Dale said:
Well, if you have copies of all the passwords to my computers, of my
passwords to my bank computers, credit card computers, etc. then aren't
those computers hacked?
Well, if I don't have copies of all your passwords, etc. aren't those
computers not hacked?
You said, ""Kazaa and Napster are responsible for more stolen passwords and
more hacked computers than any virus ever produced to date."
That requires two facts and a very simple analysis and comparison to support
your claim:
#1: A value representing the number of computers hacked and the number of
passwords stolen solely via Kazaa and Napster.
#2: A value representing the number of computers hacked and the number of
passwords stolen solely via viruses.
If the value for #1 is greater than the value for #2, you are correct. If it
isn't, you are wrong.
As far as your statement that I have to prove it or get off the pot, well,
that's absurd. You can choose not to accept what I say, but your lack of
acceptance doesn't make it any less accurate.
And it doens't make it accurate at all (DuH!).
I began by doubting your claim. I asked for proof. While the refusal to
provide proof doesn't prove the opposite, it does cast serious doubt on the
claim -- and the claimant. Your persistence in refusing to furnish any proof
other than off-track comments and bogus reasoning continues to strengthen
any doubt the reader may have. I believe it is reasonable to conclude that
if it were true you would have furnished proof by now. That you continue to
dodge and weave casts continuing doubt on the veracity of your claim and
your actual knowledge of such matters.
I think you are one of those typical bullshitters who inhabit tech groups
and are deluded into thinking that you actually have something worthwhile to
contribute. I could be wrong. I'm basing my opinion on all the evidence I
have before me to date. Whether you agree with me or not is of no
consequence to me.
