From: "Rich" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0112_01C58183.689325E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   This could be funny.  Since you dispute that a counter example =
disproves a false assertion, can you please post your proof for the =
opposite.  I bet it is a hoot.

Rich

  "Randy"  wrote in message news:42cb1267{at}w3.nls.net...
  Nope-it just shows that when faced when proving something you know you =
can't prove, you attack the poster.=20
    "Rich"  wrote in message news:42cb1088{at}w3.nls.net...
       Only one counter example is required to disprove a false =
assertion.  Maybe you should give yourself a refresher on basic logic.

    Rich

      "Randy"  wrote in message news:42cb0191{at}w3.nls.net...
      2 datapoints out of millions is statistically insigificant, =
therefore insufficient. Since you have failed to prove you assertion, =
this thread ends.

      "Rich"  wrote in message news:42cab5ea{at}w3.nls.net...
           If proof is insufficient they you will never be satisfied.  =
You may as well join mike miller in his spin.

        Rich

          "Randy"  wrote in message news:42ca8208{at}w3.nls.net...
          Still insufficient.=20
            "Rich"  wrote in message news:42ca00ea{at}w3.nls.net...
               Proof by example.  People here other than I have done it. =
 Haven't you?

            Rich

              "Randy"  wrote in message
news:42c9d965{at}w3.nls.net...
              Sice you haven't proven it the answer is still no.

              "Rich"  wrote in message news:42c9b036{at}w3.nls.net...
                   The answer to his question is yes so by your =
definition it is also spin, spin, spin.

                Rich

                  "Randy"  wrote in message =
news:42c9748c{at}w3.nls.net...
                  It's not spin if this does happen. So far, you haven't =
proven that it doesn't.
                    "Rich"  wrote in message =
news:42be01f9$1{at}w3.nls.net...
                       Spin, spin, spin.  How very typical mike miller.

                    Rich

                      "Mike '/m'"  wrote
in message =
news:jsvrb1lgj40fibn8e53pkn96m98oos4p78{at}4ax.com...

                      Yup.  The question is: can you install Windows on =
a PC that is connected
                      to the internet via broadband, and get that system =
patched before it is
                      infested?

                        /m

                      On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:27:30 -0400, "Tony =
Ingenoso" 
                      wrote:

                      >So?  That means nothing if they're exploited =
within a matter of minutes
                      >anyway.
                      >
                      >"Rich"  wrote in message =
news:42bde926$1{at}w3.nls.net...

                         Did you read the article lead in that was =
posted.  Let me quote it again

                        For thousands of Internet users, the offer =
seemed all too alluring: revealing pictures of Jennifer Lopez, available =
at a mere click of the mouse.

                        But the pictures never appeared. The offer was a =
ruse, and the click downloaded software code that turned the user's =
computer into a launching pad for Internet warfare.


                      Whether or not people reinstall or use firewalls =
makes no difference when users go out of their way to infect themselves. =
 Antivirus and antispyware applications that use rules to block user =
action can help here but those won't block something they don't know =
about and if they do warn the user and require confirmation likely many =
users will approve that just as they confirmed their action when warned =
for the initial download attempt.

                      Rich
------=_NextPart_000_0112_01C58183.689325E0
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








   This
could be funny.  =
Since you=20
dispute that a counter example disproves a false assertion, can you = please post=20
your proof for the opposite.  I bet it is a
hoot.
Rich
 

  "Randy" <{at}> wrote in message news:42cb1267{at}w3.nls.net...
  Nope-it just shows that when faced when proving =
something=20
  you know you can't prove, you attack the poster. 
  

    "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:42cb1088{at}w3.nls.net...
       Only
one counter =
example is=20
    required to disprove a false assertion.  Maybe you should give =
yourself=20
    a refresher on basic logic.
     
    Rich
     
    

      "Randy" <{at}> wrote in message news:42cb0191{at}w3.nls.net...
      2 datapoints out of millions is
statistically=20
      insigificant, therefore insufficient. Since you have failed to =
prove you=20
      assertion, this thread ends.
       
      "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:42cab5ea{at}w3.nls.net...
      

          
If proof is =
insufficient they=20
        you will never be satisfied.  You may as well join mike =
miller in=20
        his spin.
         
        Rich
         
        

          "Randy" <{at}> wrote in message news:42ca8208{at}w3.nls.net...
          Still insufficient.

          

            "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:42ca00ea{at}w3.nls.net...
               Proof by =
example. =20
            People here other than I have done it.  Haven't=20
            you?
             
            Rich
             
            

              "Randy" <{at}> wrote in
message news:42c9d965{at}w3.nls.net...
              Sice you haven't proven it the answer =
is still=20
              no.
               
              "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:42c9b036{at}w3.nls.net...
              

                   The answer =
to his=20
                question is yes so by your definition it is also spin, =
spin,=20
                spin.
                 
                Rich
                 
                

                  "Randy" <{at}> wrote in
message news:42c9748c{at}w3.nls.net...
                  It's not spin if this
does happen. =
So far,=20
                  you haven't proven that it doesn't.
                  

                    "Rich" <{at}> wrote in
message news:42be01f9$1{at}w3.nls.net...
                       Spin, =
spin,=20
                    spin.  How very typical mike =
miller.
                     
                    Rich
                     
                    
                      "Mike '/m'" <mike{at}barkto.com>=20">mailto:mike{at}barkto.com">mike{at}barkto.com>=20
                      wrote in message news:jsvrb1lgj40=
fibn8e53pkn96m98oos4p78{at}4ax.com...Yup. =20
                      The question is: can you install Windows on a PC =
that is=20
                      connectedto the internet via broadband, and =
get that=20
                      system patched before it =
isinfested? =20
                      /mOn Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:27:30 -0400, =
"Tony=20
                      Ingenoso" <admin{at}spamcop.net>wrote:=">mailto:admin{at}spamcop.net">admin{at}spamcop.net>wrote:=
>So? =20
                      That means nothing if they're exploited within a =
matter of=20
                     
minutes>anyway.>>"Rich"
=
<{at}>=20
                      wrote in message news:42bde926$1{at}w3.nls.net...=

                         Did =
you read the=20
                      article lead in that was posted.  Let me =
quote it=20
                      again
                       
                      

                        For thousands=20
                        of Internet users, the offer seemed all too =
alluring:=20
                        revealing pictures of Jennifer Lopez, available =
at a=20
                        mere click of the mouse.
                         
                        But the=20
                        pictures never appeared. The offer was a ruse, =
and the=20
                        click downloaded software code that turned the =
user's=20
                        computer into a launching pad for Internet=20
                       
warfare.
                       
                      Whether or not =
people=20
                      reinstall or use firewalls makes no difference =
when users=20
                      go out of their way to infect themselves.  =
Antivirus=20
                      and antispyware applications that use rules to =
block user=20
                      action can help here but those won't block =
something they=20
                      don't know about and if they do warn the user and =
require=20
                      confirmation likely many users will approve that =
just as=20
                      they confirmed their action when warned for the =
initial=20
                      download attempt.
                       
                      Rich

------=_NextPart_000_0112_01C58183.689325E0--

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5