?
>
> >> >Far from it.
>
> >> Great opportunities await you in the telemarketing industry.
>
> >Oh please the link I provided is entirely voluntary.
>
> ....as is answering the phone with zero information regarding
> the caller.
>
> > An analogy to
> >telemarketing is...
>
> ....therefore appropriate.
choose to watch.
wiki trix
Jan 29, 2013, 1:32:51 PM1/29/13
to
On Jan 28, 11:04 am, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
> On Jan 28, 4:29 am, wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 28, 7:15 am, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
>
> > orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> > > On Monday, 28 January 2013 11:50:57 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> > > > On Jan 28, 6:35 am, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
> > > > orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > This here is a forum of written words. Use words, huh?
>
> > > > Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words. BTW, the video does
> > > > contain words, huh?
> > > > Not sure what your problem is. If the post title does not look
> > > > interesting to you, then don't watch the video link. Duh.
>
> > > If it was posted by Stephen Hawking then I'd be interested.
>
> > > > > This here is a forum of written words. Use words, huh?
>
> > > > Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words. BTW, the video does
> > > > contain words, huh?
> > > > Not sure what your problem is. If the post title does not look
> > > > interesting to you, then don't watch the video link. Duh.
>
> > > (I know you aren't Stephen Hawking, and, don't change your screen name -
> > > we'll still know that it isn't him.)
>
> > Hey Rocket Scientologist... nobody is forcing you to click on any
> > link. What Stephen Hawking would have to do with that point is not at
> > all clear. You seem to have a problem that is far less interesting
> > than the link I provided.
>
> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
This is just too stupid. If I was to provide a link that was of some
> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
risk, do you think that telling you something about it would improve
your safety? Like if I was being malicious, I would warn you? Are you
that stupid?
Mitchell Coffey
Jan 29, 2013, 3:38:49 PM1/29/13
to
metaphor. People seem to be irritated by your off-topic posts. I
personally am not, and don't understand why others think it's so bad -
particularly what they aren't irritated by.
Mitchell
Mitchell Coffey
Jan 29, 2013, 3:40:26 PM1/29/13
to
Mitchell
Mitchell Coffey
Jan 29, 2013, 3:41:38 PM1/29/13
to
On 1/29/2013 8:20 AM, Nashton wrote:
times you have claimed to speak for everyone on T.O.
Mitchell Coffey
wiki trix
Jan 29, 2013, 4:23:05 PM1/29/13
to
On Jan 29, 3:38 pm, Mitchell Coffey <mitchelldotcof...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Thanks Mitchell. But actually, the link I gave is not that off topic.
Here it is again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU.
The link shows clearly the sort of thinking that many non-scientific
people suffer from. Creationists and such. This is as much on-topic as
is say, global warming threads. And we see a lot of that here without
complaints.
The problem seems not to be so much with the content of the link or
the off-topic-ness of the link. The problem seems to be that some
people want more background info on a link that I provide. Like that
is an obligation. And some other strange stuff that is somehow related
to misguided ideas on web security issues and such. I still cannot get
my head around how some people can complain about my lack of respect
for the time and attention of others, and then those same people waste
their time and mine with foolish nonsensical debate. Just don't click
on the stupid link for crying out loud.
wrote:
Here it is again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU.
The link shows clearly the sort of thinking that many non-scientific
people suffer from. Creationists and such. This is as much on-topic as
is say, global warming threads. And we see a lot of that here without
complaints.
The problem seems not to be so much with the content of the link or
the off-topic-ness of the link. The problem seems to be that some
people want more background info on a link that I provide. Like that
is an obligation. And some other strange stuff that is somehow related
to misguided ideas on web security issues and such. I still cannot get
my head around how some people can complain about my lack of respect
for the time and attention of others, and then those same people waste
their time and mine with foolish nonsensical debate. Just don't click
on the stupid link for crying out loud.
jillery
Jan 29, 2013, 6:53:45 PM1/29/13
to
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 10:27:27 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
wrote:
If they let him out, yes.
If they pushed him out, hell yes.
wrote:
If they pushed him out, hell yes.
Robert Carnegie
Jan 29, 2013, 8:18:33 PM1/29/13
to
On Tuesday, 29 January 2013 13:07:37 UTC, Nashton wrote:
> I am siding with you on this one. The self importance and gassbaggery
> oozes from many posters in here, Robert Carnegie included, whom can't
> help himself but attempt to appear superior to everyone else by making
> it clear that he is a moderator of this ng, as if anyone gives a shit.
I'm not. I kind of forgot that I had that set up; what it is,
> I am siding with you on this one. The self importance and gassbaggery
> oozes from many posters in here, Robert Carnegie included, whom can't
> help himself but attempt to appear superior to everyone else by making
> it clear that he is a moderator of this ng, as if anyone gives a shit.
is that sometimes the group moderation hasn't worked right with
Google Groups - or at all.
When you post to a moderated newsgroup, your post isn't immediately
put in the group, but is sent by e-mail to an address where it can
be examined and approved or rejected, either automatically or by
hand. In the case of t.o the address is talk-o...@moderators.something
which seems to have gone missing.
When it broke, I found it was convenient to have my posting name
already contain the e-mail address. I don't think that that made
it work, but I could copy the address into a "cc" e-mail duplicate
address while posting, which meant that my post actually got
e-mailed, as required.
And "Fnord" was tried a time or two as a not-very-secret password
to be allowed to post in t.o, or to post for the first time.
But I probably don't need that any more. I'm not sure they'd
work now anyway.
Robert Carnegie
Jan 29, 2013, 8:28:00 PM1/29/13
to
On Tuesday, 29 January 2013 18:32:51 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> This is just too stupid. If I was to provide a link that was of some
> risk, do you think that telling you something about it would improve
> your safety? Like if I was being malicious, I would warn you? Are you
> that stupid?
Malicious links usually come with a vague, somewhat tempting description.
> This is just too stupid. If I was to provide a link that was of some
> risk, do you think that telling you something about it would improve
> your safety? Like if I was being malicious, I would warn you? Are you
> that stupid?
Or alternatively with the appearance of very important news, such as that
Michael Jackson is dead or that someone has /already/ broken into your
bank account. Whereas, instead, it means that someone /wants/ to break
into your bank account.
There's also a category of "spear phishing" where you aim an attack
at a particular group of victims. If I announced here that there's
free beer all February at the Museum of Creationism, that would be
spear phishing. (There isn't free beer!)
If you post a video link with a detailed description of why it may be
of interest to other people, it's more credible that it's valid,
because the vague one is probably /more/ effective, is less effort,
and the carefully crafted one will usually be treated with equal
harshness - I say "usually" because you might be able to persuade
people that it was an unfortunate accident, or even that you
don't know how it happened. Indeed, you probably could keep that
going for quite a while.
wiki trix
Jan 29, 2013, 10:29:42 PM1/29/13
to
On Jan 29, 8:28 pm, Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, 29 January 2013 18:32:51 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> > This is just too stupid. If I was to provide a link that was of some
> > risk, do you think that telling you something about it would improve
> > your safety? Like if I was being malicious, I would warn you? Are you
> > that stupid?
>
> Malicious links usually come with a vague, somewhat tempting description.
I would think that a promise of easy money or perhaps porno would be
> On Tuesday, 29 January 2013 18:32:51 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> > This is just too stupid. If I was to provide a link that was of some
> > risk, do you think that telling you something about it would improve
> > your safety? Like if I was being malicious, I would warn you? Are you
> > that stupid?
>
> Malicious links usually come with a vague, somewhat tempting description.
more on target. Or in this crowd, perhaps a description about how the
video shows Richard Dawkins agreeing with Ted Haggard on some issue. I
would hardly think that my post was tempting enough to spread
malicious code.
> Or alternatively with the appearance of very important news, such as that
> Michael Jackson is dead or that someone has /already/ broken into your
> bank account. Whereas, instead, it means that someone /wants/ to break
> into your bank account.
any way?
> There's also a category of "spear phishing" where you aim an attack
> at a particular group of victims. If I announced here that there's
> free beer all February at the Museum of Creationism, that would be
> spear phishing. (There isn't free beer!)
is on that. But the issue originally raised was about my lack of
description of the video link. I could cook up anything I wanted, true
or untrue. That narrative would not change anything in terms of your
ability to trust that link, or affect the actual level of risk
associated with clicking on that link. I have a hard time accepting
that you are still so stupid on that point. But, again, if you feel
that you cannot trust a link in any post, then do not click on it.
Duh.
> If you post a video link with a detailed description of why it may be
> of interest to other people, it's more credible that it's valid,
a detailed but untrue description of why it may be of interest to
people here. That would not make it more credible or valid. Christ you
are dumb.
> because the vague one is probably /more/ effective, is less effort,
> and the carefully crafted one will usually be treated with equal
> harshness - I say "usually" because you might be able to persuade
> people that it was an unfortunate accident, or even that you
> don't know how it happened. Indeed, you probably could keep that
> going for quite a while.
Nashton
Jan 30, 2013, 6:25:23 AM1/30/13
to
Moreover, I know that your biases and prejudices make it difficult for
you (and the majority of the hoi polloi, scientist wannabees in this ng)
to agree with individuals whom are on the creation side of the fence but
next time, try to put that aside for the sake of objectivity as you did
in this instance.
Burkhard
Jan 30, 2013, 7:01:37 AM1/30/13
to
Greek for "the". If one has to be pretentious, one should at least do
it properly.
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 8:18:54 AM1/30/13
to
you think that I think that you care that I agree with you?
> Moreover, I know that your biases and prejudices make it difficult for
> you (and the majority of the hoi polloi, scientist wannabees in this ng)
> to agree with individuals whom are on the creation side of the fence but
> next time, try to put that aside for the sake of objectivity as you did
> in this instance.
prejudices for the sake of objectivity. That is very good advice for
us all.
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 8:39:15 AM1/30/13
to
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 10:45:59 AM1/30/13
to
On Jan 28, 1:35 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:48:54 -0800 (PST), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
> <wikit...@gmail.com>:
>
> >On Jan 28, 11:04 am, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
> >> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
> >It is youtube, you idiot.
>
> Apparently. So? YouTube, including faked pages, has been a
> favored venue for malware delivery in the past...
>
> http://blog.trendmicro.com/trendlabs-security-intelligence/a-new-yout...http://www.techradar.com/us/news/mobile-computing/laptops/internet/we...http://www.pcworld.com/article/133232/article.htmlhttp://www.scmagazine.com/scores-of-spoofed-youtube-pages-lead-to-mal...
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:48:54 -0800 (PST), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
> <wikit...@gmail.com>:
>
> >On Jan 28, 11:04 am, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
> >> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
> >It is youtube, you idiot.
>
> Apparently. So? YouTube, including faked pages, has been a
> favored venue for malware delivery in the past...
>
Idiot. You do not understand any of the links you provided here. They
are related to fake URLs that look like YouTube pages that trick users
into downloading a tojan horse that pretends to be a required video
codec for viewing YouTube videos. First of all, my link was an actual
YouTube link. Note how its starts off with https://www.youtube.com.
DNS ensures that this goes to YouTube’s web site, rather than some
malicious web site. Secondly, clicking on a malicious link does not
entail the risk that you refer to. Downloading the bogus ActiveX
control from the illegitimate web site is the actual security risk.
Please point out any example of a known security risk that is
associated with any URL that point directly to a YouTube's web site
page. If you cannot do that then shut your idiotic mouth. If you
personally feel that you cannot trust an actual YouTube URL, then you
should not have your computer connected to the Internet. Period. And
the issue of my providing more info on any link as being a security
related issue is just too stupid for words. Now get a brain. Better
yet, just bugger off.
Glenn
Jan 30, 2013, 11:12:39 AM1/30/13
to
"Burkhard" <b.sc...@ed.ac.uk> wrote in message news:a161a886-c70f-42b2...@w7g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
jillery
Jan 30, 2013, 11:30:42 AM1/30/13
to
events:
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1xT2grZpCI>
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 12:18:11 PM1/30/13
to
On Jan 30, 11:12 am, "Glenn" <glennshel...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "Burkhard" <b.scha...@ed.ac.uk> wrote in messagenews:a161a886-c70f-42b2...@w7g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
I think you missed the obvious. Greek is intrinsically pretentious, at
least if you are not Greek.
> "Burkhard" <b.scha...@ed.ac.uk> wrote in messagenews:a161a886-c70f-42b2...@w7g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
least if you are not Greek.
Bob Casanova
Jan 30, 2013, 12:21:13 PM1/30/13
to
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 09:33:32 -0800 (PST), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
<wiki...@gmail.com>:
>A link into youtube is about as safe as a link can get.
Thanks you for that reassurance, which I will discount.
Bob Casanova
Jan 30, 2013, 12:24:40 PM1/30/13
to
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 09:36:24 -0800 (PST), the following
Yep; analyze the logic. Until you click the link or answer
the phone you have zero information regarding the content.
> More like TV stations. You only watch shows that you actully
>choose to watch.
You watch shows without any idea what they're about? You're
an advertiser's dream.
appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
<wiki...@gmail.com>:
the phone you have zero information regarding the content.
> More like TV stations. You only watch shows that you actully
>choose to watch.
an advertiser's dream.
Bob Casanova
Jan 30, 2013, 12:26:18 PM1/30/13
to
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 18:53:45 -0500, the following appeared
Ummm...
Point.
Point.
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 12:32:21 PM1/30/13
to
and Bob Casanova, we are all out to infect your computer today.
"In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner..." - Idiot Harry
K.
"YouTube, including faked pages, has been a favored venue for malware
delivery in the past..." - Moron Bob Casanova
Bob Casanova
Jan 30, 2013, 12:33:50 PM1/30/13
to
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 07:45:59 -0800 (PST), the following
>On Jan 28, 1:35 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:48:54 -0800 (PST), the following
>> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
>> <wikit...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> >On Jan 28, 11:04 am, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> >> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
>> >> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
>> >It is youtube, you idiot.
>>
>> Apparently. So? YouTube, including faked pages, has been a
>> favored venue for malware delivery in the past...
>>
>> http://blog.trendmicro.com/trendlabs-security-intelligence/a-new-yout...http://www.techradar.com/us/news/mobile-computing/laptops/internet/we...http://www.pcworld.com/article/133232/article.htmlhttp://www.scmagazine.com/scores-of-spoofed-youtube-pages-lead-to-mal...
>
>Idiot. You do not understand any of the links you provided here.
Wrong. But no matter.
> They
>are related to fake URLs that look like YouTube pages that trick users
>into downloading a tojan horse that pretends to be a required video
>codec for viewing YouTube videos. First of all, my link was an actual
>YouTube link. Note how its starts off with https://www.youtube.com.
So you're unaware of spoofed URLs, the sort which show up
frequently in email links? I don't know if they're easy (or
even possible) in Usenet newsreaders, but I'm happy for you
to test that for me. Enjoy!
appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
<wiki...@gmail.com>:
>On Jan 28, 1:35 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:48:54 -0800 (PST), the following
>> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
>> <wikit...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> >On Jan 28, 11:04 am, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> >> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
>> >> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
>> >It is youtube, you idiot.
>>
>> Apparently. So? YouTube, including faked pages, has been a
>> favored venue for malware delivery in the past...
>>
>> http://blog.trendmicro.com/trendlabs-security-intelligence/a-new-yout...http://www.techradar.com/us/news/mobile-computing/laptops/internet/we...http://www.pcworld.com/article/133232/article.htmlhttp://www.scmagazine.com/scores-of-spoofed-youtube-pages-lead-to-mal...
>
>Idiot. You do not understand any of the links you provided here.
> They
>are related to fake URLs that look like YouTube pages that trick users
>into downloading a tojan horse that pretends to be a required video
>codec for viewing YouTube videos. First of all, my link was an actual
>YouTube link. Note how its starts off with https://www.youtube.com.
frequently in email links? I don't know if they're easy (or
even possible) in Usenet newsreaders, but I'm happy for you
to test that for me. Enjoy!
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 12:37:40 PM1/30/13
to
On Jan 30, 12:24 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 09:36:24 -0800 (PST), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
> <wikit...@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 09:36:24 -0800 (PST), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
some extent explore things you do not know much about to determine if
it may be of interest. Watch what you want to watch. Click on what you
want to click. Anything other than continue your idiotic posts in this
thread. BTW, I have not watched any TV in almost 15 years.
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 12:42:58 PM1/30/13
to
On Jan 30, 12:21 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 09:33:32 -0800 (PST), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
> <wikit...@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 09:33:32 -0800 (PST), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
YouTube URL to be a high security risk? So you never view any YouTube
link? What about a link to Google? Or Wikipedia? What in your mind
constitutes a safe link? Is any internet activity safe? Do you have
any idea how stupid you are on this issue? And a hypocrite as well,
since you are on the Internet now as you are reading this. Only Dale
comes close to you in the stupidity department here on this news
group.
alextangent
Jan 30, 2013, 1:30:30 PM1/30/13
to
On Jan 30, 3:45 pm, wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 28, 1:35 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:48:54 -0800 (PST), the following
> > appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
> > <wikit...@gmail.com>:
>
> > >On Jan 28, 11:04 am, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
>
> > <snip>
>
> > >> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
> > >> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
> > >It is youtube, you idiot.
>
> > Apparently. So? YouTube, including faked pages, has been a
> > favored venue for malware delivery in the past...
>
> >http://blog.trendmicro.com/trendlabs-security-intelligence/a-new-yout......
> On Jan 28, 1:35 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:48:54 -0800 (PST), the following
> > appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
> > <wikit...@gmail.com>:
>
> > >On Jan 28, 11:04 am, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
>
> > <snip>
>
> > >> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
> > >> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
> > >It is youtube, you idiot.
>
> > Apparently. So? YouTube, including faked pages, has been a
> > favored venue for malware delivery in the past...
>
>
> Idiot. You do not understand any of the links you provided here. They
> are related to fake URLs that look like YouTube pages that trick users
> into downloading a tojan horse that pretends to be a required video
> codec for viewing YouTube videos. First of all, my link was an actual
> YouTube link. Note how its starts off withhttps://www.youtube.com.
The link on Google groups is
> Idiot. You do not understand any of the links you provided here. They
> are related to fake URLs that look like YouTube pages that trick users
> into downloading a tojan horse that pretends to be a required video
> codec for viewing YouTube videos. First of all, my link was an actual
> YouTube link. Note how its starts off withhttps://www.youtube.com.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=https://www.youtube.com&usg=AFQjCNHz1jHS6L7z2fS3tDr6FBuDo1VXrA,
not what you typed.
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 1:34:39 PM1/30/13
to
On Jan 30, 12:33 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 07:45:59 -0800 (PST), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
> <wikit...@gmail.com>:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 07:45:59 -0800 (PST), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jan 28, 1:35 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:48:54 -0800 (PST), the following
> >> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
> >> <wikit...@gmail.com>:
>
> >> >On Jan 28, 11:04 am, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
>
> >> <snip>
>
> >> >> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
> >> >> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
> >> >It is youtube, you idiot.
>
> >> Apparently. So? YouTube, including faked pages, has been a
> >> favored venue for malware delivery in the past...
>
> >>http://blog.trendmicro.com/trendlabs-security-intelligence/a-new-yout......
>
>
>
>
> >On Jan 28, 1:35 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:48:54 -0800 (PST), the following
> >> appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
> >> <wikit...@gmail.com>:
>
> >> >On Jan 28, 11:04 am, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
>
> >> <snip>
>
> >> >> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
> >> >> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
> >> >It is youtube, you idiot.
>
> >> Apparently. So? YouTube, including faked pages, has been a
> >> favored venue for malware delivery in the past...
>
>
> >Idiot. You do not understand any of the links you provided here.
>
> Wrong. But no matter.
>
> > They
> >are related to fake URLs that look like YouTube pages that trick users
> >into downloading a tojan horse that pretends to be a required video
> >codec for viewing YouTube videos. First of all, my link was an actual
> >YouTube link. Note how its starts off withhttps://www.youtube.com.
> >Idiot. You do not understand any of the links you provided here.
>
> Wrong. But no matter.
>
> > They
> >are related to fake URLs that look like YouTube pages that trick users
> >into downloading a tojan horse that pretends to be a required video
> >codec for viewing YouTube videos. First of all, my link was an actual
>
> So you're unaware of spoofed URLs, the sort which show up
> frequently in email links? I don't know if they're easy (or
> even possible) in Usenet newsreaders, but I'm happy for you
> to test that for me. Enjoy!
There are homograph spoofing attacks, where a URL looks like it is
> So you're unaware of spoofed URLs, the sort which show up
> frequently in email links? I don't know if they're easy (or
> even possible) in Usenet newsreaders, but I'm happy for you
> to test that for me. Enjoy!
correct, but a letter is replaced with another that looks similar. O
(oh) versus 0 (zero). More sophisticated attacks may hack into the
distributed DNS system itself, and have large scale routing effects.
But if those are the sort of things you are talking about, then you
are paranoid, and should not be on the Internet at all. Nothing is
100% risk free on the internet. If I somehow got you to go to a fake
website, I would still need to infect your system, like with a bogus
download of some sort. There are also attacks that directly exploit
vulnerability bugs in client code, such as in the browser or a Java
Virtual Machine for a Flash plugin. These can work without you
voluntarily accepting a trojan download. So do not get me wrong. I am
not claiming that there are no risks to clicking on any arbitrary
hyperlink. The reason I think you are an idiot is not that there are
no risks involved. But rather that if you really think that a link is
safer if I give more descriptive details above the link, then you are
a total fool. And the idea that some link that I provide is more risky
than the dozens or hundreds of links that people click on every day in
emails, websites, and newsgroups. If you are really that frightened of
the link that I provided, then here is a thought: DO NOT CLICK ON IT.
Do you understand that instruction? And to be consistent, DO NOT CLICK
ON ANY LINK OR VISIT ANY WEBSITE IN ANY BROWSER. IN fact, do us both a
favor and stay totally off the internet, just to be really really safe.
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 1:36:58 PM1/30/13
to
On Jan 30, 1:30 pm, alextangent <b...@rivadpm.com> wrote:
> On Jan 30, 3:45 pm, wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 28, 1:35 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>
> > > On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:48:54 -0800 (PST), the following
> > > appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
> > > <wikit...@gmail.com>:
>
> > > >On Jan 28, 11:04 am, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
>
> > > <snip>
>
> > > >> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
> > > >> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
> > > >It is youtube, you idiot.
>
> > > Apparently. So? YouTube, including faked pages, has been a
> > > favored venue for malware delivery in the past...
>
> > >http://blog.trendmicro.com/trendlabs-security-intelligence/a-new-yout......
>
> > Idiot. You do not understand any of the links you provided here. They
> > are related to fake URLs that look like YouTube pages that trick users
> > into downloading a tojan horse that pretends to be a required video
> > codec for viewing YouTube videos. First of all, my link was an actual
> > YouTube link. Note how its starts off withhttps://www.youtube.com.
>
> The link on Google groups ishttp://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=https://www.youtube.com&usg=AFQjCNHz...,
> On Jan 30, 3:45 pm, wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 28, 1:35 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>
> > > On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:48:54 -0800 (PST), the following
> > > appeared in talk.origins, posted by wiki trix
> > > <wikit...@gmail.com>:
>
> > > >On Jan 28, 11:04 am, Harry K <turn...@q.com> wrote:
>
> > > <snip>
>
> > > >> In this cyberworld where viruses lurk in any corner, I will know at
> > > >> least somethingabout what link is before I test it.
> > > >It is youtube, you idiot.
>
> > > Apparently. So? YouTube, including faked pages, has been a
> > > favored venue for malware delivery in the past...
>
> > >http://blog.trendmicro.com/trendlabs-security-intelligence/a-new-yout......
>
> > Idiot. You do not understand any of the links you provided here. They
> > are related to fake URLs that look like YouTube pages that trick users
> > into downloading a tojan horse that pretends to be a required video
> > codec for viewing YouTube videos. First of all, my link was an actual
> > YouTube link. Note how its starts off withhttps://www.youtube.com.
>
> not what you typed.
Not what you provided either. truncated in both instances... Look up
thread for the actual links if you need them.
Glenn
Jan 30, 2013, 1:43:17 PM1/30/13
to
"wiki trix" <wiki...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:38bd2cdc-9511-42cd...@pp8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
Robert Carnegie
Jan 30, 2013, 1:52:47 PM1/30/13
to
On Wednesday, 30 January 2013 03:29:42 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
> On Jan 29, 8:28 pm, Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, 29 January 2013 18:32:51 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
>
> > > This is just too stupid. If I was to provide a link that was of some
> > > risk, do you think that telling you something about it would improve
> > > your safety? Like if I was being malicious, I would warn you? Are you
> > > that stupid?
> >
> > Malicious links usually come with a vague, somewhat tempting description.
>
> I would think that a promise of easy money or perhaps porno would be
> more on target.
I don't think so. Most people know that easy money is a con -
> On Jan 29, 8:28 pm, Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, 29 January 2013 18:32:51 UTC, wiki trix wrote:
>
> > > This is just too stupid. If I was to provide a link that was of some
> > > risk, do you think that telling you something about it would improve
> > > your safety? Like if I was being malicious, I would warn you? Are you
> > > that stupid?
> >
> > Malicious links usually come with a vague, somewhat tempting description.
>
> I would think that a promise of easy money or perhaps porno would be
> more on target.
and that they can get as much pornography as they want online
for nothing; at least if they aren't too fussy. Then again -
there are those solicitations from India that offer to let
you see people /kissing/.
Anyway, vague works - I suppose because it doesn't set off
most people's alarms, yet. Although it did set off mine.
> Or in this crowd, perhaps a description about how the
> video shows Richard Dawkins agreeing with Ted Haggard on some issue.
> I would hardly think that my post was tempting enough to spread
> malicious code.
If you posted that with a nasty link in a /thousand/ newsgroups -
which is how it's done - then you'd catch some victims.
> But the issue originally raised was about my lack of
> description of the video link. I could cook up anything I wanted, true
> or untrue. That narrative would not change anything in terms of your
> ability to trust that link, or affect the actual level of risk
> associated with clicking on that link. I have a hard time accepting
> that you are still so stupid on that point. But, again, if you feel
> that you cannot trust a link in any post, then do not click on it.
>
> Duh.
>
> > If you post a video link with a detailed description of why it may be
> > of interest to other people, it's more credible that it's valid,
>
> The you are an idiot. If I was trying to do harm, I would have provide
> a detailed but untrue description of why it may be of interest to
> people here. That would not make it more credible or valid.
be more effort, and would be specific to this group, not something that
you could use elsewhere. If you make the effort to engage the interest
of a particular audience, it quite strongly suggests that you're sincere.
There is one other trick, of course - to duplicate an existing post
from a while ago, or to follow-up to someone's post, maybe copying
their identity too, and add a malicious hyperlink. And that has a
similar effect, without making the effort to engage the audience
yourself.
Burkhard
Jan 30, 2013, 1:55:50 PM1/30/13
to
On 30 Jan, 16:12, "Glenn" <glennshel...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "Burkhard" <b.scha...@ed.ac.uk> wrote in messagenews:a161a886-c70f-42b2...@w7g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
Eh? Using a Greek term unnecessarily is pretentious. If you then do it
wrongly (like including the "the") shows that in addition to( trying
to be) being pretentious, you don't have a clue.
> "Burkhard" <b.scha...@ed.ac.uk> wrote in messagenews:a161a886-c70f-42b2...@w7g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
wrongly (like including the "the") shows that in addition to( trying
to be) being pretentious, you don't have a clue.
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 2:01:39 PM1/30/13
to
On Jan 30, 1:43 pm, "Glenn" <glennshel...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "wiki trix" <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:38bd2cdc-9511-42cd...@pp8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
Perhaps sllightly. But I like pretentious. Especially if it comes with
good info.
> "wiki trix" <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:38bd2cdc-9511-42cd...@pp8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
good info.
alextangent
Jan 30, 2013, 2:07:07 PM1/30/13
to
website, regardless of what you type.
You typed and Google groups shows as text this: (I've modified the
https:\\ so it appears as a literal string)
https:??www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU
Google links it as
http:??www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=https://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv
%3DEYsH9BXcflU&usg=AFQjCNFgD4pzqIib0_233zRIZ0JAKarjlQ
The link is a redirect, and the string watch?v=EYsH9BXcflU has been
escaped.
alextangent
Jan 30, 2013, 2:09:26 PM1/30/13
to
imbed a redirect...
Nashton
Jan 30, 2013, 2:10:22 PM1/30/13
to
Plato differentiates between the "aristoi" and "hoi polloi."
(ἆριστοι---οί πολλοί)
There is no such thing as the majority of the hoi polloi.
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 2:08:23 PM1/30/13
to
Pretentious and wrong is shameful. We all do it now and then. But it
is shameful.
Glenn
Jan 30, 2013, 3:07:12 PM1/30/13
to
"Burkhard" <b.sc...@ed.ac.uk> wrote in message news:1ffc7913-3d4b-4cf6...@l9g2000yqp.googlegroups.com...
Glenn
Jan 30, 2013, 3:10:17 PM1/30/13
to
"wiki trix" <wiki...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:313625dc-39d2-4a6f...@px4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 3:34:55 PM1/30/13
to
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 3:36:38 PM1/30/13
to
On Jan 30, 3:10 pm, "Glenn" <glennshel...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "wiki trix" <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:313625dc-39d2-4a6f...@px4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
Then it would be pretentious to claim that it is pretentious to accuse
someone of being pretentious. I guess it is pretentions all the way
down.
> "wiki trix" <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:313625dc-39d2-4a6f...@px4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
someone of being pretentious. I guess it is pretentions all the way
down.
Glenn
Jan 30, 2013, 3:50:46 PM1/30/13
to
"wiki trix" <wiki...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:8c8cc0f8-f499-4b0d...@s8g2000pbw.googlegroups.com...
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 4:02:25 PM1/30/13
to
On Jan 30, 3:50 pm, "Glenn" <glennshel...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "wiki trix" <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:8c8cc0f8-f499-4b0d...@s8g2000pbw.googlegroups.com...
"Pretention" is an archaic spelling of "pretension". Hoi Polloi is
archaic too. I guess you are right about that then.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pretention
> "wiki trix" <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:8c8cc0f8-f499-4b0d...@s8g2000pbw.googlegroups.com...
archaic too. I guess you are right about that then.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pretention
Glenn
Jan 30, 2013, 4:09:53 PM1/30/13
to
"wiki trix" <wiki...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:b6567441-1fca-469d...@r10g2000pbd.googlegroups.com...
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 4:19:23 PM1/30/13
to
On Jan 30, 4:09 pm, "Glenn" <glennshel...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "wiki trix" <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:b6567441-1fca-469d...@r10g2000pbd.googlegroups.com...
Time to call it a day Glenn.
> "wiki trix" <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:b6567441-1fca-469d...@r10g2000pbd.googlegroups.com...
Glenn
Jan 30, 2013, 4:24:08 PM1/30/13
to
"wiki trix" <wiki...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ee469ac2-fd12-44a1...@po6g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 4:31:26 PM1/30/13
to
On Jan 30, 4:24 pm, "Glenn" <glennshel...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "wiki trix" <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:ee469ac2-fd12-44a1...@po6g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
I think we all predicted that one. Now go to bed.
> "wiki trix" <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:ee469ac2-fd12-44a1...@po6g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
Nashton
Jan 30, 2013, 4:39:03 PM1/30/13
to
On 01-30-13 1:26 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 18:53:45 -0500, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>
>> On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 10:27:27 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>>>>>
>>>>> I just lost 2 seconds of my time trying to figure out your gibberish.
>>>>> I want them back!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Go back to the village from whence you came.
>>>
>>> But does the village *deserve* the return of their idiot?
>>
>>
>> If they let him out, yes.
>> If they pushed him out, hell yes.
>
> Ummm...
>
> Point.
>
I am honored that you think of me in those terms.
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 18:53:45 -0500, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>
>> On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 10:27:27 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>>>>>
>>>>> I just lost 2 seconds of my time trying to figure out your gibberish.
>>>>> I want them back!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Go back to the village from whence you came.
>>>
>>> But does the village *deserve* the return of their idiot?
>>
>>
>> If they let him out, yes.
>> If they pushed him out, hell yes.
>
> Ummm...
>
> Point.
>
I am honored that you think of me in those terms.
Nashton
Jan 30, 2013, 4:40:59 PM1/30/13
to
On 01-29-13 1:27 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 09:05:49 -0500, the following appeared
>> On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 09:22:13 -0400, Nashton <na...@na.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> On 13-01-29 1:42 AM, Glenn wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "wiki trix" <wiki...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:c39504a8-5be5-41fb...@zw6g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
as if I care.
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 09:05:49 -0500, the following appeared
>> On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 09:22:13 -0400, Nashton <na...@na.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> On 13-01-29 1:42 AM, Glenn wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "wiki trix" <wiki...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:c39504a8-5be5-41fb...@zw6g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> On Jan 28, 6:06 pm, "David Canzi" <dmca...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>>>>>> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>> Meaningless, this is how things really work. Would that you known.
>>>>>> wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I just lost 2 seconds of my time trying to figure out your gibberish.
>>> I want them back!
>>
>>
>> Go back to the village from whence you came.
>
> But does the village *deserve* the return of their idiot?
>
"Jillery" proving that he (she?) is only capable of hit and run insults
>>>
>>> I just lost 2 seconds of my time trying to figure out your gibberish.
>>> I want them back!
>>
>>
>> Go back to the village from whence you came.
>
> But does the village *deserve* the return of their idiot?
>
as if I care.
jillery
Jan 30, 2013, 4:59:56 PM1/30/13
to
when you have toilet paper stuck on your shoes.
Glenn
Jan 30, 2013, 5:11:32 PM1/30/13
to
"wiki trix" <wiki...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:25115f86-8593-4d4e...@d8g2000pbm.googlegroups.com...
jillery
Jan 30, 2013, 5:27:00 PM1/30/13
to
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 5:48:47 PM1/30/13
to
On Jan 30, 5:11 pm, "Glenn" <glennshel...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "wiki trix" <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:25115f86-8593-4d4e...@d8g2000pbm.googlegroups.com...
I said now.
> "wiki trix" <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:25115f86-8593-4d4e...@d8g2000pbm.googlegroups.com...
Glenn
Jan 30, 2013, 6:13:00 PM1/30/13
to
"wiki trix" <wiki...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:da927c75-d61c-4db4...@i7g2000pbf.googlegroups.com...
Mitchell Coffey
Jan 30, 2013, 6:58:52 PM1/30/13
to
Mitchell
Glenn
Jan 30, 2013, 7:24:24 PM1/30/13
to
"Mitchell Coffey" <mitchell...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:kecc3c$jbn$2...@dont-email.me...
wiki trix
Jan 30, 2013, 8:51:17 PM1/30/13
to
On Jan 30, 6:13�pm, "Glenn" <glennshel...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "wiki trix" <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:da927c75-d61c-4db4...@i7g2000pbf.googlegroups.com...
No more internet for you young man,
> "wiki trix" <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:da927c75-d61c-4db4...@i7g2000pbf.googlegroups.com...
Glenn
Jan 30, 2013, 9:05:02 PM1/30/13
to
"wiki trix" <wiki...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:89415c5b-7d11-49a3...@d8g2000pbm.googlegroups.com...
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages