Comment Re:Where do I comment? (Score 1) 165
They're trying to increase page hits and ad impressions on the BI sites that next to no one cares about. It's one of those Dice.com side effects.
They're trying to increase page hits and ad impressions on the BI sites that next to no one cares about. It's one of those Dice.com side effects.
especially if game developers start to ditch Windows
Hahahahahaha! Good joke! Ditch 99% of their customers in PC game market? Yeah, right. Even Valve doesn't even believe this nonsense otherwise it would have already gone Linux-only. Gabe is saber rattling because knows freetards can't sustain his business.
Yes, hence why it was stupid that the "editor" did not pick up on it and fix it. As you said, it's glaringly obvious.
That was meant to be "second to last full paragraph".
Yeah, it's a typo. The privacy report says in the last full paragraph on page 13:
As it can't be ruled out that the published Windows executable of TrueCrypt 7.0a is compiled from a different source code than the code published in “TrueCrypt 7.0a Source.zip” we however can't preclude that the binary Windows package uses the header bytes after the key for a back door.
Seems the author retyped the statement themselves rather than just copying and pasting then the summary carried it over.
Yeah was just about to make the same post. That sentence sounds pretty stupid.
To further explain, your statement is akin to calling MP3 a DRM scheme. AAC is simply an audio codec standard.
You have to excuse Timmeh. He'a an idiot. PengPod doesn't give any such "guarantee". Timmeh just thinks he's smart and witty by inserting the NSA into the topic.
Link not length.
Except I'm not ignoring anything. My statements are based on actual statements from officials in the administration, declassified documents and info from FOIA requests. Do you have proof that Paul O'Neill was lying? Or can you at all provide evidence to dispute my second length based on declassified documents and FOIA requests? All you seem to have is ad homs.
LOL it was contingency planning? Are you serious? The only one engaging in revisionism is you.
But didn't you read below? I supposedly just manufactured all of this. I'm sure that idiot probably still believes that Iraq had WMDs.
And if you want to deny the USA today story read this. They were planning the Iraq invasion as early as January 2001.
Nothing revisionist about it. From here:
CRAWFORD, Texas — Paul O'Neill, President Bush's Treasury secretary in the first two years of his presidency, says the Bush administration was planning to invade Iraq long before the Sept. 11 attacks and used questionable intelligence to justify the war.
This is a 7 year old story.
Because constructing false dilemmas is more fun.
"Your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberrys!" -- Monty Python and the Holy Grail
