disable annoying flash update notices

MSGROUPS.NET |

Search |

Post Question |

Groups |

Stream |

About | Register

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0020_01CB13CC.8ABFE8C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

To disable Flash auto-update:

    1. Create a file named mms.cfg (text) in a text editor.

    2. Add the following auto-update setting:

       AutoUpdateDisable=3D1    <<<  add this to disable updates, use =
'0' (zero) to turn updates on again
      =20
    3. Save the mms.cfg file to \Windows\System  (W98)
        or SYSTEMROOT%\System32\Macromed\Flash  (NT)

    4. Close and restart Flash Player or the browser in which Flash =
Player is running.

---

alternative method:

Go to =
http://www.macromedia.com/support/documentation/en/flashplayer/help/setti=
ngs_manager05.html=20

Uncheck "Notify me..."=20

Close IE/Firefox=20

A config file is now saved under : \Documents and =
Settings\<Username>\Application Data\Macromedia\Flash =
Player\macromedia.com\support\flashplayer\sys\settings.sol=20

After that, you can copy SETTINGS.SOL to any (or all) profiles.=20

------=_NextPart_000_0020_01CB13CC.8ABFE8C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2853" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#f8f8f8>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>To disable Flash =
auto-update:<BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 1. Create a file =
named=20
mms.cfg (text) in a text editor.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 2. Add the =
following=20
auto-update setting:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =

AutoUpdateDisable=3D1&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &lt;&lt;&lt;&nbsp; add this to =
disable=20
updates, use '0' (zero) to turn updates on=20
again<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 3. Save the =
mms.cfg file to=20
\Windows\System&nbsp; =
(W98)<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; or=20
SYSTEMROOT%\System32\Macromed\Flash&nbsp; (NT)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 4. Close and =
restart Flash=20
Player or the browser in which Flash Player is running.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>---</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>alternative method:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>Go to <A=20
href=3D"http://www.macromedia.com/support/documentation/en/flashplayer/he=
lp/settings_manager05.html">http://www.macromedia.com/support/documentati=
on/en/flashplayer/help/settings_manager05.html</A>=20
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>Uncheck "Notify me..." </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>Close IE/Firefox </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>A config file is now saved under : =
\Documents=20
and Settings\&lt;Username&gt;\Application Data\Macromedia\Flash=20
Player\macromedia.com\support\flashplayer\sys\settings.sol </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>After that, you can copy =
SETTINGS.SOL to any (or=20
all) profiles. <BR></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0020_01CB13CC.8ABFE8C0--

none

6/24/2010 11:39:13 PM

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_007B_01CB1404.E4683390
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

WTF would you want to disable Flash update notices?
  "none" <nospam@bogusaddress.com> wrote in message =
news:i00qb4$oo0$1@news.eternal-september.org...
  To disable Flash auto-update:

      1. Create a file named mms.cfg (text) in a text editor.

      2. Add the following auto-update setting:

         AutoUpdateDisable=3D1    <<<  add this to disable updates, use =
'0' (zero) to turn updates on again
        =20
      3. Save the mms.cfg file to \Windows\System  (W98)
          or SYSTEMROOT%\System32\Macromed\Flash  (NT)

      4. Close and restart Flash Player or the browser in which Flash =
Player is running.

  ---

  alternative method:

  Go to =
http://www.macromedia.com/support/documentation/en/flashplayer/help/setti=
ngs_manager05.html=20

  Uncheck "Notify me..."=20

  Close IE/Firefox=20

  A config file is now saved under : \Documents and =
Settings\<Username>\Application Data\Macromedia\Flash =
Player\macromedia.com\support\flashplayer\sys\settings.sol=20

  After that, you can copy SETTINGS.SOL to any (or all) profiles.=20

------=_NextPart_000_007B_01CB1404.E4683390
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.17063" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#f8f8f8>
<DIV><FONT face=3DCalibri color=3D#000080>WTF would you want to disable =
Flash update=20
notices?</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000080 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV>"none" &lt;<A=20
  =
href=3D"mailto:nospam@bogusaddress.com">nospam@bogusaddress.com</A>&gt; =
wrote in=20
  message <A=20
  =
href=3D"news:i00qb4$oo0$1@news.eternal-september.org">news:i00qb4$oo0$1@n=
ews.eternal-september.org</A>...</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>To disable Flash =
auto-update:<BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 1. Create a =
file named=20
  mms.cfg (text) in a text editor.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 2. Add the =
following=20
  auto-update setting:</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 =
size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  AutoUpdateDisable=3D1&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &lt;&lt;&lt;&nbsp; add this to =
disable=20
  updates, use '0' (zero) to turn updates on=20
  again<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 3. Save the =
mms.cfg file to=20
  \Windows\System&nbsp; =
(W98)<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; or=20
  SYSTEMROOT%\System32\Macromed\Flash&nbsp; (NT)</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 4. Close and =
restart Flash=20
  Player or the browser in which Flash Player is running.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>---</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>alternative method:</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>Go to <A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.macromedia.com/support/documentation/en/flashplayer/he=
lp/settings_manager05.html">http://www.macromedia.com/support/documentati=
on/en/flashplayer/help/settings_manager05.html</A>=20
  </FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>Uncheck "Notify me..." =
</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>Close IE/Firefox </FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>A config file is now saved under : =
\Documents=20
  and Settings\&lt;Username&gt;\Application Data\Macromedia\Flash=20
  Player\macromedia.com\support\flashplayer\sys\settings.sol =
</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>After that, you can copy =
SETTINGS.SOL to any=20
  (or all) profiles. <BR></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_007B_01CB1404.E4683390--

6/25/2010 5:22:35 AM

In message <uKzI8aCFLHA.5736@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>, "PA Bear [MS MVP]" 
<PABearMVP@gmail.com> writes:
>WTF would you want to disable Flash update notices?
[]
Because they annoy you?

Because you are running an OS that won't work with any more up-to-date 
FLASH? (And thus they annoy you?)

WTF would you feel it necessary to swear?
-- 
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **

"Who came first? Adam or Eve?"          "Adam of course; men always do."
Victoria Wood (via Peter Hesketh)

6/25/2010 7:51:31 PM

If updating were disabled, you probably wouldn't know about, e.g., 
http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb10-14.html

I'd rather be annoyed every 2 or 3 months rather than be subject to a 
widely-exploited security vulnerability, no matter what OS I was running.

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> WTF would you want to disable Flash update notices?
>
> Because they annoy you?...

6/25/2010 9:21:12 PM

In message <Om9qX$KFLHA.5500@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>, "PA Bear [MS MVP]" 
<PABearMVP@gmail.com> writes:
>If updating were disabled, you probably wouldn't know about, e.g., 
>http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb10-14.html
>
>I'd rather be annoyed every 2 or 3 months rather than be subject to a 
>widely-exploited security vulnerability, no matter what OS I was 
>running.
>
>
>J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>> WTF would you want to disable Flash update notices?
>>
>> Because they annoy you?...
>
I notice you've snipped my other suggested reason, that you might have 
an OS that can't take the updates ...
-- 
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **

.... "Peter and out." ... "Kevin and out." (Link episode)

6/25/2010 10:14:42 PM

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote in message 
news:qPvb1LCSpSJMFwGT@soft255.demon.co.uk...
> In message <Om9qX$KFLHA.5500@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>, "PA Bear [MS MVP]" 
> <PABearMVP@gmail.com> writes:
>>If updating were disabled, you probably wouldn't know about, e.g., 
>>http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb10-14.html
>>
>>I'd rather be annoyed every 2 or 3 months rather than be subject to a 
>>widely-exploited security vulnerability, no matter what OS I was 
>>running.
>>
>>
>>J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>>> WTF would you want to disable Flash update notices?
>>>
>>> Because they annoy you?...
>>
> I notice you've snipped my other suggested reason, that you might have 
> an OS that can't take the updates ...

Isn't this a Win98 group, John?  Win98 supports Flash 9.x.

If you read the link Robear posted, you will see it states,
"For users who cannot update to Flash Player 10.1.53.64, Adobe has 
developed a patched version of Flash Player 9, Flash Player 9.0.277.0, 
which can be downloaded from the following link."

So, if you disable Flash updates, you don't get notified of this update 
that your OS *can* take.....

-- 
Glen Ventura, MS MVP  Oct. 2002 - Sept. 2009
A+
http://dts-l.net/

glee

6/26/2010 2:33:46 AM

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0008_01CB1512.FDEC0850
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks for your support John!

To address the ridiculous comments which followed the initial post:

The 'WTF' comment from one who is supposed to be a 'professional' was =
uncalled for. I personally distain filthy mouth comments and respect for =
that person is deminished. Furthermore, a little more thought should =
have gone into comments before critizing. Consider the SUBJECT LINE; =
this was a post to turn off flash updates which are ANNOYING. If update =
notices DON'T annoy someone do you really think they are going to =
disable updates ??  (duhhhh!)

Furthermore, not everyone wants updates for any number of reasons, =
that's why MOST software has options to turn them OFF (right?)

For example, COMPATIBILITY issues; on my older PC's the newest flash 9 =
update does NOT allow for full screen playback, which I want, thus it is =
not wanted on my W98 box. On my older PC's with W2K or XP any flash =
beyond v10.045 does not allow full screen playback, thus update notices =
are NOT WANTED (get it?)

---  BTW, I believe the issue of no full screen playback is caused by =
too little VRAM  ---

I think people need to get over the 'saviour' mentality which has begun =
to pervade our societies, which states; if someone considers this =
(whatever it is) is 'FOR YOUR GOOD' then they can SHOVE it down our =
throats, that they are justified in doing it, and those who DON'T want =
it are, of course, STUPID (right?)  What a bunch of baloney.

GET A LIFE, and GROW UP!
------=_NextPart_000_0008_01CB1512.FDEC0850
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2853" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#f8f8f8>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000>Thanks for your support John!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000>To address the ridiculous comments which =
followed the=20
initial post:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000>The 'WTF' comment from one who is supposed to =
be&nbsp;a=20
'professional'&nbsp;was uncalled for. I personally distain filthy mouth =
comments=20
and respect for that person is deminished. Furthermore, a little more =
thought=20
should have gone into comments before critizing. Consider the SUBJECT =
LINE; this=20
was a post to turn off flash updates which are ANNOYING. If&nbsp;update=20
notices&nbsp;DON'T annoy someone do you really think they are going to =
disable=20
updates ??&nbsp; (duhhhh!)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000>Furthermore,&nbsp;not everyone wants updates =
for any=20
number of reasons, that's why MOST software has options to turn them OFF =

(right?)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000>For example, COMPATIBILITY issues; on my =
older PC's the=20
newest flash 9 update does NOT allow for full screen playback, which I =
want,=20
thus&nbsp;it is not wanted on my W98 box. On&nbsp;my older PC's with W2K =
or XP=20
any flash beyond v10.045 does not allow full screen playback, thus =
update=20
notices are NOT WANTED&nbsp;(get it?)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000>---&nbsp; BTW, I believe the issue of no full =
screen=20
playback is caused by too little VRAM&nbsp; ---</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000>I think people need to get over the 'saviour' =
mentality=20
which has begun to pervade our societies, which states; if someone =
considers=20
this (whatever it is) is 'FOR&nbsp;YOUR GOOD' then they can SHOVE it =
down our=20
throats, that they are justified&nbsp;in doing it, and those who DON'T =
want it=20
are, of course, STUPID (right?)&nbsp; What a bunch of =
baloney.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000>GET A LIFE, and GROW =
UP!</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0008_01CB1512.FDEC0850--

none

6/26/2010 2:36:02 PM

+1

glee wrote:
> "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:qPvb1LCSpSJMFwGT@soft255.demon.co.uk...
>> In message <Om9qX$KFLHA.5500@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>, "PA Bear [MS MVP]"
>> <PABearMVP@gmail.com> writes:
>>> If updating were disabled, you probably wouldn't know about, e.g.,
>>> http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb10-14.html
>>> 
>>> I'd rather be annoyed every 2 or 3 months rather than be subject to a
>>> widely-exploited security vulnerability, no matter what OS I was
>>> running.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>>>> WTF would you want to disable Flash update notices?
>>>> 
>>>> Because they annoy you?...
>>> 
>> I notice you've snipped my other suggested reason, that you might have
>> an OS that can't take the updates ...
> 
> Isn't this a Win98 group, John?  Win98 supports Flash 9.x.
> 
> If you read the link Robear posted, you will see it states,
> "For users who cannot update to Flash Player 10.1.53.64, Adobe has
> developed a patched version of Flash Player 9, Flash Player 9.0.277.0,
> which can be downloaded from the following link."
> 
> So, if you disable Flash updates, you don't get notified of this update
> that your OS *can* take.....

6/26/2010 9:24:38 PM

 Look like glee is +1 to your 98.99% always right  Bear!



"PA Bear [MS MVP]" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:#FsKzZXFLHA.588@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> +1
>
> glee wrote:
>> "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:qPvb1LCSpSJMFwGT@soft255.demon.co.uk...
>>> In message <Om9qX$KFLHA.5500@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>, "PA Bear [MS MVP]"
>>> <PABearMVP@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> If updating were disabled, you probably wouldn't know about, e.g.,
>>>> http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb10-14.html
>>>>
>>>> I'd rather be annoyed every 2 or 3 months rather than be subject to a
>>>> widely-exploited security vulnerability, no matter what OS I was
>>>> running.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>>>>> WTF would you want to disable Flash update notices?
>>>>>
>>>>> Because they annoy you?...
>>>>
>>> I notice you've snipped my other suggested reason, that you might have
>>> an OS that can't take the updates ...
>>
>> Isn't this a Win98 group, John?  Win98 supports Flash 9.x.
>>
>> If you read the link Robear posted, you will see it states,
>> "For users who cannot update to Flash Player 10.1.53.64, Adobe has
>> developed a patched version of Flash Player 9, Flash Player 9.0.277.0,
>> which can be downloaded from the following link."
>>
>> So, if you disable Flash updates, you don't get notified of this update
>> that your OS *can* take.....

Hot

6/26/2010 9:48:03 PM

In message <i0538k$96f$1@news.eternal-september.org>, none 
<nospam@bogusaddress.com> writes:
>Thanks for your support John!
>�
>To address the ridiculous comments which followed the initial post:

I was actually going to say that glee had come up with some valid 
arguments about why you might want the updates ...
>�
>The 'WTF' comment from one who is supposed to be�a 'professional'�was
>uncalled for. I personally distain filthy mouth comments and respect
>for that person is deminished. Furthermore, a little more thought

.... but I agree there ...

>should have gone into comments before critizing. Consider the SUBJECT
>LINE; this was a post to turn off flash updates which are ANNOYING. If�update notices�DON'T annoy someone do you really think they are going
>to disable updates ??� (duhhhh!)

.... and that is a nice (in the original meaning of "nice") point! (Mind 
you, the "duhhhh" reduces the respect, like the "WTF" did, for the 
poster. But you can argue provocation ...)

>�
>Furthermore,�not everyone wants updates for any number of reasons,
>that's why MOST software has options to turn them OFF (right?)

I hadn't thought of that aspect either.
[]
>I think people need to get over the 'saviour' mentality which has begun
>to pervade our societies, which states; if someone considers this
>(whatever it is) is 'FOR�YOUR GOOD' then they can SHOVE it down our
>throats, that they are justified�in doing it, and those who DON'T want
>it are, of course, STUPID (right?)� What a bunch of baloney.

I agree; it's related to the "greater good" excuse which is given for 
many things done apparently on our behalf, many of which reduce our 
c*v?l l-bert-es (and don't do what they're intended, but aren't removed 
once this is discovered).
>�
>GET A LIFE, and GROW UP!

I wish you hadn't added that, though. |-:
-- 
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **

"Mr. Notlob, there's nothing wrong with you that an expensive operation can't
prolong!" - Monty Python

6/28/2010 9:12:04 PM

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote in message 
news:TuxFdILkARKMFwLP@soft255.demon.co.uk...
> In message <i0538k$96f$1@news.eternal-september.org>, none 
> <nospam@bogusaddress.com> writes:
> snip
>>I think people need to get over the 'saviour' mentality which has 
>>begun
>>to pervade our societies, which states; if someone considers this
>>(whatever it is) is 'FOR YOUR GOOD' then they can SHOVE it down our
>>throats, that they are justified in doing it, and those who DON'T want
>>it are, of course, STUPID (right?) What a bunch of baloney.
>
> I agree; it's related to the "greater good" excuse which is given for 
> many things done apparently on our behalf, many of which reduce our 
> c*v?l l-bert-es (and don't do what they're intended, but aren't 
> removed once this is discovered).
>> snip

Software updates to civil liberties is a bit of a leap, 
folks....but......
Consider the other side of the coin.  The Number ONE infection vector 
for PCs right now is through vulnerabilities in browser plug-ins, and 
the most used browser plug-ins are two Adobe products: Flash and Acrobat 
Reader.  Nearly every update to those two products is to fix a critical 
security vulnerability, and if you don't update them, you are at much 
higher risk of having your computer "owned", putting it under the 
control of someone else without your knowledge.

Now I couldn't care less if you want to put your computer at risk 
because it's easier to not install an update than to replace your 
inadequate video card, and I couldn't care less if it got 
pwned....except for the fact that then your pwned system becomes part of 
a criminal network participating in DoS attacks and a host of other 
activity that screws with everyone else.  So it's better for you to 
allow your system to be used for the disruption of my civil liberties, 
than for your civil liberties to be interfered with by installing 
updates?

If you get a recall notice for a sticking accelerator pedal in your car, 
will you complain that they are shoving it down your throat and throw 
the notice away instead of getting it fixed?  And then when your car 
runs amok and kills a family of 5, that's better because at least your 
civil liberties were preserved?
-- 
Glen Ventura, MS MVP  Oct. 2002 - Sept. 2009
A+
http://dts-l.net/

glee

6/29/2010 4:56:09 AM

True and right

"glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message 
news:i0budm$gl0$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote in message 
> news:TuxFdILkARKMFwLP@soft255.demon.co.uk...
>> In message <i0538k$96f$1@news.eternal-september.org>, none 
>> <nospam@bogusaddress.com> writes:
>> snip
>>>I think people need to get over the 'saviour' mentality which has begun
>>>to pervade our societies, which states; if someone considers this
>>>(whatever it is) is 'FOR YOUR GOOD' then they can SHOVE it down our
>>>throats, that they are justified in doing it, and those who DON'T want
>>>it are, of course, STUPID (right?) What a bunch of baloney.
>>
>> I agree; it's related to the "greater good" excuse which is given for 
>> many things done apparently on our behalf, many of which reduce our c*v?l 
>> l-bert-es (and don't do what they're intended, but aren't removed once 
>> this is discovered).
>>> snip
>
> Software updates to civil liberties is a bit of a leap, folks....but......
> Consider the other side of the coin.  The Number ONE infection vector for 
> PCs right now is through vulnerabilities in browser plug-ins, and the most 
> used browser plug-ins are two Adobe products: Flash and Acrobat Reader. 
> Nearly every update to those two products is to fix a critical security 
> vulnerability, and if you don't update them, you are at much higher risk 
> of having your computer "owned", putting it under the control of someone 
> else without your knowledge.
>
> Now I couldn't care less if you want to put your computer at risk because 
> it's easier to not install an update than to replace your inadequate video 
> card, and I couldn't care less if it got pwned....except for the fact that 
> then your pwned system becomes part of a criminal network participating in 
> DoS attacks and a host of other activity that screws with everyone else. 
> So it's better for you to allow your system to be used for the disruption 
> of my civil liberties, than for your civil liberties to be interfered with 
> by installing updates?
>
> If you get a recall notice for a sticking accelerator pedal in your car, 
> will you complain that they are shoving it down your throat and throw the 
> notice away instead of getting it fixed?  And then when your car runs amok 
> and kills a family of 5, that's better because at least your civil 
> liberties were preserved?
> -- 
> Glen Ventura, MS MVP  Oct. 2002 - Sept. 2009
> A+
> http://dts-l.net/
>

Hot

6/30/2010 2:39:13 PM

In message <i0budm$gl0$1@news.eternal-september.org>, glee 
<glee29@spamindspring.com> writes:
>"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote in message 
>news:TuxFdILkARKMFwLP@soft255.demon.co.uk...
>> In message <i0538k$96f$1@news.eternal-september.org>, none 
>><nospam@bogusaddress.com> writes:
>> snip
>>>I think people need to get over the 'saviour' mentality which has 
>>>begun
>>>to pervade our societies, which states; if someone considers this
>>>(whatever it is) is 'FOR YOUR GOOD' then they can SHOVE it down our
>>>throats, that they are justified in doing it, and those who DON'T want
>>>it are, of course, STUPID (right?) What a bunch of baloney.
>>
>> I agree; it's related to the "greater good" excuse which is given for 
>>many things done apparently on our behalf, many of which reduce our 
>>c*v?l l-bert-es (and don't do what they're intended, but aren't 
>>removed once this is discovered).
>>> snip
>
>Software updates to civil liberties is a bit of a leap, 
>folks....but......
>Consider the other side of the coin.  The Number ONE infection vector 
>for PCs right now is through vulnerabilities in browser plug-ins, and 
>the most used browser plug-ins are two Adobe products: Flash and 
>Acrobat Reader.  Nearly every update to those two products is to fix a 
>critical security vulnerability, and if you don't update them, you are 
>at much higher risk of having your computer "owned", putting it under 
>the control of someone else without your knowledge.

Good point. As it happens, I've just tried to update it anyway, having 
forgotten about this thread. (The update process failed at some point, 
but that wasn't, obviously, my intention.)
>
>Now I couldn't care less if you want to put your computer at risk 
>because it's easier to not install an update than to replace your 
>inadequate video card, and I couldn't care less if it got

Who is to say whether my video card is inadequate - you don't know what 
I use it for! (Actually very little that requires any modern abilities 
on its part.) (In fact I'm posting from a netbook - I wouldn't know how 
to go about changing the video card.)

>pwned....except for the fact that then your pwned system becomes part 
>of a criminal network participating in DoS attacks and a host of other 
>activity that screws with everyone else.  So it's better for you to 
>allow your system to be used for the disruption of my civil liberties, 
>than for your civil liberties to be interfered with by installing updates?

Wow, I obviously hit a nerve! I wasn't necessarily saying in all cases - 
I was just agreeing with "none" that there does seem to be a tendency to 
over-use "for your [own] good" as an excuse to force things on us. There 
are obviously plenty of examples where it's valid, and plenty where it 
isn't.
[]
-- 
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

We need a reversal of the old saying: "DON'T do unto others as you would have
them NOT do unto you." (Paraphrase from "The Moral Maze", 1998-11-21: it was an
attempt - quite good I thought - to get a modern [and non-specific] version.)

6/30/2010 10:01:49 PM

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote in message 
news:5Vb$zOON77KMFwMz@soft255.demon.co.uk...
> In message <i0budm$gl0$1@news.eternal-september.org>, glee 
> <glee29@spamindspring.com> writes:
>>"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote in message 
>>news:TuxFdILkARKMFwLP@soft255.demon.co.uk...
>>> In message <i0538k$96f$1@news.eternal-september.org>, none 
>>> <nospam@bogusaddress.com> writes:
>>> snip
>>>>I think people need to get over the 'saviour' mentality which has 
>>>>begun
>>>>to pervade our societies, which states; if someone considers this
>>>>(whatever it is) is 'FOR YOUR GOOD' then they can SHOVE it down our
>>>>throats, that they are justified in doing it, and those who DON'T 
>>>>want
>>>>it are, of course, STUPID (right?) What a bunch of baloney.
>>>
>>> I agree; it's related to the "greater good" excuse which is given 
>>> for many things done apparently on our behalf, many of which reduce 
>>> our c*v?l l-bert-es (and don't do what they're intended, but aren't 
>>> removed once this is discovered).
>>>> snip
>>
>>Software updates to civil liberties is a bit of a leap, 
>>folks....but......
>>Consider the other side of the coin.  The Number ONE infection vector 
>>for PCs right now is through vulnerabilities in browser plug-ins, and 
>>the most used browser plug-ins are two Adobe products: Flash and 
>>Acrobat Reader.  Nearly every update to those two products is to fix a 
>>critical security vulnerability, and if you don't update them, you are 
>>at much higher risk of having your computer "owned", putting it under 
>>the control of someone else without your knowledge.
>
> Good point. As it happens, I've just tried to update it anyway, having 
> forgotten about this thread. (The update process failed at some point, 
> but that wasn't, obviously, my intention.)


Sometimes it's better in that case to uninstall all versions of Flash, 
download and run their Flash Uninstaller, reboot, then download the 
latest version's installer manually, and install.


>>
>>Now I couldn't care less if you want to put your computer at risk 
>>because it's easier to not install an update than to replace your 
>>inadequate video card, and I couldn't care less if it got
>
> Who is to say whether my video card is inadequate - you don't know 
> what I use it for! (Actually very little that requires any modern 
> abilities on its part.) (In fact I'm posting from a netbook - I 
> wouldn't know how to go about changing the video card.)


John, although I replied to the last post in this portion of the thread, 
which was yours, I was mainly addressing the remarks made by "none".  If 
you look at his post (to which you replied), he was referring to his 
reason for not updating being that he felt he had too little VRAM and 
thus could not display full-screen.


>>pwned....except for the fact that then your pwned system becomes part 
>>of a criminal network participating in DoS attacks and a host of other 
>>activity that screws with everyone else.  So it's better for you to 
>>allow your system to be used for the disruption of my civil liberties, 
>>than for your civil liberties to be interfered with by installing 
>>updates?
>
> Wow, I obviously hit a nerve! I wasn't necessarily saying in all 
> cases - I was just agreeing with "none" that there does seem to be a 
> tendency to over-use "for your [own] good" as an excuse to force 
> things on us. There are obviously plenty of examples where it's valid, 
> and plenty where it isn't.


Again, as I mentioned above, I was mainly referring to the comments and 
attitude in the reply by "none".  I probably should have repled directly 
to his post instead, but since you had brought up the civil liberties 
terminology, I clicked reply at that juncture.  Sorry....you 
inadvertently ended up in the middle.  :)

-- 
Glen Ventura, MS MVP  Oct. 2002 - Sept. 2009
A+
http://dts-l.net/

glee

7/1/2010 12:56:28 AM

microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion

237 articles.

0 followers.

13 Replies

1243 Views

(page loaded in 0.671 seconds)

8/2/2012 4:35:04 PM