Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:HOSTS files = QUITE relevant (Score 1) 495 495

What are you sniveling about now? no-ip.com wasn't seized. The authoritive NS records for the domain still point to Vitalwerks' servers. Ditto for the other no-ip ccTLDs - all of which you listed. Face it, your list is wrong, and RANDOMLY capitalising and bolding WORDS doesn't change that fact, or that hosts files are irrelevant to this discussion.

Comment: Re:Hey stupid - prove they're not bad (Score 1) 495 495

APK, for the love of all that's holy... I don't give a shit about your hosts files. They aren't even relevant to this topic. And I post days later because I don't troll Slashdot day and night looking for perceived offenses to take umbrage at and scour comment histories to spam up with irrelevant bullshit.

Comment: Re:"Wrong"? Prove it... apk (Score 1) 495 495

Hey fuckwit, I didn't say anything about your fucking hosts files. I said your list was wrong because it included a bunch of domains which aren't seized, which is correct.

There's a reason people resort to profanity when dealing with you: because you're a contemptible trolling cunt who needs to fuck off and stop acting like a 5 year old. If you actually read my comment history, you'd see that on occasion I have even agreed with you, where you say things which make sense.

Comment: Re:Can we get a lawyer to assist? (Score 1) 495 495

Well, no. Since what they claimed is that they only SEEK to block traffic to the malicious domains. For example by blocking the bad ones and recursing the other ones. Now, they failed to do that, but it wasn't intentional. You certainly wouldn't be able to claim bad faith.

Yes, we will be going to OSI, Mars, and Pluto, but not necessarily in that order. -- Jeffrey Honig

Working...