On 10/18/2015 08:52 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
Maybe it is easier to see white cars day or night. One of my BIL
(wife's side) always buys/drives white cars. Once I heard from a
painter, matching white or ivory black is most difficult.

My current car is arrest me red. Not my favorite color but when I bought
it Japan was undergoing a little nuclear meltdown so I took what was on
the lot.

My least favorite is that gray that was popular. Fog, or even the mist
kicked up on the road when it's raining makes them banish entirely.

| Have you ever read the descriptions for the updates windows
| pushes? Ever notice how many claim to be to fix a "security
| vulnerability"?
|
| This is the polite way of saying the developer screwed up and
| didn't anticipate someone MISUSING the code he wrote. How
| does someone misuse code? Ans: they present it with "inputs"
| that have been crafted to exploit unexpected patterns in
| that data. I.e., violating basic ASSUMPTIONS that the developer
| made -- inappropriately.
|

That's an interesting point. If you look into the
details of those fixes you'll find, in the vast majority
of cases, that it's like your PDF, MP3 and MP4 issues:
The actual hack involves javascript. Microsoft doesn't
generally focus on that because they're a big
corporation trying to "monetize" the Web. They don't
want people disabling javascript. They even play
down ActiveX. IE always depended on ActiveX. MS
just couldn't afford to write the truth: "Warning!
New IE attack! You should disable ActiveX because
ActiveX is dangerous. It was a big mistake. Sorry."

Instead they have a section, way down the page,
titled "workarounds", in which they beat around the bush.

The javascript issue is like the elephant in the room.
It's obvious to anyone who takes a look. It's common
sense that executable code in webpages can never
go along with security. But nobody wants to hear
that. The website owners want "rich content" and
trackability. The visitors want convenience.

You've brought out a lot of interesting points in this
discussion with your devil's advocate style of discussion,
but I think that at some point that misses the point.
You're making a big deal out of the rare exception.
Javascript is by far the biggest problem. Maybe 90%.
Almost all the rest is things like Java, or maybe an
occasional MS Office attack that doesn't need script.
The data is online. Cisco put out a report awhile back,
for instance. Anyone can read it for themselves:

http://www.cisco.com/web/offers/pdfs/cisco-msr-2015.pdf

0-day browser hacks, used by everyone from the NSA
to Russian criminals, are also mainly javascript issues.
Typically it's javascript running in an iframe. Cross site
scripting.

Script, script and more script. To keep focusing on
the .5% that's not script related, and that is highly
unlikely in the first place, is to skew the facts. (The
VLC player vulnerability is good to know about, but
it's very unlikely to ever be a risk. It's unlikely to ever
even be exploited, because VLC isn't widely distributed.
Even if it were exploited, I don't use it online. (Likewise,
I would never install a PDF browser plugin.) And there's
also context: Exploiting VLC would require that I
download a video from a dubious source.

What makes Adobe's stuff so bad is threefold:

1) Adobe has a bad habit of jacking up functionality
with javascript at the cost of security.

2) Adobe has a long history of trying to create a
proprietary Web by force-installing their plugins.
(Acrobat Reader installs the PDF browser plugin,
with Adobe pretending that PDF is a webpage
format.)

3) Adobe has been very successful at flooding the market
in attempts to make their products ubiquitous. Acrobat
Reader is nearly universally installed because they've been
giving it away like grocery store coupons since the 90s.
Flash is also nearly universal.

Those three things have resulted in the vast majority
of people having Flash and Acrobat Reader *and* with
both running in the browser. That's an important distinction.
Their ubiquity, their use of script, and the fact they run
in the browser, all combine to make them the most
common attack targets.

*Not using the most popular brand is one of the best
security measures because it's not a good strategy
for hackers to target software with a limited market.*

| I've never heard of any vulnerability in HTML.
|
| Thirty seconds with google: CVE-2014-6332
|

Another 30 seconds turns up this:

"This vulnerability can be exploited using a specially-crafted web page
utilizing VBscript in Internet Explorer."

https://www.us-cert.gov/ncas/alerts/TA14-318B

It's an IE-specific bug, requiring script. It has nothing
to do with HTML. (No one should *ever* use IE online
in the first place. It's too closely linked into Windows.)

This is what I mean about your devil's advocate
approach. You're trying to find any tiny exception to
the rule. A tiny exception does not negate the rule.
And what you're finding are not even exceptions.
By trying to carry out a good debate you're obscuring
the one critical point: The single best thing you can
do, by far, is to disable javascript. No other security
measure, even using anti-virus software, comes close
to the protection afforded by disabling script.

| Does anyone know if Microsoft will be offering a paid version of Win10
that doesn't spy on us?
|
| Enterprise version.
|

Not exactly. I don't know whether they still sell the
so-called Enterprise version as a retail disk or not.
They may. Either way, the only version exempt from
forced updates is the corporate install under a Software
Assurance license. In other words, if you want to
be exempt from the "consumer EULA" you need to
contract with Microsoft. For that you need to be
making a very big order. Even then, it's not clear
how much spying can be stopped. You'd need to
ask some corporate IT people who've had time to
look into it. The only thing I've heard for certain is
that the corporate contract allows IT people to
block automatic updates.

Roger Blake wrote:
On 2015-10-19, Tony Hwang wrote:
Both you and the TV set is antique, dinosaurs, LOL!
I am guessing I am as old as you are.

Always tough to tell in this medium. I've found most of the smartphone
crowd tend to be youngsters but there are always exceptions.

I always carry phone for emergencies for like sudden heart attack.
Always in my pocket wherever I go, fishing, walking the dog, strolling
in the park. In winter I could slip and take a fall, for things like that.

On 10/19/2015 7:04 AM, rbowman wrote:
On 10/18/2015 08:37 PM, Don Y wrote:
The *worst* is someone who fishes around for a checkbook...
then starts hunting for a pen...
then thumbs through *carbons* of previous checks to find check #7125...
then starts writing out the check...
then discovers that the ink cartridge is "retracted"...
then discovering that the pen is *dead*...
then hunting for scrap paper to "scribble on" to "reprime" the pen...
then asking the cashier for a pen...
then asking who the check should be paid to...
then...

and, EVENTUALLY, getting *****y* that someone waiting makes a comment about
how SLOW they are!

That really burns my butt at Costco. You sign the check and the cashier runs it
through the machine that prints the rest but you always have half blind, half
senile Aunt Millie trying to fill it out for herself.

Or, someone who has decided they've "spent too much" (?) and then
starts an amusing game with the cashier -- trying to figure out
which items they can "leave behind" to adjust their total
downward to something with which they are more comfortable.

Of course, they can't do mental arithmetic (else wouldn't have
got themselves in this bind -- *addition* being much easier
for most than subtraction) so, they can't just ask the
cashier how much a particular item (i.e., candidate to be
"left behind") costs but must actually have the cashier
elide it from the current total, recite the *new*/adjusted price
at which time they will select other items to "process",
similarly. Along the way, deciding to add some items BACK INTO
their purchases as others have brought the total down to
a point where they can now "afford" these.

(sigh)

And, we won't get into the ones who blissfully drag a cart FULL of
items into the "10 items or less" lane. Then, when challenged,
start with a justification along the lines of "I'm 84 years old..."
as if their age entitles them to some special treatment. I am
sorely tempted to jump in with "OhMiGosh! Then, why are you
*here*?? You'll probably DROP DEAD any second now! Wouldn't
you want to do that in the comfort of your own HOME? Surrounded
by all your CATS???!"

["god", if I live that long, PLEASE don't let me become one of these
olde fartes!]

On 10/19/2015 11:37 AM, Tony Hwang wrote:

I always carry phone for emergencies for like sudden heart attack.
Always in my pocket wherever I go, fishing, walking the dog, strolling
in the park. In winter I could slip and take a fall, for things like that.


I've taken to carry cell phone, for much
same reasons. Gives me a good chance of
being able to call for help. For me, or
for others.

Well, where there is cell service....

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On 10/19/2015 10:08 AM, rbowman wrote:
On 10/18/2015 08:46 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
Hey, I am up here in Canuck land. I never carry coins of any kind.
I don't want holes in my pants pockets. Smart phone and CC is all I need.

That works until it doesn't. Around here it isn't hard to find stores
that don't do plastic and cell reception gets spotty outside of town and
the interstates.



My bank was offering a bonus if you made X number of charges less than
$10 on your debit card in one month. The idea was to get you in the
habit of using them for everything as they get a percentage.

I rarely use plastic for anything less than $100. Sometimes you can get
a better deal with cash too!

On 10/18/2015 10:52 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:


People who drive white cars tend to have fewer accidents.
Is this because white cars are safer? Or, because people
who aren't concerned with the color of their car tend
to have a more cautious personality? Or, because OTHER
drivers can more readily *see* white vehicles (to avoid
them)?

shrug
Maybe it is easier to see white cars day or night. One of my BIL
(wife's side) always buys/drives white cars. Once I heard from a
painter, matching white or ivory black is most difficult.

Visibility is a factor from what I read. White is very popular in
places that get a lot of sun. I'd consider it myself it I was in the
hot sunbelt.

Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 10/19/2015 11:37 AM, Tony Hwang wrote:

I always carry phone for emergencies for like sudden heart attack.
Always in my pocket wherever I go, fishing, walking the dog, strolling
in the park. In winter I could slip and take a fall, for things like
that.


I've taken to carry cell phone, for much
same reasons. Gives me a good chance of
being able to call for help. For me, or
for others.

Well, where there is cell service....

True, even out at my cabin cell works fine in the forest.

On 10/19/2015 7:20 AM, Mayayana wrote:
This is what I mean about your devil's advocate
approach. You're trying to find any tiny exception to
the rule. A tiny exception does not negate the rule.
And what you're finding are not even exceptions.
By trying to carry out a good debate you're obscuring
the one critical point: The single best thing you can
do, by far, is to disable javascript. No other security
measure, even using anti-virus software, comes close
to the protection afforded by disabling script.

As I said previously (and my last comment in this thread),
I have no skin in this game. If you think disabling Jscript
is The Answer to network exploits, I think you're in for a
rude awakening!

Would you like me to send you some INFECTED PDF's? Open
them in your EMAIL client -- so your browser isn't even involved.

Then, call me when you get your machine rebooted... ;-)

rbowman wrote:
On 10/18/2015 08:11 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
I bought a new car with my card. When dealer hesitated I was going to
walk out the door. They don't like cash sale or full payment with CC.
They make better money on financed cars.

I just write a check. The last car I bought the salesman kept launching
into his financing deal even though I'd made my intention to pay cash
clear. He just couldn't help himself; it was part of his programming.

The last time I financed was back in '80 when they had a $99 down 0%
deal to try to move cars off the lot. It was GMAC's money and boosted my
credit rating.

I'ts just how I was brought up. You save the money and then you buy what
you want; you don't go in hock for it.

When I deal to buy a car, I never tell salesman how I am going to pay
'till final price is reached. If financing is taken I pay the whole
balance after couple months. I hate car buying more than house buying.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 10/18/2015 10:52 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:


People who drive white cars tend to have fewer accidents.
Is this because white cars are safer? Or, because people
who aren't concerned with the color of their car tend
to have a more cautious personality? Or, because OTHER
drivers can more readily *see* white vehicles (to avoid
them)?

shrug
Maybe it is easier to see white cars day or night. One of my BIL
(wife's side) always buys/drives white cars. Once I heard from a
painter, matching white or ivory black is most difficult.

Visibility is a factor from what I read. White is very popular in
places that get a lot of sun. I'd consider it myself it I was in the
hot sunbelt.

Our city fire trucks color was changed to bright yellow but now they
changed it back to red.

On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 5:49:56 PM UTC-5, Tony Hwang wrote:
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 10/18/2015 10:52 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:


People who drive white cars tend to have fewer accidents.
Is this because white cars are safer? Or, because people
who aren't concerned with the color of their car tend
to have a more cautious personality? Or, because OTHER
drivers can more readily *see* white vehicles (to avoid
them)?

shrug
Maybe it is easier to see white cars day or night. One of my BIL
(wife's side) always buys/drives white cars. Once I heard from a
painter, matching white or ivory black is most difficult.

Visibility is a factor from what I read. White is very popular in
places that get a lot of sun. I'd consider it myself it I was in the
hot sunbelt.

Our city fire trucks color was changed to bright yellow but now they
changed it back to red.

It always causes a problem and lots of confusion when you change those things which are traditional. Fire engines are RED! Everyone knows that. I remember when marriage was between a man and a woman. Now things are really confusing. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Confused Monster

Uncle Monster wrote:
On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 5:49:56 PM UTC-5, Tony Hwang wrote:
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 10/18/2015 10:52 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:


People who drive white cars tend to have fewer accidents.
Is this because white cars are safer? Or, because people
who aren't concerned with the color of their car tend
to have a more cautious personality? Or, because OTHER
drivers can more readily *see* white vehicles (to avoid
them)?

shrug
Maybe it is easier to see white cars day or night. One of my BIL
(wife's side) always buys/drives white cars. Once I heard from a
painter, matching white or ivory black is most difficult.

Visibility is a factor from what I read. White is very popular in
places that get a lot of sun. I'd consider it myself it I was in the
hot sunbelt.

Our city fire trucks color was changed to bright yellow but now they
changed it back to red.

It always causes a problem and lots of confusion when you change those things which are traditional. Fire engines are RED! Everyone knows that. I remember when marriage was between a man and a woman. Now things are really confusing. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Confused Monster

Now word "sex" will be deleted from dictionary soon?, LOL!

On 10/19/2015 12:06 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
My bank was offering a bonus if you made X number of charges less than
$10 on your debit card in one month. The idea was to get you in the
habit of using them for everything as they get a percentage.

My Discover bill includes a credit report from FICO. It's amusing that
the months when I charge something the score goes up 11 or so points.

On 10/19/2015 05:31 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
It always causes a problem and lots of confusion when you change those things which are traditional. Fire engines are RED! Everyone knows that. I remember when marriage was between a man and a woman. Now things are really confusing. o_O

What used to confuse me in some states the cops used red lights, in
others blue. Lately the light bars seem to have both red and blue so
there's no question you're screwed.

On 10/19/2015 04:36 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
I hate car buying more than house buying.

I don't buy houses. If it's not on wheels, I'm not interested.

On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 6:50:29 PM UTC-5, Tony Hwang wrote:
Uncle Monster wrote:
On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 5:49:56 PM UTC-5, Tony Hwang wrote:
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 10/18/2015 10:52 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:


People who drive white cars tend to have fewer accidents.
Is this because white cars are safer? Or, because people
who aren't concerned with the color of their car tend
to have a more cautious personality? Or, because OTHER
drivers can more readily *see* white vehicles (to avoid
them)?

shrug
Maybe it is easier to see white cars day or night. One of my BIL
(wife's side) always buys/drives white cars. Once I heard from a
painter, matching white or ivory black is most difficult.

Visibility is a factor from what I read. White is very popular in
places that get a lot of sun. I'd consider it myself it I was in the
hot sunbelt.

Our city fire trucks color was changed to bright yellow but now they
changed it back to red.

It always causes a problem and lots of confusion when you change those things which are traditional. Fire engines are RED! Everyone knows that. I remember when marriage was between a man and a woman. Now things are really confusing. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Confused Monster

Now word "sex" will be deleted from dictionary soon?, LOL!

In the colleges the Hysterically Howling Progressive Liberal Leftist Commiecrat Freak Trans Intellectuals infesting the higher education system are demanding that the words,"he, him, his, she, her and hers" be eliminated for some other Moonbat designations that are gender neutral. My vote is for,"it, that, those and them". Later on those terms will be replaced with numbers like those used to designate individual cyborg units by The Borg. Hell, The Moonbats are trying to forcedly assimilate everyone anyway. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Borg Monster

On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 8:17:11 PM UTC-5, rbowman wrote:
On 10/19/2015 05:31 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
It always causes a problem and lots of confusion when you change those things which are traditional. Fire engines are RED! Everyone knows that. I remember when marriage was between a man and a woman. Now things are really confusing. o_O

What used to confuse me in some states the cops used red lights, in
others blue. Lately the light bars seem to have both red and blue so
there's no question you're screwed.

Many years ago here in Alabamastan, the police and other law enforcement vehicles had blue lights and the emergency vehicles had red lights. It's been some time since light bars with both red and blue lights were installed on law enforcement vehicles so it attracts the attention of drivers from everywhere to get them to slow down. Emergency vehicles still have red light bars. When I was a kid back in the middle of the last century, police cars had a single rotating red light on the roof and a huge chrome plated electric motor driven siren on the front fender. Whenever a police car stopped in the neighborhood, the kids would gather around to look at the chrome covered car and to see what was going on. These days, kids run away when they see a cop car. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Chrome Monster

On 2015-10-20, rbowman wrote:
My Discover bill includes a credit report from FICO. It's amusing that
the months when I charge something the score goes up 11 or so points.

It's a very free feeling to not know, or care, what my credit score is.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled.)

NSA sedition and treason -- http://www.DeathToNSAthugs.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tony Hwang wrote in news:PNbVx.187166$nK6.49431
@fx31.iad:

Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 10/19/2015 11:37 AM, Tony Hwang wrote:

I always carry phone for emergencies for like sudden heart attack.
Always in my pocket wherever I go, fishing, walking the dog,
strolling
in the park. In winter I could slip and take a fall, for things like
that.


I've taken to carry cell phone, for much
same reasons. Gives me a good chance of
being able to call for help. For me, or
for others.

Well, where there is cell service....

True, even out at my cabin cell works fine in the forest.


And my cell is a lot cheaper and much more useful than one of the popular
emergency pendants at ~$30 a month.


--
You know it's time to clean the refrigerator
when something closes the door from the inside.

On 10/20/2015 10:50 AM, KenK wrote:

I've taken to carry cell phone, for much
same reasons. Gives me a good chance of
being able to call for help. For me, or
for others.

Well, where there is cell service....

True, even out at my cabin cell works fine in the forest.

And my cell is a lot cheaper and much more useful than one of the popular
emergency pendants at ~$30 a month.

SWMBO carries a cell phone "for emergencies" ("Don, I've got a flat
tire" "Do we need any linguini for Friday supper?" etc.) She
puts $100 of credit on it each year (else she loses any accumulated
credit -- or something like that. I think it now has several
hundred dollars "on account" as she uses it so little!

OTOH, $8/month (total!) is a small price to pay to be able to
make a call in an emergency!

On 10/20/2015 10:56 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 10/20/2015 10:50 AM, KenK wrote:

I've taken to carry cell phone, for much
same reasons. Gives me a good chance of
being able to call for help. For me, or
for others.

Well, where there is cell service....

True, even out at my cabin cell works fine in the forest.

And my cell is a lot cheaper and much more useful than one of the popular
emergency pendants at ~$30 a month.

SWMBO carries a cell phone "for emergencies" ("Don, I've got a flat
tire" "Do we need any linguini for Friday supper?" etc.) She
puts $100 of credit on it each year (else she loses any accumulated
credit -- or something like that. I think it now has several
hundred dollars "on account" as she uses it so little!

OTOH, $8/month (total!) is a small price to pay to be able to
make a call in an emergency!
PagePlus has a prepaid plan for $10 every 120 days on Verizon network.
It's 10-cents a minute and minutes rollover. Per minute cost doesn't
matter if you're not using them.

I have a Lycamobile phone plan where prepaid minutes don't expire.
I put $10 on it two years ago. Must have been too many doing that,
becuz, I think they don't offer the non-expire plan any more.

SWMBO carries a cell phone "for emergencies" ("Don, I've got a flat
tire" "Do we need any linguini for Friday supper?" etc.) She
puts $100 of credit on it each year (else she loses any accumulated
credit -- or something like that. I think it now has several
hundred dollars "on account" as she uses it so little!

OTOH, $8/month (total!) is a small price to pay to be able to
make a call in an emergency!

Yep - same here.
My first personal cell phone was also my retirement cell phone.
~ 4 1/2 years in - $ 500. spent $ 180. remaining.
It's an OK little flip phone - still has good battery life.
Using a gas station's pay-as-you-go PetroCanada
which uses the Bell Canada system. Voicemail, cheap texting,
and I transferred my long-standing company-cell-phone
number when I retired - a big plus at the time !
I haven't heard of any better cell phone options for low-usage.
John T



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On 10/20/2015 1:44 PM, mike wrote:
On 10/20/2015 10:56 AM, Don Y wrote:

SWMBO carries a cell phone "for emergencies" ("Don, I've got a flat
tire" "Do we need any linguini for Friday supper?" etc.) She
puts $100 of credit on it each year (else she loses any accumulated
credit -- or something like that. I think it now has several
hundred dollars "on account" as she uses it so little!

OTOH, $8/month (total!) is a small price to pay to be able to
make a call in an emergency!
PagePlus has a prepaid plan for $10 every 120 days on Verizon network.
It's 10-cents a minute and minutes rollover. Per minute cost doesn't
matter if you're not using them.

I have a Lycamobile phone plan where prepaid minutes don't expire.
I put $10 on it two years ago. Must have been too many doing that,
becuz, I think they don't offer the non-expire plan any more.

SWMBO got her phone many years ago when she was making regular trips
to Utah -- many parts of that trip have spotty coverage, at best. We
did a fair bit of research to find the carrier(s) -- at that time -- that
would be able to cover her trip. A phone that gets "no signal" isn't
much of a bargain -- esp when the nearest "service station" may be
the better part of an hour's drive!

In town, it's almost silly to have one as you can *walk* to a service
station or some other "open to the public" business in a pinch.

| Let me do some more research.
|

This seems to cover it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_10_editions

Enterprise is available as volume license. Even that
includes "telemetry". As I understand it, what they
mean by that is Windows calling home with usage
data. And if you use things like Cortana you're adding
to the spying. It won't work otherwise.

I would think that corporate customers would be
allowed to control contact more, but that doesn't seem
to be the case. There's no indication in what I've
read anywhere that there's any reasonable way to
even stop the auto-updating outside of a coprorate,
multi-license contract, much less the spying.
And the auto-updating is being obscured. Microsoft
have announced that they'll no longer be detailing
what's in an update. So even corporate people who
can control the updates would have to reverse
engineer them to figure out what they are. And what
if a security update is linked to new ads on the Desktop?

It looks like Microsoft have really covered all the
angles on this one. As the saying goes, they gotcha
coming and going.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/299...e-updates.html