Wednesday, March 01, 2000, 10:00:18 AM, Simon wrote:
> Privacy is privacy. Sneaky tactics are sneaky tactics. These companies
> need to get with the program and shouldn't get away with it. If they
> don't have our permission then they just shouldn't be allowed to do
> it. Yeah, blocking a port is OK, and easy, but how many blasted ports
> do we end up blocking?
The point I was trying to make isn't that the program was doing something,
the point was that what the program /was/ doing wasn't confirmed by a
reputable source as anything contrary to what the user was told. To be blunt
about it, a good portion of what those DLLs do I laughed at because I can't
see how it really effectively could do most of it.
The time to worry is when a /REPUTABLE/ source, not a joe-blow dorkwad on
angelfire (AKA, can't even afford web space of his own) who most likely
suffers from rectal-cranial inversion says that someone is doing something
wrong and sneaky.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed as : [email protected]
