Feeds

* Posts by Roo

660 posts • joined 21 Sep 2010

Page:

Bring back error correction, say Danish 'net boffins

Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Bah.

Splitter !

2
0

Secure microkernel that uses maths to be 'bug free' goes open source

Roo
Bronze badge
Devil

Re: Technically speaking...

"Was it really necessary for MS to change the architecture of the NT kernel just so a server OS could have all-singing all-dancing display drivers?"

Yes it was, because they couldn't bring themselves to copy the UNIX way of achieving the same end efficiently and (more) securely. ;)

2
1

Need a US visa, passport? Prepare for misery: Database crash strands thousands

Roo
Bronze badge
Devil

Re: Nah

In fairness the Buffer Overflow is quite valid - I found one by compiling their sample code. :)

0
0

Banning handheld phone use by drivers had NO effect on accident rate - study

Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Typing texts at the wheel is incredibly dangerous

"But I do get somewhat annoyed when I see trumped up traffic officers on TV lambasting the odd driver who just picks up his phone to see the status of the screen. There's no danger in that, in my opinion, any more than there is picking up a sandwich and taking a bite (which I gather is now also a punishable offence in the UK)."

I get the irritation, but those traffic officers attend accident scenes so they have a very different perspective on it because they see the grizzly aftermath of a driver not paying attention or making an error of judgement while they were distracted. At the end of the day a driver *can* cause a massive amount of damage to themselves and innocent bystanders, even at a low speed, therefore a driver *should* be giving driving the maximum amount of attention that they can at all times.

In my view by trying to do driving + something else the driver has decided that saving a few seconds time is more important that driving as safely as they can.

5
0

Will the next US-EU trade pact prevent Brussels acting against US tech giants?

Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Class Action...

Strikes me that this is a class action suite waiting to happen where the little guys take governments to the cleaners as well for giving multinationals an unfair advantage. It appears that Turkeys do indeed vote for Xmas.

14
0

NUDE SNAPS AGENCY: NSA bods love 'showing off your saucy selfies'

Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Why am I not surprised by this?

"Actually, yes. The NSA is part of the US DoD and hence, has anyone viewing, trading or collecting child porn arrested and charged for the crime."

That's only useful if folks get caught and prosecuted, Snowdon is claiming that the NSA's internal oversight is very lax - so there is a strong possibility "anyone" won't get caught so prosecution won't happen.

16
1

Child diagnosed as allergic to iPad

Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: @Roo

"The internet is full of vacillating drain bramaged novelty seekers. Can't we just have ONE place in tech reporting that encourages skepticism?"

I am quite happy with the Reg as far as skepticism goes, although I think that it has gone a bit soft in comparison to say 10 years ago - or perhaps I have become too jaded by the endless press releases.

Change is inevitable, and I think that El Reg has handled change over the years better than most. :)

0
0
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: @Roo

"Get off my goddamned lawn."

No worries, you can keep your lawn Trevor. For the record I think there is room for both kinds of lawn at El Reg, I just wish that El Reg could find a bit more space for the other kind... :)

0
0
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

"The Register has been focussing increasingly on an old fashioned IT administrator crowd."

You have taken quite a few downvotes, but I think the point you made above is a fair one, I have been lamenting that particular trend for many years now. Have an upvote for that point at least. :)

6
9

NSA dragnet mostly slurped innocents' traffic

Roo
Bronze badge

Re: AC BoringGreen Boring Roominant (the proven liar) @Matt Bryant

"".....I wonder how you can claim to know that those caught or admitting to it were the only ones that abused the system....." Gee, is that another sheeple attempt to get me to try proving a negative?"

No Matt, that is actually a person pointing out the massive hole in your argument. Instead of addressing that hole you have decided to insult them instead, presumably because you think that makes you look better at their expense. Here's a clue for you: the fact you attacked the person rather than the argument draws attention to the fact that you have no valid point to make.

Service as usual from Mendacious Matt Bryant the identity thief.

1
0
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: BoringGreen Boring Roominant (the proven liar) @Matt Bryant

"Roo or anyone else, would you please report this as abuse to bring it to the attention of the mods. Matt, if you wish to do the same, that would be great."

I have some sympathy for your point of view BG having shared a similar train of thought on more than one occasion. There are factors that stay my hand though, in no particular order:

+ Matt behaves like a narcissistic contrarian. If that is his true nature then he really can't help himself. Expecting decent behaviour from Matt would be akin to expecting a Hippo to put on a hat and tails and nip over to Covent Garden to take in an opera.

+ Sometimes an opposing view is actually useful and even valid (OK, Matt doesn't score particularly well on this front - but it's *technically* possible even if it's very unlikely).

+ Matt clearly invests quite a lot of time and anger into his posts, it would be churlish to deny the poor chap an audience.

+ Matt is doing a fantastic job of embarrassing himself, why stop him when the record is there for anyone who cares enough about Matt Bryant to take a look ?

The downside of all that is that real Matt Bryants (Matt asserts that he is using a pseudonym), will look like a bunch of arses as well, but if it really does hurt their interview chances they may be able to find redress within the courts. It's not as if Matt hasn't had it explained to him that he might be shafting real Matt Bryants with his abusive rubbish so I wouldn't be too upset if that chicken came home to roost.

1
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Boring Roominant (the proven liar) @Matt Bryant

Matt I had a look at post to see if I could find any sentence that had any evidence supporting it and didn't contain an insult. I couldn't find any, the closest was this.

"And thirdly, as I have stated many, many times before, your trivial attempts at constructing any form of argument are so easy to debunk it simply doesn't get much above mildly amusing."

I let you get away with the "easy to debunk" and "mild amusing" because they are purely subjective in their nature. At present, in the context of this thread, there is no evidence that you are able to construct a statement of fact backed by evidence.

1
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Boring Roominant (the proven liar) @Matt Bryant

"".....Please lay out your assumptions regarding NSA interception and whether those who have access to said interceptions (ie. a very few) will always be immune to the lure of using such power for personal or political gain (ie. abusing it)......"

You claimed it was not an assumption, you stated it was happening, was affecting 'us all', and that you could prove it."

Err, Matt you've just indulged in a deceitful evasion, please provide the requested evidence to support your position.

1
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Boring Roominant (the proven liar) @Matt Bryant

""Perhaps if you take on board the faint possibility that posts here come from real people that simply hold different views often for good reason...." No, I accept there are people with different views, what I object to is when those morons (like you) insist on trying to force them on the rest of us."

That's funny Matt because we feel exactly the same way when you make a post telling us what to think (ie: most of your posts).

1
1
Roo
Bronze badge

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

"".....This is why I stated the DEA & NSA conspired to convict defendants with false evidence....." You are also a clueless, ill-educated moron that needs to go back and re-take your basic English. That is not fabrication of evidence, that is simply hiding where you got the tip-off that led to the evidence from. The actual evidence in the trial would have been what the DEA discovered as a result of the NSA's tip-offs, not the tip-offs themselves."

That process of hiding sources is *meant* to be transparent to the Judge so that the Judge is in a position to ensure a fair trial. That process was opaque to the judges in these cases. Furthermore because the sources are not just witheld, but intentionally obscured the defendant is denied the opportunity to challenge the evidence gathering process. That is *unfair* by definition.

You can argue about whether faking evidence is justified or not, but the problem with this process of lying to judges is that there is no check and balance applied to the evidence gathering process - it is hidden away where it can't be examined to ensure it's fair and accurate. In this scenario you have to take it on trust that unaccountable people make the right call, people who's reputation, pay-check and bonus scheme is linked to them getting convictions.

1
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Roominant (the proven liar)

Matt is a liar that desperately wants to baaaah-lieve in paranoid delusions and conspiracy theories, as evidenced by his repeated ravings about Sheeple and Unicorns. He also behaves like an infantile dullard spoilt brat in public forums, as evidenced by his habit of attacking people before attacking arguments.

Anyone can insult and lie, not everyone can back it up with the fact this entire sub-thread came about because Matt told a big fat lie when he claimed the NSA had caused no harm.

Like I said earlier, Matt lost his point long ago, all that is left is mud-slinging and bullshit.

1
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

"".....The DEA & NSA conspired to convict defendants with false evidence (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/08/05/sod_squad_found_feeding_nsa_surveillance_info_to_drug_enforcement/)....." LOL! Did you even bother to try reading the article? It starts as follows - please note it says nothing about the NSA fabricating evidence:"

Yes I did Matt, but unlike you I managed read it all the way through and I came across this piece of information:

"But part of the deal for getting this data is that the DEA and others should cover up the information's source by setting up a fake investigation trail – a process known as "parallel construction"

This is why I stated the DEA & NSA conspired to convict defendants with false evidence. You have continued to demand proof that the NSA fabricated evidence, so it appears that you don't understand the meaning of the word "conspire".

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

"You are a liar that desperately wants to baaaah-lieve in paranoid delusions and conspiracy theories, I have proven that with your own statements.

"That won't cause me any sleepless nights either...." Oh good, then you should be fresh enough in the morning to go and try actually looking for the evidence of 'harm' you claimed would be so easy to prove."

It is easy to prove Matt, it has been spelt out in a 11 months worth of news too, you don't have to take the Reg's word as gospel either - all the mainstream newspapers carried the story too:

1) The DEA & NSA conspired to convict defendants with false evidence (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/08/05/sod_squad_found_feeding_nsa_surveillance_info_to_drug_enforcement/).

2) The American constitution asserts that defendants have a right to a fair trial (you should be able to find a copy without too much effort).

3) Lawrence S. Lustberg has gone on record as claiming such activity would be "blatantly unconstitutional.". No idea if Lawrence is the best candidate to pick an opinion from, but he has a lot more credibility in the fields of US Law and US Constitutional Rights than Matt Bryant.

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

"".....The NSA asked the DEA hide their source when presenting their evidence in court, this is why I stated that the DEA and NSA *conspired* to fabricate evidence." LOL, if you backpedal any faster you'll go back in time!"

Matt, according to The Register I wrote the following two days ago:

"I (and others) have already made references to relevant evidence (DEA conspiring with the NSA to secure convictions using falsified evidence), yet you have consistently avoided acknowledging, accepting or engaging in a rational discussion about the evidence."

You actually quoted that post as well Matt. In this instance Matt it is in fact you that is lying and back-pedalling.

That same post contained the following snippet that you yourself quoted:

"I think that the most likely outcome will be that you will continue to ignore all evidence of harm and that the moderators will continue to indulge you in behaving like a 4 year old spoilt brat in a public forum."

And you are still cutting and pasting:

"You are a liar that desperately wants to baaaah-lieve in paranoid delusions and conspiracy theories, I have proven that with your own statements. Now quit the lying and evasions and show me the 'harm'."

You are still behaving like an infantile dullard as well, so my prediction has panned out.

1
1
Roo
Bronze badge

Re: Boringgreen Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant @Bernard M. Orwell @Plump & Bleaty

"A quadrupedal Roger Moore, really."

One that wears a party hat on its head because it wants to be a unicorn.

That's a keeper BG.

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

"".....not something that is going to cause me sleepless nights." Yeah? Well what if I tell you the Brony Mafia are closing in on the unicorns!"

That won't cause me any sleepless nights either, because that is happening in your deluded mind Matt.

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

"So we're back to the imaginary cases of the NSA fabricating evidence for the DEA,"

No, we are not.

""I have referred to evidence of incarceration on false evidence...." You have referred to it, you have not provided any evidence of such an occurrence being the result of the NSA fabricating evidence as you claimed"

It was not my intent to convery the impression that I believe the NSA fabricate evidence. The NSA asked the DEA hide their source when presenting their evidence in court, this is why I stated that the DEA and NSA *conspired* to fabricate evidence.

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

Matt, your posts have become even more mind-numbingly dull and devoid of original thought that usual. Cut and pasting the same thing over and over again instead of addressing a point or even attempting an original put-down is weak, boring and futile.

Here's some evidence of your cut and paste skills:

"You are a liar that desperately wants to baaaah-lieve in paranoid delusions and conspiracy theories, I have proven that with your own statements."

...

"You are just being evasive again, desperate to avoid the admission that you cannot provide proof of the 'harm' you claimed was happening to us all."

Matt, the only impediment to me providing you with evidence is that you are failing to operate your web browser properly. You've had over a day and multiple references and reminders, so ignorance isn't really a valid excuse. The simplest and most plausible explanation for your failure to see evidence is that you are an infantile lying dullard.

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

"".....Failing to address the evidence is your problem Matt....." It would be if you had posted any"

I have referred to evidence of incarceration on false evidence, as you yourself have done. It is axiomatic that incarceration on false evidence harms the right of the accused to a fair trial and harms the rule of law.

"Otherwise I will have to taunt you about unicorns again."

That is as close to objective debate that you ever get dream boat.

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

"please do post an in-depth analysis of the code in swat.c, especially the bits you want to pretend are a webserver"

I don't want to pretend SWAT is a webserver, that would be silly because it is a service that is hosted by inetd.

Why lie about me wanting pretend bits of swat.c are a webserver ?

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Boringgreen Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant @Bernard M. Orwell

"It took less time to completely debunk it than it did to read it."

You debunked nothing Matt, you just made a bunch of unsubstantiated assertions and insults, and you have already admitted that you can't prove no harm occurred.

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

"Now post some evidence of the 'harm' or just admit you are a moronic, self-deluding liar."

Do you often issue orders to total strangers on public forums Matt ? Didn't your allegedly superior education and upbringing cover basic ettiquette ?

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

"Oh, and you have zero credibility outside of the flock."

Matt the only person you have not accused of being a "Sheeple" is yourself. Enjoying credibility with everyone but you is not something that is going to cause me sleepless nights.

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

I wrote:

"Not sure if I would go as far as "not a troll" and "well-meaning", his habit of attacking the poster rather than the post indicates that he is a troll who places more value in causing harm than engaging in honest debate."

Then Matt wrote:

"You are a lair that desperately wants to baaaah-lieve in paranoid delusions and conspiracy theories,"

Point proven. Matt is a troll.

"I have proven that with your own statements."

Matt your posts indicate that you don't even understand what is provable, let alone how to quote and attribute claims accurately. That leaves you with zero credibility as far proving anything on the basis of someone's statements goes.

"".....I actually claimed that the harm is not just at a personal level, but it hurts society as a whole...." Great, so if it 'harms' at a personal level and society as a whole then you have just doubled the task you are already beyond failing at - show me the 'harm' at both a personal level and to society as a whole."

At least it's possible but it isn't necessarily twice the work because you could find evidence that satisfies both criteria.

I (and others) have already made references to relevant evidence (DEA conspiring with the NSA to secure convictions using falsified evidence), yet you have consistently avoided acknowledging, accepting or engaging in a rational discussion about the evidence. Failing to address the evidence is your problem Matt, and projecting the blame for your failure onto other folks just doesn't wash in a public forum where anyone can cross check the information.

I think that the most likely outcome will be that you will continue to ignore all evidence of harm and that the moderators will continue to indulge you in behaving like a 4 year old spoilt brat in a public forum.

3
1
Roo
Bronze badge

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant @Bernard M. Orwell

"Strange guy. He's not a troll in the usual sense, he's well-meaning in his own way."

Not sure if I would go as far as "not a troll" and "well-meaning", his habit of attacking the poster rather than the post indicates that he is a troll who places more value in causing harm than engaging in honest debate.

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant @Roo

"I'm not surprised you'd hesitate - a lifetime of sheeple conditioning makes you want to baaaah-lieve anyone that questions The Truth you have been told just must be lying,"

If nothing else Matt you are certainly putting a lot of effort into promoting your "Sheeple" Conspiracy Theory.

The problem with that post is that has no *real* substance at all, its all make believe, insult and a mindless assertions repeated ad nauseum by an angry dullard. Even worse your insults and story isn't even clever or amusing, it is an ugly aggregate of concepts and ideas stolen from smarter more original thinkers. In the final analysis that post is dull rubbish served up by an angry dullard.

3
1
Roo
Bronze badge

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

"I'd suggest that your claimed GCSE-level of education probably wouldn't give you the skills to analyse the content of swat.c,"

No worse than your claimed non-GCSE education judging by the results of you trying to understand swat.c. On the other hand saving up and buying a C compiler in my early teens helped a lot, perhaps you should have done that given that your oh-so-much-better-than-GCSE-education led to you making a complete arse of yourself when you attempted to read some C.

"so I won't waste time (as you are desperately trying to) in asking you to show me the webserver code in swat.c."

Not at all Matt, just having a dig at your reasoning and technical ability.

3
1
Roo
Bronze badge

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

""..... it renders just fine on my browser....." I'm beginning to think that half of what you 'see' is not in your browser but solely exists in the random spasms of your paranoid delusional brain."

That would be your paranoid delusions taking over Matt.

"There is no link in your post and no cut'n'paste, so you are merely consistent in your inability to provide evidence to back up your claims.""

No Matt, it's just you failing to understand how web browsers work, maybe you should 'swat' up on he topic.

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

"The big differences are that I can use my brain to form an opinion, and can research and find facts to form my conclusions that I can back up with evidence"

No doubt you *could* do all that, but you very rarely do, because you are a contrarian. What you tend to do is take an opposing position - heedless of it's validity or consistency, as demonstrated by your insistence of "no harm". It is nice of you to keep the threads ticking over, but I think that few people will learn anything new from reading a Matt Bryant post on the strength of what I have seen so far.

3
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

""....Matt your claims have a cat's chance in hell of being true...." I have backed up all my claims with evidence, "

You lie again Matt, because you still haven't provided evidence to support your unprovable claim of "no harm". You have already agreed that your claim of "no harm" is unsupportable, therefore there is no rational purpose served by making that claim, so why not withdraw the claim of "no harm" ?

1
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

".....Matt has no evidence, and no *rational* way to prove his claim of "no harm"....." And you're still trying to push that deceitful evasion!?!?!"

Telling you that your claim of no harm is unprovable is not deceitful Matt.

Asking you to provide evidence to back up your unprovable claim is not deceitful either Matt.

You had every opportunity to acknowledge your claim as being unprovable and you have had every opportunity to make a claim that is provable. Instead you have chosen to bleat about how deceitful it is for someone to point out the holes in your arguments.

"Sunshine,"

Tetchy, tetchy.

"everyone has cottoned on to the fact by now that you only started trying to insist I prove a negative as a desperate evasion from the fact you cannot show any evidence of 'harm' to innocents due to the NSA's activities"

I actually claimed that the harm is not just at a personal level, but it hurts society as a whole, but you chose to assert that I had claimed "harm to innocents" instead. It really doesn't matter if the guys who were convicted on false evidence are innocent or not, harm has been done to the rule of law.

You can carry on with your charade for as long as you like, but all you are going to achieve is further erosion of any credibility you may have remaining.

3
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant @Roo

"That sounds all kind of backwards - do you think he's using port 08?"

I would hesitate to work out what is wrong with Matt's immediate environment on the basis of anything he writes here because I can find precious little coherence in his writing.

Any coherence in Matt's posts is shredded by Matt's habit of reinventing stuff, projection, lack of evidence, and straw-man arguments. Just to add to the challenge of finding coherence in Matt's output, his posts are often moderated and sometimes withdrawn.

A rational self-consistent thread of discussion with Matt appears to be a very rare beast.

3
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

""....Pointing out that you made up a load of stuff and attributed it to me is not back-pedalling Matt...." Nope, but debunking what you did bleat and then pointing put your desperate retreat is!"

Err, that reads as [you] back-pedalled via debunking & gloating. Is that the meaning you intended to convey ?

3
1
Roo
Bronze badge

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

"Nope, no post. LOL, you are so bad at providing evidence you can't even cut'n'paste your own drivelling bleats"

That's strange, it renders just fine on my browser, are you sure your web server is defaulting to the correct port Matty ? You could try reading the page's source code, it should be pretty easy stuff for someone who can understand swat.c. It would be nice if you took some of your own delicately worded advice Matt, and I quote:

"Go back and read the thread, moron."

3
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Joke

Re: lucki rtard @Matt Bryant

Matt: Note the Joke Alert icon.

""Matt what do you do for a living?...." What, you seriously think I'd post that info with the number of bleating skiddies that frequent this site?!?!? Let's just say I currently work for one of those global corporations that the sheeple love to hate so much and leave it at that."

Don't despair lucki, he goes on (and on):

"I get headhunted to be in a position to advise on hiring."

And he drops another claim:

"Some of are old enough to have done real study, not toy exams like GCSEs, and a lot more than basic secondary education."

Surely that narrows it down a bit, but you should keep in mind that Matt has expressed the opinion that fabrication of evidence and perjury are harmless, and he has made unprovable claims in recent history.

1
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

"".....You haven't actually provided any evidence that I made such claims in the first place....." So you're still trying to wriggle out of admitting you have SFA evidence of 'harm' from the NSA's activities?"

No. I've pointed out the evidence of harm, you have chosen to deny it, but even if everyone did accept that the reports of the NSA & DEA colluding to commit perjury on multiple occasions were harmless.

a) Matt has no evidence, and no *rational* way to prove his claim of "no harm".

b) Matt's alleged (but as yet unprovable) population of Unicorns & Sheeple has no evidence of harm, but the claim can be proven in a *rational* way simply by finding one example of harm - however minor.

So in summary Matt your claims have a cat's chance in hell of being true, and that makes you a liar, whereas the oft derrided mythical Sheeple & Unicorns* have a claim that does have a chance of being true - however slim and implausible you assert it to be.

* => Matt postulated: "do the 'bronies' represent the Dark Force oppressing the unicorns?"

Given those facts Matt I am actually quite relieved that you see yourself as somehow radically different from me, it is already embarrassing enough that I have expended time attempting to reason with you.

You are not all bad though, your down-votes reassure me that you are waiting eagerly for my pearls of wisdom. Of course if that wasn't you down-voting every response I make, I don't mind because at least someone cares enough to go to all the effort to express their feelings via a binary value. Imagine how heartbroken I would become if the trickle of down-votes were to abate.

3
1
Roo
Bronze badge

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

Yet another misrepresentation by Mendacious Matt:

"The actual 'harm' insistence was another one of your great myths, starting in this thread with your insistence that the NSA was fabricating evidence for the DEA to lock people up:"

Ah, you mean this post (typos included):

"the NSA has already been caught red-handed they can colluding with other law enforcement agencies (e.g. the DEA) to fabricate evidence with a view to locking someone up for longer than they otherwise would be (*if* they were found to be guilty)."

The "they can" editing cock up may confuse people, but aside from that it is clear that what you claim I wrote is materially different from what I actually wrote.

Yet another misrepresentation by Mendacious Matt:

"Then you went off on a little class war ramble in a thread insisting the shortage of certain resources was being artificially engineered by 'the ruling classes' to oppress the masses, again with no actual evidence for your claims:"

You mean the post entitled "Tin Foil Hat Deployed" with the Black Helicopter icon ? That was idle speculation, I had hoped the title and the Black Helicopter might give a hint that I wasn't 100% serious...

Yet another misrepresentation by Mendacious Matt:

"But what really outlines exactly what a deceitful liar you are is this jewel about trying to prove a negative, something you desperately tried to insist needed to be done just because you couldn't find any evidence of 'harm': ".... Try proving that a product of your choice does not infringe any patents - let us know how you get on. Hint: you can't prove a negative... :)""

Here's the post where I "insist" (your word, not mine) - complete with the bit of your post I was replying too:

"" Oh, and, BTW - SHOW ME THE 'HARM'."

By the same token Matt you should show the evidence backing up your claim that no harm has occurred, at present you have failed to show that, so your claim of "no harm" (which you made first) amounts to a baseless assertion."

All I did there was hold you to the same standard that you demanded of others, then I and others pointed out that your claim was unprovable and you agreed. You could have qualified your claim of no harm done and everyone could have got on with discussing the issue at hand...But no, admission of a mistake is not the way Matty B Rant rolls and here we are with you accusing me of lying because I somehow got you to admit your claim of no harm was in fact unprovable and therefore bollocks.

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge
WTF?

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

"".....2) I made no claim about the individuals being "innocent"...." But you claimed us all, especially the 'innocent', were being 'harmed',"

You haven't actually provided any evidence that I made such claims in the first place Matt, besides

people being innocent or not is entirely irrelevant to whether they are being convicted on false evidence.

"and now you are back-pedalling because you can't prove it."

Pointing out that you made up a load of stuff and attributed it to me is not back-pedalling Matt. I rather naively hoped that a man who gets "head hunted" for HR work might have enough smarts, honesty and integrity to not make shit up and attribute it to strangers.

The tired old line of "One True Faith baaaah-liefs are a load of cobblers based on paranoid delusions" constitutes a Conspiracy Theory worthy of Narcissus. You should seek help, but the chances are that you won't which is a tragedy for all of us who prefer signal to noise.

""....You are quite correct that I have not presented any evidence to support those assertions that I did not in fact make....." Which is just your usual deceitful way"

The only deceit going on here is coming from you Mendacious Matt, as any one looking for a self-proclaimed recruitment genius will be able to see when they google through the posts cross-checking your credentials. Oh I forgot, you claim to hide behind a pseudonym so all your bullshit and bile won't reflect badly on you in real life, that tells us all we need to know about the quality of your output on this site.

Note: I have taken the trouble to quote you because your posts are often moderated or withdrawn. ;)

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

"....As it happens I feel that harm has been done because I view incarceration of people on false evidence as being wrong and harmful to the individual and society at large....." And your evidence that this has befallen some 'innocent' individual solely through the activities of the NSA is...."

1) I made no claim that it's the solely the NSA's fault.

2) I made no claim about the individuals being "innocent".

You are quite correct that I have not presented any evidence to support those assertions that I did not in fact make. Have a muted round of applause on the house.

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

I posted:

"I wasn't aware of punting any conspiracy theory in this particular thread Matt, I certainly wasn't intending to do so, have you got a quote to support that claim ?"

Matt posted:

"I wasn't aware of punting any conspiracy theory...." You are most definitely in support if the wing nut theory of The Great Conspiracy To Oppress Us All. All your posts expose you as just such a baaaah-liever,"

You haven't presented any evidence of me punting a conspiracy theory in this thread because there is none. Instead you have presented your own conspiracy theory (again) that there are a bunch of "Sheeple" and "baaah-lievers" that are constructing conspiracy theories.

I was impressed by your failure to prove that SWAT requires a web-server, you demonstrated an enormous capacity for sheer bloody minded ignorance in the face of a mountain of hard evidence. Your explanation of how HTTP works was comedy gold, though not nearly as funny as the Brasseye Heavy Electricity sketch. :)

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

""My recommendation...." What, you think I should put weight in the opinion of someone that baaaah-lieves in unicorns????""

With all due respect accusing people of believing in unicorns is pathetic. It's the kind of thing a deranged pre-teen wannabe troll resorts to.

"I get headhunted to be in a position to advise on hiring."

Crikey, the Brony Mafia are taking over.

2
1
Roo
Bronze badge

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

""......Matt has failed at rational debate...." Let's see - exposed your idiotic conspiracy theory baaaah-liefs for the hot air they are;"

I wasn't aware of punting any conspiracy theory in this particular thread Matt, I certainly wasn't intending to do so, have you got a quote to support that claim ?

"established that you simply don't want to answer the simple question of proof of 'harm' because you can't, which destroys your whole argument;"

Strangely enough I entered this debate by asking you to back up your claim of no harm, you have still presented no proof whatsoever, and you have stated that you are unable to provide proof. If you hadn't made those assertions about "no harm", but instead left it at "you don't have evidence for that" the chances are that I wouldn't have added my penny's worth.

As it happens I feel that harm has been done because I view incarceration of people on false evidence as being wrong and harmful to the individual and society at large (because it is unjust and it undermines the processes of rehabilitation and reintegration).

3
1
Roo
Bronze badge

Re: Roominant Anon Cluetard Roominant

"....the Anon understood my argument about proof correctly....." So you're saying the Anon also baaaah-lieves unicorns exist because no-one has proved the negative that they don't exist? Is this a simple way of detecting sheeple? Thanks, it could save a lot of time weeding out the mentally deficient at interviews"

My recommendation is that you should start by weeding yourself out of the interview process given that you are the one with the unicorn fixation who believes that stuff is true because there is no evidence to the contrary. It must be tough being interviewed by someone so long on opinion and so very short on understanding.

2
2

Forget the mobile patent wars – these web giants have patented your DATA CENTER

Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

"Great. Wouldn't it be cheaper to give engineers money than tie up the world in monopolies and lawsuits? Or would that set a bad precedent?"

It would put lots of people who went to the right schools out of work, so I think that counts as a "bad precedent". Besides, here in the West the majority of production has been shipped off elsewhere and the carcasses left behind have been asset stripped, so all that's left is IP and the paperwork associated with it. This may explain why the authorities are working so hard to implement mass surveillance, aggressive IP law enforcement and mandatory filtering, because without all that stuff in place its practically impossible to maintain a monopoly on an idea.

4
0

LibreSSL crypto library leaps from OpenBSD to Linux, OS X, more

Roo
Bronze badge
Windows

"Do we really need OpenSSL (or LibreSSL) supported on platforms that make it harder to support the platforms of today in a secure and software auditable way?"

For the cases where the answer is "yes", the tidying up effort should make forking & porting easier for the folks who need to support an oddball, so all in all I think it's a win.

6
0

Page: