An interesting twist on WGA

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kerry Brown
  • Start date Start date
well it doesn't take a genius to figure out who wrote the program.
Probably the same people who cracked XPs activation code.
So Microsoft responds with WGA, the only problem I have
is that WGA continues to check and comes up as a download.
When I click on download update nothing happens. I hope I
don't get the malware.
 
I have no idea what you mean by this. The spyware referenced in the link has
nothing to do with WGA other than it uses the name to try and fool people
into thinking it's a legitimate service. I thought it was an interesting bit
of social engineering. You won't get the malware by downloading Windows
updates.
 
Today, with great enthusiasm and quite emphatically, Kerry Brown
laid this on an unsuspecting readership ...
I have no idea what you mean by this. The spyware referenced
in the link has nothing to do with WGA other than it uses the
name to try and fool people into thinking it's a legitimate
service. I thought it was an interesting bit of social
engineering. You won't get the malware by downloading Windows
updates.
Click to expand...
Exactly how do you know that, Kerry? ANY software can have malware
in it, certainly from the most hated, most vulnerable developer on
the planet. I'm not saying that there is malware in anything from M
$, but I wouldn't be nearly as quick as you are to defend them
without a shred of proof which, by definition, is impossible to
gather, as one cannot prove a negative hypothesis by searching for
examples.
 
All said:
Today, with great enthusiasm and quite emphatically, Kerry Brown
laid this on an unsuspecting readership ...

Exactly how do you know that, Kerry? ANY software can have malware
in it, certainly from the most hated, most vulnerable developer on
the planet. I'm not saying that there is malware in anything from M
$, but I wouldn't be nearly as quick as you are to defend them
without a shred of proof which, by definition, is impossible to
gather, as one cannot prove a negative hypothesis by searching for
examples.
Click to expand...

Adobe once distributed a virus. Apple distributed a virus.

It is unthinkable that Microsoft would allow such to happen. Their QC
departments are on the job.
 
Today, with great enthusiasm and quite emphatically, HeyBub laid
this on an unsuspecting readership ...
Adobe once distributed a virus. Apple distributed a virus.

It is unthinkable that Microsoft would allow such to happen.
Their QC departments are on the job.
Click to expand...
Good one! Just this week, somebody reported a failure of screen
savers to fail to actuate when using an M$ wireless mouse. I'd
guess the guy who says he only hires the best and the brightest
must have thousands in his QC department, there's hundreds of
thousands of beta testers, and easy ones still slip by, except I
doubt they really slip by, I more think Bill just doesn't want to
take the time to release a fix and risk one of his (in)famous
side-effect bugs.

I doubt that the class-action suits against M$ for WGA will
prevail, but I'd sure like to see it, as well as somebody,
somehow forcing them to abandon their "check for authenticity"
bullshit activatin scheme. And then there's Vista which reported
won't run at all if your Internet connection drops ...
 
You're right it is possible, unlikely but possible. It's extremely unlikely
that you would get that particular malware through Windows updates.
 
Today, with great enthusiasm and quite emphatically, Kerry Brown
laid this on an unsuspecting readership ...
You're right it is possible, unlikely but possible. It's
extremely unlikely that you would get that particular malware
through Windows updates.
Click to expand...
Then, Kerry, why not be more credible and tone down the M$ shill
rhetoric, especially when you don't have any better idea than
anyone else if malware does or does not come via CUs?

New strains of malware to the tune of hundreds, probably thousands
per month are foisted upon an unsuspecting world, most targeted
specifically for Windoze. There are even documented cases of
developers releasing malware on their paying customers via their
install CDs, so I'm still curious how you can be so sure that none
have ever left the hallowed halls of the Wonks of Redmond.
 
Today, with great enthusiasm and quite emphatically, NoStop laid
this on an unsuspecting readership ...
By putting out an "operating system" that is so prone and open
to such attacks.
Click to expand...
Problem is, M$ sows, and the paying customers reap, as in "reap the
whirlwind". And we get crap like WGA to help us stay honest, right?

I suppose it does take resources away from more useful pursuits to
have to have so many wonks assigned to just fixing the
vulnerabilities that are known, but no O/S that is a world-leader
is immune to attack, especially when so many people have such an
abiding hatred for Bill the Gates so that they take special delight
in seeing him "sown".
 
All said:
Today, with great enthusiasm and quite emphatically, Kerry Brown
laid this on an unsuspecting readership ...

Then, Kerry, why not be more credible and tone down the M$ shill
rhetoric, especially when you don't have any better idea than
anyone else if malware does or does not come via CUs?

New strains of malware to the tune of hundreds, probably thousands
per month are foisted upon an unsuspecting world, most targeted
specifically for Windoze. There are even documented cases of
developers releasing malware on their paying customers via their
install CDs, so I'm still curious how you can be so sure that none
have ever left the hallowed halls of the Wonks of Redmond.
Click to expand...

We obviously disagree so I'll change the topic. What is your sig about? I
used to have a 2.2 litre Daytona that was approaching 300 hp. It was a
beast. I think we probably agree that Mopar rocks.
 
Today, with great enthusiasm and quite emphatically, Kerry Brown
laid this on an unsuspecting readership ...
We obviously disagree so I'll change the topic. What is your
sig about? I used to have a 2.2 litre Daytona that was
approaching 300 hp. It was a beast. I think we probably agree
that Mopar rocks.
Click to expand...

My sig or my E-mail? Assuming you mean E-mail, my daily driver is
a 2006 Dodge Charger 5.7L 340 HP HEMI R/T. It is indeed a blast
to drive. I would love to own a 425 HP 6.1L SRT8 but cannot get a
Chrysler employee discount on any SRT8 car so the price
differential is pretty steep.

What makes today's HEMI cars so different from the 440 Six Packs
and 426 Street Hemi engines of the halcyon days of the late 1960s
is the degree of refinement in the car. These cars come with 4
levels of suspension tuning, depending on model and are equipped
with both electronic stability control and all-speed traction
control. Handling and braking are superb for a large sedan.
Straight-line performance is also quite good. The 5.7L HEMI has
been tested in car rags at 0-60 in less than 6 seconds while the
SRT8 can get below 5 seconds and a standing 1320 in about 13 at
around 110, both dead stock. And, the 5.7L has MDS (Multiple
Displacement System) which electronically shuts down 4 of the 8
cylinders whenever the engine computer detects that power isn't
needed, so the cars have excellent (for a performance sedan) CAFE
numbers of 17/25.

BTW, I had 5 Dodge Daytonas in the 1980s, one a 2.2L intercooled
Turbo II, but none even approached 200 hp, much less 300. How'd
you do that? Today's SRT-4 2.4L turbo 4's can get there, the new
Dodge Caliber SRT-4 will be rated 330 HP, but I've never heard of
a 2.2L being able to stretch that far.

For their day, a 2.2L turbo 5-speed was an awesome performer, but
it had zero guts until the turbo spooled up, requiring some fancy
heel-and-toe to raise the revs whilst slipping the clutch a
little to put a load on the engine so the turbo boost would come
one, then floor it and pop the clutch when the light turned
green. Problem was, and still is today for any small turbo-
charged engine, too much gas/boost and all that happened was
clouds of blue tire smoke, while not enough boost and you bogged
at launch.
 
All said:
Today, with great enthusiasm and quite emphatically, Kerry Brown
laid this on an unsuspecting readership ...


My sig or my E-mail? Assuming you mean E-mail, my daily driver is
a 2006 Dodge Charger 5.7L 340 HP HEMI R/T. It is indeed a blast
to drive. I would love to own a 425 HP 6.1L SRT8 but cannot get a
Chrysler employee discount on any SRT8 car so the price
differential is pretty steep.

What makes today's HEMI cars so different from the 440 Six Packs
and 426 Street Hemi engines of the halcyon days of the late 1960s
is the degree of refinement in the car. These cars come with 4
levels of suspension tuning, depending on model and are equipped
with both electronic stability control and all-speed traction
control. Handling and braking are superb for a large sedan.
Straight-line performance is also quite good. The 5.7L HEMI has
been tested in car rags at 0-60 in less than 6 seconds while the
SRT8 can get below 5 seconds and a standing 1320 in about 13 at
around 110, both dead stock. And, the 5.7L has MDS (Multiple
Displacement System) which electronically shuts down 4 of the 8
cylinders whenever the engine computer detects that power isn't
needed, so the cars have excellent (for a performance sedan) CAFE
numbers of 17/25.

BTW, I had 5 Dodge Daytonas in the 1980s, one a 2.2L intercooled
Turbo II, but none even approached 200 hp, much less 300. How'd
you do that? Today's SRT-4 2.4L turbo 4's can get there, the new
Dodge Caliber SRT-4 will be rated 330 HP, but I've never heard of
a 2.2L being able to stretch that far.

For their day, a 2.2L turbo 5-speed was an awesome performer, but
it had zero guts until the turbo spooled up, requiring some fancy
heel-and-toe to raise the revs whilst slipping the clutch a
little to put a load on the engine so the turbo boost would come
one, then floor it and pop the clutch when the light turned
green. Problem was, and still is today for any small turbo-
charged engine, too much gas/boost and all that happened was
clouds of blue tire smoke, while not enough boost and you bogged
at launch.
Click to expand...

Of course, you fail to mention that in a car is the most dangerous place
in the world to be if it's moving (and sometimes when it's not moving),
more dangerous than Baghdad.

Personally, I haven't owned a car since 1990 and haven't missed it one bit.

Alias
 
Today, with great enthusiasm and quite emphatically, Alias laid
this on an unsuspecting readership ...
Of course, you fail to mention that in a car is the most
dangerous place in the world to be if it's moving (and
sometimes when it's not moving), more dangerous than Baghdad.
Click to expand...

what the **** are you talking about?
Personally, I haven't owned a car since 1990 and haven't
missed it one bit.
Click to expand...

how do you get where you're going, ride a bicycle? whatta maroon!
 
For their day, a 2.2L turbo 5-speed was an awesome performer, but
it had zero guts until the turbo spooled up, requiring some fancy
heel-and-toe to raise the revs whilst slipping the clutch a
little to put a load on the engine so the turbo boost would come
one, then floor it and pop the clutch when the light turned
green. Problem was, and still is today for any small turbo-
charged engine, too much gas/boost and all that happened was
clouds of blue tire smoke, while not enough boost and you bogged
at launch.
Click to expand...

A re-programmed computer, lot's of boost, race gas (110 octane), and yes
traction was a problem. For daily driving it was down around 200 hp.
 
Alias is fitted with a propeller and a big rubber band which his
wife winds up each morning after she points him towards work.

Doug W.
-
 
Today, with great enthusiasm and quite emphatically, Kerry Brown
laid this on an unsuspecting readership ...
A re-programmed computer, lot's of boost, race gas (110
octane), and yes traction was a problem. For daily driving it
was down around 200 hp.
Click to expand...
The 2.2L was a very strong engine, by luck more than design, but
you're lucky it lived. I suppose by controlling the boost except
during your banzai starts helped. Production engines had a fuel
cut-off built into the primative engine computers of the day, which
I would occasionally trip when racing my Turbo II. Needless to say,
no fuel = I lost the race!

Daytonas were reasonably well-behaved wrt torque steer but no FWD
car is truly suited for high-performance driving, nor were the
tires limited by the K-Car wheel wells up to the task.
 
Back
Top