Which Avast 5.0 Shields are recommended
in [Anti-Virus]
|
Prev: Ironic
Next: Call for papers: ISP-10, USA, July 2010
From: Max Wachtel on 11 Mar 2010 13:41 On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 02:24:21 -0500, Jack <null(a)null.com> wrote: > Avast v. 5.0.462, WinXP SP3 running W2K here. > > I currently only run the File System Shield which would seem to lay over > and > duplicate the Mail, Web, P2P and IM Shields but I am unsure if the > Network > and Behaviour Shields are similarly covered. Any good reason to start > more > Shields? > not that I am aware of but I have the behavior shield activated anyway. Also using Privatefirewall 7.0 along with a hosts file so I did not install the web or network shields. > As an unrelated but welcome footnote v. 5.0 has a smaller commit > footprint > than v. 4.8 on this system, which is a refreshing trend. Developers very > often seem unable to understand that a clean, light and simple tool that > provides a specific and narrowly defined application well is still far > more > useful in program maturation than a coat hanger / toaster combo that > tweets. > I agree with you -- This post was created using Opera(a)USB: http://www.opera-usb.com Virus Removal Instructions http://sites.google.com/site/keepingwindowsclean/home Max's Favorite Freeware http://sites.google.com/site/keepingwindowsclean/freeware
From: Bad Boy Charlie on 11 Mar 2010 16:36 On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:47:39 +0100, FredW <fredw(a)blackholespam.net> wrote: >On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:12:26 -0600, Bad Boy Charlie <Legba(a)hotmail.com> >wrote: >>On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 02:25:56 -0600, VanguardLH <V(a)nguard.LH> wrote: >>>Jack wrote: >>> >>>> Avast v. 5.0.462, WinXP SP3 >>> >>>Learn to cross-post: >>> >>< Self-appointed Usenet Policeman crapola snipped > >> >>"Officer..do you mind showing me your badge?" > >Don't be silly. >Someone has to explain why multi-postying in many groups is not the best >way to ask a question. Well then why have you taken this timeless , pointless and never-ending Usenet crusade for truth about cross-posting upon yourself ? What's next..the inevitable top posting vs. bottom posting debate? I should have top posted this just to watch you take the bait. Ponder this my friend....if cross-posting was so wrong, evil and ineffective..why oh why has it been in the NNTP protocol since day #1 ? And supposing if it is now discovered to be a wrong thing..why do news servers still happily cross post according to the users discretion ? Little Charlie's Blues Pages http://www.soundclick.com/LittleCharlie
From: Beauregard T. Shagnasty on 11 Mar 2010 17:03 Bad Boy Charlie wrote: > FredW <fredw(a)blackholespam.net> wrote: >> Someone has to explain why multi-postying in many groups is not the >> best way to ask a question. > > Well then why have you taken this timeless , pointless and > never-ending Usenet crusade for truth about cross-posting upon > yourself ? You've missed the point. Cross-posting (to relevant groups) is *far* better than *multi*-posting to them. "Learn to cross-post" is the expected response to one who multi-posts. -- -bts -Four wheels carry the body; two wheels move the soul
From: Char Jackson on 11 Mar 2010 17:05 On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 15:36:25 -0600, Bad Boy Charlie <Legba(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:47:39 +0100, FredW <fredw(a)blackholespam.net> >wrote: > >>On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:12:26 -0600, Bad Boy Charlie <Legba(a)hotmail.com> >>wrote: >>>On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 02:25:56 -0600, VanguardLH <V(a)nguard.LH> wrote: >>>>Jack wrote: >>>> >>>>> Avast v. 5.0.462, WinXP SP3 >>>> >>>>Learn to cross-post: >>>> >>>< Self-appointed Usenet Policeman crapola snipped > >>> >>>"Officer..do you mind showing me your badge?" >> >>Don't be silly. >>Someone has to explain why multi-postying in many groups is not the best >>way to ask a question. > >Well then why have you taken this timeless , pointless and never-ending >Usenet crusade for truth about cross-posting upon yourself ? > >What's next..the inevitable top posting vs. bottom posting debate? >I should have top posted this just to watch you take the bait. > >Ponder this my friend....if cross-posting was so wrong, evil and >ineffective..why oh why has it been in the NNTP protocol since day #1 ? > >And supposing if it is now discovered to be a wrong thing..why do news >servers still happily cross post according to the users discretion ? Just to clarify, crossposting is good. Multiposting is bad. Crossposting is posting a single message to multiple groups at once. Multiposting is posting that same message multiple (separate) times.
From: Bad Boy Charlie on 11 Mar 2010 18:47
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 23:57:00 +0100, FredW <fredw(a)blackholespam.net> wrote: >On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 15:36:25 -0600, Bad Boy Charlie <Legba(a)hotmail.com> >wrote: > >>On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:47:39 +0100, FredW <fredw(a)blackholespam.net> >>wrote: >> >>>On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:12:26 -0600, Bad Boy Charlie <Legba(a)hotmail.com> >>>wrote: >>>>On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 02:25:56 -0600, VanguardLH <V(a)nguard.LH> wrote: >>>>>Jack wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Avast v. 5.0.462, WinXP SP3 >>>>> >>>>>Learn to cross-post: >>>>> >>>>< Self-appointed Usenet Policeman crapola snipped > >>>> >>>>"Officer..do you mind showing me your badge?" >>> >>>Don't be silly. >>>Someone has to explain why multi-postying in many groups is not the best >>>way to ask a question. >> >>Well then why have you taken this timeless , pointless and never-ending >>Usenet crusade for truth about cross-posting upon yourself ? > >Oh, dear, another one of those: "There are no rules, because I say so". > >What "crusade"? >A "crusade" of one message? >Your fantasy makes you see things that are only in your mind. > :-P So is 100% of our so-called 'Reality'....only in your mind. |