From: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Subject: Re: Windows 10. Horrible!
Full headers:
From: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Subject: Re: Windows 10. Horrible!
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2017 10:29:47 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <021120171029479728%nospam@nospam.invalid>
References: <> <ota72v$a08$> <> <> <otbah6$10c3$> <otbuml$qkc$> <otchr5$v4h$> <otcslc$do7$> <> <otf9e1$1kd$>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info:; posting-host="4959ca34163b94e8ee5f73f0f07fdb30";
logging-data="15286"; mail-complaints-to="";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+BSdeS5l/VXxpFNp1ReWvP"
User-Agent: Thoth/1.9.0 (Mac OS X)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:kZP0YwZgcHuNYCuFegYaRNANU2U=
Print Article
Forward Article
In article <otf9e1$1kd$>, Mayayana<mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:

>   Which comes full circle to where this started:
> Security updates are nice, but only a small part
> of computer security. The latest version of Windows
> is far less safe than careful use of an old version.

complete nonsense.

>   Our own tax dollars are being spent by the NSA
> to figure out new 0-day hacks. Then outside
> hackers hack into the NSA and make them public.
> Federal tax dollars are funding the likes of WannaCry.
> It's not oging to get better. There's a lot of money
> involved.

which is why users need to update to the latest version, because the
security exploits the nsa finds eventually get patched.

your strategy to use older versions means the nsa has free reign.

you also are oblivious as to other things that can be done to secure a
system beyond what the nsa can do.

> At some point it may be that *all*
> money is involved. (Nospam thinks he's going to
> be safe by letting Apple or Google handle his
> finances.)

i never said that.

i'm not surprised you're too ignorant to understand what i did say.

the rest of you lunacy snipped.