From: Robert Myers on 29 Jan 2010 16:48 You can find the claim in the subject line as the top-rated risk at http://www.csl.sri.com/users/neumann/insiderisks08.html#220 I found that link from the useful (moderated) newsgroup comp.risks. I found my way to that newsgroup at the suggestion of a former government official who probably got tired of my repeated comments about US incompetence and laziness with regard to information security. How important you think the integrity of the Internet (and the financial system) should be may be culturally-dependent. If you live in the gunslinger mentality of so much of the former Warsaw pact, the solution to any security problem might well be another round of vodka shots. Russia, for example, is ranked 117 on the world corruption audit http://www.worldaudit.org/corruption.htm The country I have repeatedly slighted by implication is well up the list, not so very far below, say, Costa Rica. The United States has nothing to brag about in that department, as it is almost at the end of the list of First World countries, just two slots below the UK. In any case, software integrity is a *very* big problem. If you are trying to argue otherwise, my guess is that you don't think integrity is all that important. Robert.
From: Sebastian Kaliszewski on 1 Feb 2010 07:23 > [Robert Myers written nonsense snipped] Yet another off-topic post by RM (off-topic on both groups he crossposted). Yet, He just wrote, he will not continue the discussion, yet he continues it. How predictable... :) Then the post is filled with rambling about buch of unrelated things, peppered with some poor attempts at ad hominem, all intermixed with demonstration with very poor understanding of the matter he tries to discuss. Whether he tries to discuss realities of former Warsaw Pact countries, software security, software integrity, risk estimation, his jedgement shows similar level of cluelessness. (Besides, sorry Mr. Myers, i'm not Russian, so wrong shot, troll) \SK -- "Never underestimate the power of human stupidity" -- L. Lang -- http://www.tajga.org -- (some photos from my travels)
From: Robert Myers on 1 Feb 2010 08:24 On Feb 1, 7:23 am, Sebastian Kaliszewski <s.bez_sp...(a)remove.this.informa.and.that.pl> wrote: > > [Robert Myers written nonsense snipped] > > Yet another off-topic post by RM (off-topic on both groups he crossposted). > Yet, He just wrote, he will not continue the discussion, yet he > continues it. How predictable... :) > > Then the post is filled with rambling about buch of unrelated things, > peppered with some poor attempts at ad hominem, all intermixed with > demonstration with very poor understanding of the matter he tries to > discuss. Whether he tries to discuss realities of former Warsaw Pact > countries, software security, software integrity, risk estimation, his > jedgement shows similar level of cluelessness. > > (Besides, sorry Mr. Myers, i'm not Russian, so wrong shot, troll) > > First of all, cowboy, you decided to resurrect this topic in a completely unrelated thread about Intel's compiler. So long as the discussion began in these groups, that's where the discussion should end. Secondly, it is clear from the logic of my post that I did not believe you to be Russian, only from a former Warsaw Pact country whose position on the corruption list I located a bit below Costa Rica (which I am sure must produce *some* of its foreign exchange through legal means with unlaundered cash). Thirdly, I care no more what you think of me than what Prof. Redelmeier thinks of me. The fact that many misuse statistics and draw false conclusions from them the way you do is no defense for you. You don't understand what you are doing and you defend it by heaping up misinformation and abuse. Fourthly, the proper manner of formal address is Dr. Myers. Robert.
From: Bill Davidsen on 2 Feb 2010 14:03 Robert Myers wrote: > On Feb 1, 7:23 am, Sebastian Kaliszewski > <s.bez_sp...(a)remove.this.informa.and.that.pl> wrote: >> > [Robert Myers written nonsense snipped] >> >> Yet another off-topic post by RM (off-topic on both groups he crossposted). >> Yet, He just wrote, he will not continue the discussion, yet he >> continues it. How predictable... :) >> >> Then the post is filled with rambling about buch of unrelated things, >> peppered with some poor attempts at ad hominem, all intermixed with >> demonstration with very poor understanding of the matter he tries to >> discuss. Whether he tries to discuss realities of former Warsaw Pact >> countries, software security, software integrity, risk estimation, his >> jedgement shows similar level of cluelessness. >> >> (Besides, sorry Mr. Myers, i'm not Russian, so wrong shot, troll) >> >> > First of all, cowboy, you decided to resurrect this topic in a > completely unrelated thread about Intel's compiler. So long as the > discussion began in these groups, that's where the discussion should > end. > Actually, this is far enough off any relation to Intel that moving the discussion with a "Followups-To" somewhere else would be appropriate. Don't take that as an endorsement of (or disagreement with) Mr Kaliszewski's other points, but on the suggestion that this is no longer relevant to Intel, I believe he is right.
|
Pages: 1 Prev: Wall Street Explained Next: Is there such a thing as safe DownLoading? |