If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Tracy Barber wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 13:31:30 -0700, Grandpa jsdebooATcomcast.net wrote: Tracy Barber wrote: On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:24:15 -0700, Grandpa jsdebooATcomcast.net wrote: Didier Cuidet wrote: snip I think that someone knowing your address has his computer infected by a worm or a virus that copied his address book, and use random names in it to send copies of it all around the world. Thats why I use Netscape. Its not foolproof but the hackers LOVE Micro$oft products and rarely fiddle with NS, or Mozilla if you prefer. Hopefully, you're using one of the 4.xx versions, unless you have a speed demon / RAM hog of a PC that can load / paly NutScrape 6.x or 7.x - they just hog your PC. I used 4.78 until I was unable to load a number of different web sites so I went to 7.1. Works like a champ and pics load fine, Java stuff etc, all the new crud that 4.x can't. I've a 2.53GHz w/512mb RAM and a high speed cable modem connection thru Comcast so pages load really fast. Aha! So he does have a speed demon machine. Good. Try NutScrape on a 1 GHz PC with 128 RAM. Most of the world has this or less. It'll puke, gag and sputter until it loads 5 minutes later. In this instance, IE makes mincemeat outta NutScrape. I run only a paltry 400 Mhz K6-2 with 128 meg of RAM on RoadRunner, but I've got the sucker optimized enough for speedy delivery. I don't use NutScrape, is all. I use IE, Free Agent and OutLook. Why? NutScrape tries to do it all and it doesn't look / feel right to me. I'm used to the other ones. At one point, I used "NetScape" until they bloated it. Unfortunately, I can't go out and buy a new PC every time they ahve a new revision. --- :^) I will have a decent PC as soon as I set it up! (Lazy, boy, lazy...) OK, we can now be returned to our regularly scheduled spam, blackball and other sordid and sundry topics. :^) I'm using Mozilla on a PC with 128 MB of RAM running at 785 MHz. Runs just fine. Version 7 of Netscape is based on the Mozilla code, I don't know what they added to it to make it run soooo slowly. = Eric |
Ads |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Tracy Barber wrote:
Thats because Mickey$oft makes illegal calls in the background to its own apps, calls that they do not allow their 'partners' to make so it retains pieces of code others cannot thuis seeming like its a screamer. Illegal calls? Sounds like they have a right to make any calls to their own software that that want to. That sounds just like sour grapes in your response. Because you can't do it makes them a monster. Heh... Yeah, right. No sour grapes here, I like overall Micro$oft products and use them. I'm simply saying that they claim you cannot do 'this' or 'that' because of potential crashes, security issues and problems, yet they do it themselves with IE for example only because it'll seem like it loads faster than a competitors app when in fact thats a lie. But business is business and MS apps work for me. Riddle me this, Grandpa - do you REALLY think MS will reveal all to the hackers? Heh! You aren't that old to know the answer to that one. :^) If you think the hacks are something now, just wait until they come through approved methods! They don't have to, the hackers are smart enough to get the necessary code to hack, either that or they are patient enough to keep pounding on the wall until they find a way in. BTW, did you know Bill Gates grew up here in Albuquerque? |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 21:59:37 -0700, Grandpa jsdebooATcomcast.net
wrote: Tracy Barber wrote: Thats because Mickey$oft makes illegal calls in the background to its own apps, calls that they do not allow their 'partners' to make so it retains pieces of code others cannot thuis seeming like its a screamer. Illegal calls? Sounds like they have a right to make any calls to their own software that that want to. That sounds just like sour grapes in your response. Because you can't do it makes them a monster. Heh... Yeah, right. No sour grapes here, I like overall Micro$oft products and use them. I'm simply saying that they claim you cannot do 'this' or 'that' because of potential crashes, security issues and problems, yet they do it themselves with IE for example only because it'll seem like it loads faster than a competitors app when in fact thats a lie. But business is business and MS apps work for me. Riddle me this, Grandpa - do you REALLY think MS will reveal all to the hackers? Heh! You aren't that old to know the answer to that one. :^) If you think the hacks are something now, just wait until they come through approved methods! They don't have to, the hackers are smart enough to get the necessary code to hack, either that or they are patient enough to keep pounding on the wall until they find a way in. BTW, did you know Bill Gates grew up here in Albuquerque? No - are you searching for buried secrets? :^) Hey, you have a good night. I'm outta here. I have some MS Access code to write tomorrow and don't want the hackers to be able to get past my front end, so... :^) Tracy Barber |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 19:51:26 -0800, Eric Bustad
wrote: Tracy Barber wrote: On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 13:31:30 -0700, Grandpa jsdebooATcomcast.net wrote: Tracy Barber wrote: On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:24:15 -0700, Grandpa jsdebooATcomcast.net wrote: Didier Cuidet wrote: snip I think that someone knowing your address has his computer infected by a worm or a virus that copied his address book, and use random names in it to send copies of it all around the world. Thats why I use Netscape. Its not foolproof but the hackers LOVE Micro$oft products and rarely fiddle with NS, or Mozilla if you prefer. Hopefully, you're using one of the 4.xx versions, unless you have a speed demon / RAM hog of a PC that can load / paly NutScrape 6.x or 7.x - they just hog your PC. I used 4.78 until I was unable to load a number of different web sites so I went to 7.1. Works like a champ and pics load fine, Java stuff etc, all the new crud that 4.x can't. I've a 2.53GHz w/512mb RAM and a high speed cable modem connection thru Comcast so pages load really fast. Aha! So he does have a speed demon machine. Good. Try NutScrape on a 1 GHz PC with 128 RAM. Most of the world has this or less. It'll puke, gag and sputter until it loads 5 minutes later. In this instance, IE makes mincemeat outta NutScrape. I run only a paltry 400 Mhz K6-2 with 128 meg of RAM on RoadRunner, but I've got the sucker optimized enough for speedy delivery. I don't use NutScrape, is all. I use IE, Free Agent and OutLook. Why? NutScrape tries to do it all and it doesn't look / feel right to me. I'm used to the other ones. At one point, I used "NetScape" until they bloated it. Unfortunately, I can't go out and buy a new PC every time they ahve a new revision. --- :^) I will have a decent PC as soon as I set it up! (Lazy, boy, lazy...) OK, we can now be returned to our regularly scheduled spam, blackball and other sordid and sundry topics. :^) I'm using Mozilla on a PC with 128 MB of RAM running at 785 MHz. Runs just fine. Version 7 of Netscape is based on the Mozilla code, I don't know what they added to it to make it run soooo slowly. I dunno either, other than even on a 2 GHz PC, it still takes a good amount of time to do things. honestly, I think they changed the SW used to write the code and it bloated out on them. This happens when new technology is ported in. I remember DOS database apps that would run rings around 'doZe comparable apps. But - the overhead is apparent in 'doZe as opposed to DOS. I don't have the full story, so I can't comment on it... Tracy Barber |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
"Bob Ingraham" wrote in message ... 1/11/2004 8:31 AM Douglas Myall wrote: "Victor Manta" wrote in message ... "Mette" wrote in message ... Grandpa and Dakota, None of you are the culprits, and neither are those who have contacted me at my yahoo-address. snip To find the offender it is not enough to yell out on Usenet "stop spamming me!". I had to go other ways, and one of them was to provoke people to contact me on my Yahoo-address to narrow down the offender. I did well. So many people, both from this group and others that I read, have contacted me, so by simple exclusion methods I can now concentrate my search among very few people. In a few more days I will know for sure who that "friend" was, and he/she can be sure to be killfiled for eternity, both on my Usenet-account and my private accounts. snip Thank you, Dakota and Grandpa, and everybody else for your patience :-) -- Ann Mette Heindorff (Mette) "Tom, I have just answered your email in private but it bounced back. Anyhow, I know it's not you Buddy :-) Mette" Three of RCSD participants (Tom, Dakota, Grandpa) aren't on the black list anymore. The work progresses, slowly but efficiently. BTW, the abuse game isn't still over, because other 30 or more permanents here still have to somehow prove that they aren't the "culprits". Maybe a better place for us would be a Danish Guaxxxxxmo. Some suggestions for a proper place, because I'm not familiar with Denmark's geography? :-) Nevertheless we stay patient, isn't it? Victor Manta I don't think Victor needs to keep stirring this pot and his references to a prison camp are over the top. I am content for Mette to do whatever is necessary to identify the person who is plaguing her. Even although she felt it necessary (desirable?) to inform this NG of her problem I do not see how that means that 30 or more NG members are under any obligation to `prove' (Victor's word) their innocence. Douglas I think the problem is that Damark is a cold and loneley place this time of year and some people need to get attention any way they can. ENOUGH ALREADY! Mette Heindorff has a long and respectable history as a supportive and generous member of this newsgroup. She's trying to deal with something that she perceives as a problem, and hardly needs the petty criticisms that some people in the newsgroup seem all too willing to pass out. Check the mote in your own eye, Doug. Her country's name is "Denmark," by the way, not "Damark." Bob, you have completely misread my post. I was defending Mette as she has herself recognised in a private posting. Nor am I the originator of the `Damark' post. Douglas |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
what ever it is it is a waste of effort.... bandwidth is used in amateur
radio as well... space width, it all means the same thing.... just use yer delete button... kk "J. A. Mc." wrote in message ... On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 03:59:06 -0800, "kevin" found these unused words floating about: what a waste of bandspace.... kk What's "bandspace" ... anything like selvedge? For that you take a pair of scissors and snip. On the internet ... it's bandwidth. Your friend, Kirk Splatt. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.560 / Virus Database: 352 - Release Date: 08/01/2004 |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Not bothering to read the enormous thread this generated, except for a few
messagfes, I'll pass this on (FWIW). If someone here abused your private e-mail address, changing it and announcing the new one hardly serves to stop the abuser, does it? If the purpose was to plant an e-mail address on the group (and I suppose different e-mail addresses are given to other groups/persons) to catch someone here, nothing much is achieved. After all, what will you do if you can prove someone here abused your email address? How will you divide and conquer the whole? Better to just anounce to those that matter via e-mail your new address and carry on. Life's too short and there are too many pleasant things to do than give the abuser the pleasure of seeing you go to such measures and spend so much time and energy on this matter. As for the thread about people proving their innocence, I'll say this. The burden of proof is _always_ on the accuser. Innocence is presumed _always_. No-one should ever feel they have to prove they didn't do something. And such an inversion of the usual prcoess is wholly inappropriate for a small group like this. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
"Grandpa" jsdebooATcomcast.net wrote in message
... Alan wrote: snip Not to mention the apostrophe in the correction ... What does apostrophe "mean" ? Don't know about an apostrophy but I know what a Catastrophy is - an award for the cat with the nicest buns! Moving right along......... A lousy joke (grin) but a perfect example to others of a good snip. Pity others haven't learned the art of the judicious snip. |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 15:21:05 GMT, "Peter D" [email protected] wrote:
"Grandpa" jsdebooATcomcast.net wrote in message ... Alan wrote: snip Not to mention the apostrophe in the correction ... What does apostrophe "mean" ? Don't know about an apostrophy but I know what a Catastrophy is - an award for the cat with the nicest buns! Moving right along......... A lousy joke (grin) but a perfect example to others of a good snip. Pity others haven't learned the art of the judicious snip. Does cut and paste count? Tracy Barber |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
21st Century E-Business Money Making Formula | NeoTycoon | Coins | 1 | January 18th 05 06:09 PM |
FRAUD ALERT-DESERTBOB using fake email address | trippin28track | 8 Track Tapes | 9 | October 13th 04 06:05 PM |
eBay "spoof" email messages - BEWARE! | PJZ | Coins | 4 | September 1st 03 07:24 PM |