quote:

ORIGINAL: Karmastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: lizi

Hey there OP,
I'm going to go off topic here, not that it would be unusual on any of the threads you seem to frequent lately, and just talk about behavior. In at least two other thread besides this one people keep having to stop and talk about behavior and attitudes with you instead of the thread. I assure you, this isn't really the norm around here. At the risk of having you paint me as yet another troll, I'd like to point out that when multiple people seem to be having trouble with same person, you, there might be a correlation there. You know the old saying that if you keep having issues with people, then maybe it might be yourself? It sure seems odd to me that so many people lately have been accused of, or are accusing you of, not listening or misinterpreting. Something to think about...

Don't take my word for it, check out some old threads. Sure there are the occasional heated debates, but I have never seen anyone point the finger at others so many time as you do and vice versa. Troll seems to be a word you like using, but perhaps 'that word does not mean what you think it means' (props to anyone who gets the PB reference). Anyway, not to add fuel to the fires around here lately, but it seemed time to mention the fact that they keep cropping up around you. That is meant to be a moment for reflection, not an attack.

yes thanks, all taken in good spirit. i think the cause is certainly not a one way street. red magic's post alluding to how i shouldn't have replied to him without being addressed by him helps sum it up. while i respect coming into a community and following their norms, i don't handle internet mob rule well (not that you're one of the mob, you're not). and I'm picky about using words, and don't like being mischaracterized, and will call people on it.

but yeah, i get that if 100 sailors say it's so, it's prob so. but again, i'm not worried about mob rule, anymore than the people who come here for some BDSM solidarity worry about what vanillas think.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MissImmortalPain

Man, really, it's all good. I'm not here to defend or argue with anyone. I don't know Red and I don't know you either so it's all just talk. I do have to say though that I did say it was very nice of you to make this tread to try and help people. I thought you would understand that meant something did "resonate" with me. And as far as my posts go....I'll just go ahead and say it...If you ever read something I typed and think I'm angry, I'm more than likely laughing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: angelikaJ
My gentle suggestion is that to remember that sometimes when you are new and don't yet know the lay of the land you can easily perceive threat when there is none intended.

I think there is much that you can contribute and you are certainly welcome:


But sometimes mis-communications and misunderstandings can easily be blown up into very unpleasant affairs.
Try not to automatically make assumptions that will result in your feeling wronged or will create unhappiness.

The 2 of you were much closer in your thinking than you thought and a few more neutral questions and less defensiveness would have quickly revealed that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Karmastic
you said you were "disturbed" that i was "providing incorrect security advice" to your real life friends, when in fact, you agreed with what i was saying.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TNDommeK

Tor is fun for trolling.

Just saying.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RedMagic1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Karmastic
you said you were "disturbed" that i was "providing incorrect security advice" to your real life friends, when in fact, you agreed with what i was saying.

I had no issue with your OP. I knew points in it were off, but it was a fine way to start a discussion. There are, however, two things you said that were dangerously incorrect, as follows.

1. "u don't understand the no-script add-on. it already prevents cross-requests as well by default." (from your post 28)

NoScript does not protect against all such attacks, Cross-site request forgeries (CSRF attacks) being perhaps the most prominent example. (RequestPolicy adds this layer of protection.) So your statement is objectively false. It moves from just being false to being dangerous, because it is better to surf knowing one is unprotected, than it is to surf believing one is protected from something when one, in reality, is not. Since you were advocating a dangerous position, I asked you to stop.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RedMagic1
2. Your belief in the extreme importance of installing antivirus software (from your OP and numerous comments throughout the thread)

While this was indeed the conventional wisdom until about 2005, at this point, just having antivirus software is like bringing a knife to a gunfight. It's not "wrong" to install, but it's not a priority either. In fact, if I could only install one of an antivirus, or Secunia, I would probably install Secunia. I will indulge myself in one technical sentence (and angelikaJ please consider sharing this with your master, as he might be interested): as of 2011, far and away the most prominent attack vector is zerodays on current and outdated forms of Java. In layman's terms, this more or less means that the bad guys have stopped writing viruses, and are now directly attacking programs already installed on your computer, to take them over (like Agent Smith in the Matrix), because the antivirus program won't notice if a trusted program is attacking you.

This has gotten so bad that the prominent firm F-Secure advised its clients earlier this year to uninstall Java completely from their systems.

Position 2 of yours is dangerous for exactly the same reason as your Position 1 is dangerous: you are encouraging people to believe they will be protected if they do X, when the truth is that they won't.

quote:

You should point out that it is not recommened to run Firefox and Explorer tandum as it can cause issues with things not working and can cause older computers to crash.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Karmastic
i never said it protects against all attacks, never even implied it.

quote:


u don't understand the no-script add-on. it already prevents cross-requests as well by default. u actually can traverse through layers if u want, and progressively accept each layer of cross-scripting requests.

quote:


i think you dismissing two of my suggestions (without explaining as you've done now), to people who replied directly to me, was passive aggressive, and invited my replies.

quote:


ooh, u reminded me of another good FF add-on - fergit actual name, but something like no cross references. stops/spoofs pages from seeing where u came from.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MissImmortalPain

Actually in many cases running more than one anti vi or malware checker can cause them to not work. I still wouldn't use spybot if you paid me to do it

quote:

ORIGINAL: MissImmortalPain

hahaha Actually, Kali, I run them in tandum often. But both companys suggest people don't do it.

quote:

They really suggest people don't do it if they are running any windows below xp.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Ah. It appears that there's a specific piece of malware called 'Spybot' (rather than 'Spybot Search and Destroy').