On 2008-04-04, William Poaster <wp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> claimed:
> Sinister Midget wrote:
>
>> On 2008-04-04, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> claimed:
>>> ____/ Sinister Midget on Friday 04 April 2008 07:19 : \____
>>>
>>>> On 2008-04-01, The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> claimed:
>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ezekiel
>>>>><a@xxxxx>
>>>>> wrote
>>>>> on Tue, 1 Apr 2008 15:58:17 -0400
>>>>><47f28860$0$25985$88260bb3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>>>
>>>>>> No. He said *WOULD* have worked.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
> http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9074102
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ""Shane's [Macauley] exploit ***WOULD*** have worked on Linux. He could
>>>>>> have knocked it over. But [the contestants] get a lot more mileage out of
>>>>>> attacks on the Mac or Windows," she continued."
>>>>>
>>>>> There you are. "Linux is both insecure and not often used"
>>>>> is the implication here.
>>>>>
>>>>> +2 points for Ezekiel, -1 for Jim Richardson for not
>>>>> noticing this obvious trap. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> (To be fair, the flaw was in Adobe's Flash player.
>>>>> However, that makes it not Microsoft's problem, but Linux's
>>>>> fault, according to the standard logic around here.)
>>>>>
>>>>> I concur with you, however; the exploit would have easily
>>>>> worked, allowing a hacker to gain user-level access.
>>>>
>>>> And /you/ fell for that trap.
>>>>
>>>> Who is quoting whom? If you read the entire paragraaph it shows that
>>>> being a quote of a person named Forslof. Forslof isn't the author of
>>>> the exploit. I know what the article says about her, but not knowing
>>>> her credentials I can't be sure she's expressing more than an opinion.
>>>> The title whe isn't a surety that she knows what she's pretending to
>>>> know in this instance.
>>>>
>>>> In any event, the person who exploited Winders, Shane Macaulay, did
>>>> *not* utter the words of certainty, as Erik's tap-dance is supposed to
>>>> have us believe. Instead, he's hearing
>>>>
>>>> HIS MASTER'S VOICE
>>>> ()._
>>>> _.--. (##)_`-. "LINUX WOULD BE EXPLOITED BY THE
>>>> / . ``u (##), ` `. SAME BUG"
>>>> \__) _/ (##),--. \
>>>> | --' ()' \ \ "WE SOLD MORE COPIES OF VISTA
>>>> / | | | THAN THERE ARE PEOPLE ON EARTH"
>>>> ,' \ _,' /
>>>> ,' | ,;--// "WINDOWS IS CHEAPER THAN LINUX"
>>>> / ___\ |/ ___V__{(_
>>>> | ' \| || ,'-===- `,'| "SECURITY IS BINARY"
>>>> __| ,' /| || |""""""""|-L|
>>>> ,`__. < _)))_))) |________|,'
>>>> gnv (,' ool
>>>
>>> Microsoft views us all as dogs? I thought Bill Gates said we were
>>> spidermonkeys (or have, on average, the brain capacity of one). Oh, wait...
>>>
>>> "We will never make a 32-bit operating system."
>>>
>>> -- Bill Gates, At the launch of MSX
>>
>> The dog is a good joke. But what it references might be a bit too old
>> and/or foreign for many viewers.
>>
>> In the olden days (up to the 70s or 80s) the logo for RCA was a white
>> dog (might have been a dalmatian instead of pure white) sitting in
>> front of a gramophone with an ear cocked. The words "His Master's
>> Voice" accompanied it. It adorned every record in those days.
>
> Nipper first appeared in an 1898 oil painting called His Master's Voice.
> His Master's Voice was originally launched as a record label which then
> opened an Oxford Street (London) store.
>
> History:
> http://www.erikoest.dk/nipper.htm
>
> Grommit as HMV logo:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6516235.stm
>
> This is the modern HMV logo:
> http://uk.gizmodo.com/hmv%20logo.jpg
There you go. Erik's logo has history.
>> I thought that was an appropriate thing to tie to Erik under most
>> circumstances.
>
> LOL.
I'm on the lookout for a good ascii weasel, too.
--
Behind a successful man is a woman who made it necessary.
|
|
