Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×
User Journal

Journal Journal: Just moving my User perfs Bios to journal in hopes of a link.

Once I opened up and posted it here, it's' what I've been using elsewhere. I do hope you don't mind.

Former: Pharmacist, Electrician, Purchasing Agent for the Alyeska Pipeline (Alaska), Certified nuclear reactor operator of a 4000 M/W reactor producing Plutonium for DOE (Department of Energy), and avid poster to the Usenet Newsgroup: 24hoursupport.helpdesk.

Present: Bum with an Internet connection.

User Journal

Journal Journal: Prevent almost all ads from your cell phone (no HOST)

The back story: Taken from the ToS of Rivio.com (angry birds):
All of the data collected from you is sold to Flurry.com (was Google now comes from Yahoo.com - robtex.com will show all), Flurry.com takes that data mixing it with what they have; sending it out to you as target ads.

Your able to opt out of flurry.com, and in my case now have almost zero ads coming in, the only exception is from the application your using. I've done this with ever cell phone I've owned and even a Xoom tablet (Android).

How: Goto Google Play Store and download "Device info" the one your looking for is a green circle with a small i in the middle (by:jphilli85). Install this free and ad-less program; It will show as a green ID on your screen; open it up and grab the very first number (Secure. ANDROID_ID).

Now: Google: flurry.com opt out - on that screen are pages of text mentioning what a good thing they are, a few screen down is a place to input your type of phone and a spot to paste the number ID gave you.

After inputing the number you will be told it's successful by telling you it will take a few weeks to get the number into the system.

And your done, enjoy.

User Journal

Journal Journal: I've referred to this so much it's just easier to post it here.

This was posted and grabbed from the Newsgroup: alt.fan.cecil-adams it's my reference to the meaning of a virgin but it goes much deeper, and quite lengthy.

From: "Bill Baldwin"
Subject: Re: Bill Baldwin citing
Date: 1999/08/14
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Newsgroups: alt.fan.cecil-adams

Deborah wrote:
>"Ras Harpentuan" writes:
>>May be old news, but is this the same Bill Baldwin that frequents this
>>group? http://www.straightdope.com/columns/990730.html
>Ed Zotti was doing some fact-checking, and asked me to help him out with
>the background on this question. Always eager to delegate, I suggested
>putting Bill in the picture.
>I only regret that Cecil did not end up quoting Bill more extensively,
>since the summary that he prepared for Ed was not only edifying but
>Maybe Bill will post it here, if we ask nicely. What do you say, Bill?
>Pretty please?

  I have served the master well. My life is complete. Here's the full
text of what I sent "Little Ed." (You'll note that the misprint suggesting
that Greek for "sisters" is "adelphi" rather than the correct "adelphai" is
not derived from my synopsis. And Cecil being who he is, this mistake
obviously belongs to someone else. Must be the work of disgruntled office
drudges or saboteurs):

(1) whether Jesus had siblings


I know of no extra-Biblical historical source that says anything on this
subject. Several Biblical passages do speak of Jesus' brothers: John 2:12,
7:3-5, 10, Acts 1:14, Matthew 12:46,47 (parallel passage Mark 3:31,32),
Matthew 13:55 (Mark 6:3). The last of these names them as James, Joseph (or
Joses), Simon, and Judas and goes on to mention that he had sisters as well.

Also Matthew (in 1:25) and Luke (in 2:7) refer to Jesus as Mary's
"firstborn" son. However, it's possible that such a designation was
conferred automatically to firstborn sons at birth whether there was further
issue or not.

Paul also refers to "James, the Lord's brother" in Galatians 1:19.

However, it is interesting to note that Jesus on the cross singles out John,
"the beloved disciple" but a non-relation. He says of John to Mary "Woman,
behold your son" and of Mary to John, "Behold your mother" with the result
that John took her in to live with him (John 19:25-27). This is a somewhat
perplexing decree when the woman presumably had four able-bodied sons
available to take care of her. However, John 7:5 notes that his brothers did
not believe in him, so that would be a simple explanation of his preference
for John.


So obviously the Church line was that Jesus had siblings, right? Of course,
right, say the Protestants. Not so fast, Bub, say the Eastern Orthodox and
the Roman Catholics. Mary was not simply a virgin when she conceived, but a
virgin all her life, unsullied by the inherent dirtiness of the sex act.
(Thus, as Dave Barry noted, making Joseph the patron saint of cold showers,
but I digress.) So these cannot be her children.

I have labeled this section "The Dogma" advisedly. The perpetual virginity
of Mary is not a doctrine asserted by Scripture. It is a dogma handed down
by Tradition, an authority which the Orthodox and Roman Catholics
acknowledge on a level with Scripture, but which Protestants reject.

So the Orthodox and Catholics disagree with the Protestant interpretation of
the above data. It only remains for them, inevitably, to disagree with each

The Orthodox Dogma

The passages refer to Jesus' half brothers. They are Joseph's sons by a
former marriage. They are called brothers by the same convention that allows
Scripture to refer to Joseph as Jesus' "father" despite the fact that he
hadn't, technically, been involved in the conception except as an innocent

Support from Tradition: "This theory is found first in the apocryphal
writings of James (the Protevangelium Jacobi, the Ascents of James, etc.),
and then among the leading Greek fathers (Clement of Alexandria, Origen,
Eusebius, Gregory of Nyssa, Epiphanius, Cyril of Alexandria); it is embodied
in the Greek, Syrian, and Coptic services, which assign different dates to
the commemoration of James the son of Alphaeus (Oct. 9), and of James the
LordÂ's brother (Oct. 23). It may therefore be called the theory of the
Eastern church. It was also held by some Latin fathers before Jerome (Hilary
of Poitiers and Ambrose)" (Philip Schaff, _History of the Christian Church).
With such evidence, the eastern church is more than content.

Strengths: It would be very natural to the Hebrew mindset to refer to such
relations as "brothers." It supports the dogma of Mary's virginity. It
lessens the problem of Jesus commending his mother into John's care. (But
not much. See "Weaknesses.") It explains the brothers' patronizing attitude
to Jesus in John 7:3,4.

Weaknesses: Jesus' brothers almost always accompany his mother, indicating a
close relationship and leaving the problem of Jesus commending Mary to John
undiminished. It assumes a former marriage of Joseph nowhere attested to.
(This isn't really such a big deal. There are lots of things we aren't told
about Joseph.) It compromises Jesus' claim to the throne of David which had
to come through Joseph's lineage, not Mary's. Scripture elsewhere vigorously
asserts this claim.

The Catholic Dogma

The passages refer to Jesus' cousins. This theory was first advanced by a
young Saint Jerome (of Latin Vulgate fame) in 383. He was arguing against
one Helvidius who had held forth the theory that Jesus' "brothers" were,
well, his brothers. To Jerome this did not sufficiently guard the purity of
Mary or, interestingly enough, of Joseph either.

Jerome's contemporary and an even bigger theological powerhouse, Augustine,
picked up the cousin theory. He waffled for a bit with the half-brother idea
in 394. But finally his inherent suspicion of the sex act won out and
decided for the virginity of both parties.

Naturally, then, the Latin or Western Church adopted this view.

This is Roman Catholic doctrine to this day. The Jerusalem Bible, a modern
English translation for Catholics, has this footnote where Jesus' brothers
are referred to: "Not MaryÂ's children but near relations, cousins perhaps,
which both Hebr. and Aramaic style Â'brothers,Â' cf. Gn 13:8 ; 14:16 ; 29:15 ;
Lv 10:4 ; I Ch 23:22f ."

The Catholic doctrine further asserts that these cousins are sons of Mary,
the wife of Alphaeus and sister of the Virgin Mary; but I'm darned if I know
how they decided that.

Strengths: It protects Mary's and Joseph's virginity. It accounts even
better for Jesus commending his mother into the care of John, "the beloved
disciple." It does not compromise Jesus' claim to the Davidic throne.

Weaknesses: There are perfectly good Greek words for "cousin" and "kinsman"
and these words are used in the very books that refer to Jesus' "brothers."
This is simply an unnatural reading of the text. It means that the Virgin
Mary had a sister named ... Mary. Right.

Conclusion: Aside from dogmatic concerns, there is every reason to believe
the Bible claims Jesus had four brothers and at least two sisters. There is
no other contemporary historical evidence on either side of this question.


(2) whether virgin as in Virgin Mary meant what we think it means today or
merely "young woman."



Luke is explicit about this. He recounts how the angel appeared to Mary and
told her she would bring forth a son. She responds with the obvious
question: "How can this be, since I do not know a man [i.e. I'm a virgin]?"
(Luke 1:34). The angel responds that the child will be conceived in her by
the Holy Spirit.

Matthew concurs. Matthew 1:18 reads: "Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as
follows: After His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, before they came
together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit." The gospel goes on
to note that Joseph's first impulse on finding out his fiancée was pregnant
was to break up with her. He had to be calmed down by an angel telling him
everything was jake and that the child in her was conceived by the Holy

Matthew sums up the event in 1:22,23: "So all this was done that it might be
fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying:
23'Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall
call His name Immanuel,' which is translated, 'God with us.'"


Did Matthew and Luke and the early church assign virginity to Mary because
of a misunderstanding of an Old Testament prophecy? Does the Hebrew Bible
really predict that a virgin will conceive the Messiah? Or does this basic
Christian doctrine rest on (giggle) a mistranslation?


Here's the King James translation of the prophecy from Isaiah 7:14: "Behold,
a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel."
Now for the New Revised Standard translation: "Look, the young woman is with
child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel."

Both versions are translating the Hebrew word almah. The Koehler-Baumgartner
lexicon -- the OED of the Hebrew to English world -- defines it thus:
"almah: girl (of marriageable age), young woman (until the birth of first
child)." The first definition implies virginity, the second doesn't. And
even in the first definition, the idea that the almah would conceive
doesn't necessarily mean that she would do so while still a virgin. She
could get married, do the nasty, and then conceive.

The word is used 7 times in the Hebrew Bible. Here's how it breaks down:

Genesis 23:43 -- The woman, Rebekah, is unquestionably a virgin
Exodus 2:8 -- The woman, Pharaoh's daughter, may or may not be a virgin.
Isaiah 7:14 -- (The passage in question)
Psalm 68:26 -- Probably virgins, but unable to tell.
Proverbs 30:19 -- Probably virgins, but unable to tell.
Song of Solomon 1:3 -- Probably virgins, but unable to tell.
Song of Solomon 6:8 -- Probably virgins, but unable to tell.

What else is there? Nothing really. For the New Testament, we can study
contemporary ancient Greek documents. For the Old Testament, the Hebrew
Bible is all there is (excepting the odd amulet or bit of pottery).

So where did Matthew get the idea to translate this "virgin"? From the
Septuagint, the 3rd to 1st Century B.C. Greek translation of the Hebrew
Scriptures. Hebrew was becoming an unfamiliar language to many, so the Jews
set to work on a suitable translation to be read in the synagogues. This
translation pegs the almah as a parthenos. A virgin. Nothing more, less, or

One other time the Septuagint translates the word as "parthenos" (virgin), 4
times "neanis" (young woman, girl, maiden) and once as "neotes" (youthful
female). Even these second and third words indicate that the person in
question is a virgin.

The passage surrounding Isaiah 7:14 involves a prophesy to King Ahaz of
Judah when King Rezin of Aram and Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel are
marching against Jerusalem, Judah's capital. The Lord tells Ahaz to ask for
a sign, but Ahaz declines. So the prophet Isaiah expresses the Lord's
disgust at this and says he'll give a sign anyway. A ... whatever ... will
conceive and bear a son, etc. "But before the boy knows enough to reject the
wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid


The Early Church Was Misled by the Septuagint

Under this theory the Septuagint made a simple error of translation. The
early Church, in its zeal to proclaim Jesus the Jewish Messiah (and
possibly, doing double duty, explain away rumors of his illegitimacy) stated
that this prophecy of virgin birth had been fulfilled in their Lord.

Argument for: The word doesn't really mean virgin. And what's more the
prophecy clearly refers to the near future of Ahaz's time, not to the remote
future of the coming Messiah. Before the boy grows up, the two kings coming
against Ahaz will be defeated. This happened long before the birth of Jesus.

Rebuttal: It was a Jewish translation of Isaiah, prior to the time of
Christ, that first introduced the idea that it was a virgin that would
conceive. These translators knew the Hebrew language and chose their words
carefully. They would have been able to formulate the above argument, yet
still they chose to translate the passage the way they did.

One must understand the hermeneutic of the time. Many passages were
considered messianic that would not appear that way to a 20th century
reader. Even passages that refer to the near future or even the present or
the past. This was not a hermeneutic invented by the early church, although
naturally the early church seized on it. In any event, a passage predicting
the birth of "Immanuel" -- Hebrew for "God with us" -- would almost
certainly have been considered messianic. Matthew wasn't even being

An advantage to rejecting this is it saves us from the "Everyone was stupid
then, but we're so smart now" school of thought.

The Passage Is a Prophecy of a Miraculous Virgin Birth

Pro: It's possible that the Hebrew word almah always carried the connotation
of virginity. There just isn't enough Hebrew data to conclude that. This
would explain why the Septuagint translators, who knew Hebrew and Greek,
made the translation they did.

Rebuttal: Dang it, the passage clearly refers to the time of Ahaz! He's got
two kings attacking him and those kings will be defeated before this kid
that's about to be born is mature. There's no reference in Isaiah or any of
the contemporary historical narratives to a miraculous virgin birth. And
that's the only time when this miracle could have occurred to fulfil this
prophecy. A virgin birth over half a millennium later just doesn't count,
even if it did happen.

It's a Floor Wax and a Dessert Topping

The prophecy in Isaiah has both a proximate and an ultimate fulfillment. It
refers proximately to an event in Ahaz's time and ultimately to the birth of
the Messiah. Thus the use of almah is deliberately ambiguous. It refers in
Ahaz's time to a young woman who will conceive in the ordinary way, but it
refers ultimately to the birth of Christ. The Septuagint translators chose
to emphasize the ultimate over the proximate fulfillment.

Pro: Regardless of whether this flies with us, this is certainly consistent
with the attitude of Matthew and the other New Testament writers. Matthew
was not ignorant of the historical context of Isaiah's prophecy; he simply
felt that the ultimate historical context of all Scripture had arrived in
Jesus. As Paul put it, "All the promises of God are 'yes' in Christ Jesus."

In support of this, notice how Matthew handles the flight of Mary and Joseph
into Egypt. "So [Joseph] got up, took the child and his mother during the
night and left for Egypt, 15where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so
was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: 'Out of Egypt I
called my son.'"

Matthew is here quoting Hosea 11:1:"When Israel was a child, I loved him,
and out of Egypt I called my son." Hosea is clearly referring to the flight
of the nation of Israel from Egypt. (In fact, Hosea, speaking for God, goes
right on to complain that "the more I called Israel, the further they went
from me." This would certainly be an odd set of words for Matthew to apply
to Jesus.) Israel is often referred to as God's "son" in the Hebrew Bible.

Now Matthew is not brain dead. He knows that the words of Hosea originally
referred to the flight of Israel from Egypt. And he knows his readers know
that. So what's he trying to pull? He's trying to say that it is Jesus who
is the true son of God, Jesus who is the true Israel. He is reinterpreting
the literal meaning of these words, imbuing them with Messianic portent.

Many such examples could be adduced in Matthew. And Matthew is not alone in
this. This appears to be the uniform treatment of Old Testament prophecies
by the New Testament writers.

Rebuttal: I'll leave that to Deborah (hee hee). Seriously, I think this is
clearly what's going on in Matthew's argument. The obvious non-Christian
rebuttal is "Do you expect us to buy his argument?" But that's really
outside the scope of this response. I'm simply saying that this was the New
Testament understanding; and, as far as the translation "virgin" goes,
there's pre-Christian provenance for that. Where Deborah may be able to help
is in answering whether pre-Christian Rabbinic interpretation of Isaiah 7
was messianic.

User Journal

Journal Journal: Old Thinking: My HOST file protect me 2

My IP address (as per Grc.com (SheildsUp)) is Robtex.com shows and I expected

NetRange: -
NetName: TMO9
NetHandle: NET-172-32-0-0-1
Parent: NET172 (NET-172-0-0-0-0)
NetType: Direct Allocation
OriginAS: AS21928
Organization: T-Mobile USA, Inc. (TMOBI)
RegDate: 2012-09-18
Updated: 2012-09-18

Kool I'm as anonymous as one can get and how I've seen it from day one.

Then hell, check out my IP address (from phone > info)

Netname: DNIC-NET-030
NetRange: -
NetName: DNIC-NET-030
NetHandle: NET-30-0-0-0-1
Parent: ()
NetType: Direct Allocation
Organization: DoD Network Information Center (DNIC)
RegDate: 1991-07-01
Updated: 2009-06-19


User Journal

Journal Journal: HOSTS file for the Win! 2

My Malware protection a 144267 line HOSTS file (called that on any operating system
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1122) and a very outdated version of Comodo firewall.

I've always been curious why my postings of the C:\Windows\System32\CWX\*.* files didn't receive more attention than it did, as the littlest of such types of it's nature activity are being reported. Surly the anti-maleware ware companies are aware of this and a + to their product when listed as being caught.

I was even banned from the website sevenforums.com After posting about it.

You have been banned for the following reason:
Posting crap
Date the ban will be lifted:Never

You can't stop this kind of stuff from happening
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-06-14/u-s-agencies-said-to-swap-data-with-thousands-of-firms other than using a HOSTS file. Yet even then may of no use which according to APK Microsoft can disabled. From day one I've never seen what the right side of /. holds.

User Journal

Journal Journal: CWX directory, what it did, u got hosed

The refusal I've encountered of even considering such a thing caught me off guard,
My first post got me banned from sevenforum three days after I registered for posting crap -claim- I think it was really when someone posted their services I mentioned what AVG has done is a crime - it's like 10 services now, I hit on a sponsor. It's been so long since I've used any av program but 8-10 services are too much for a program

This type of thing (CWX) comes in three phases, one the alert there might be a problem with xxx and what you or they found.

Two is verification that it is indeed it's not wanted. In this case I'm might know where I can get it, and if not be very disappointed in them.

Three what it really does as your findings are coming together and making since and
normally the removal and repair if needed.

I'm at three - I know all who have a CWX directory have sent a scan like I posted just with their cache files. It ran for 24 hours then left so less than 25 hours. Your protection didn't have time to get anything to you. So why even mention it. I know how I screwed up and it went from 500 to 7 K (it got sent), I know why I alone came across it. Pretty much any question about about it now I can answer, FWIW I fairly sure to a high degree what directory it used to hide it's activity, come on it's an easy one, considering what it sent. I know Microsoft didn't do this alone, a third party collected the config.xml files who? don't need to know, and I'm sure nobody else does either. but it's not over, expect this again as from the post I've read if you read this your one of the few who know what it did, Microsoft got away with it.

apk scores one here, he's not a spammer while the post are long even for me and overkill they can be much shorter (just tell me if my post are too long), he's really giving you a clue, if you just listen to what he supports above all - is better than anything else you can run then your close to understanding the clue.

And while I did everything right I did it wrong. 15 days after it's installation and still nobody knew what it really does was a red light for me and why I was removing it.

Oh and the fact I sent a scan to someone I could care less - I'm sure I've sent worse. My post were to alert u, but hell it happened over 10 days ago so my post were useless.

My protection: very old version of Comodo firewall, if it works as well has all this time it stays, what I know, HOSTS file and autoruns to tell me what I need to know.

  would suggest you remove the CWX directory, even if it's other function is "prep you for an update" hell easier and to introduce you to the only tool you need (for most functions) just use autoruns and disable it,

An option is to: Hide Signed Microsoft Entries you can't trust them anymore I'd have those in the view. (unhide MS entries)

User Journal

Journal Journal: Follow up: I now feel it important enough that you know of and remove this item, 2

Disconnect yourself from the Internet. I now feel it will send the results itself if tampered with.

To remove the directory (many ways I'm sure, I just did it the way I always do) boot up with another OS

The config.xml in question I found and copied when I first found it (Powerpro keeps the last 100 clips (a clip - anytime time a copy command is used from any application or keys PowerPro keeps a copy) I can go back later to find something that's now of importance in some manner - a recently used username and password (security, lot of sites on the internet to visit till the right one is found), So a feature always waiting through PowerPro (been using it since Win95) I'm just used to copying stuff, it does no harm and available later if needed.

I was in no hurry, the directory was protected and I was going to remove it no big deal.

Booted into MiniXP and moved the directory to a pen drive.

From the time I found the config.xml file, to logging off the config.xml became a 7K config.xml file (default size), down from over 500K

Damn, I went to the PowerPro to see if I had copied it and found I had, whew not a dream. I have to assume is was sent within being found and shutting down I have no clue the time, but not long after finding the CWX , I use Agent Ransack alone for my system searches I haven't run MS search since Win98?? when the cache collector took up all the resources rendering ones computer fairly useless. Once burnt shame on u, twice burnt situation, I've disabled it since. Agent Ransack (Ctl+Alt+F) is all I've used, it searches everything as opposed to just certain file types. files strings, by file name, the desperate act of three letters, regular expression, over a span of months, to hours (as low as I'd go). Being free you can use it yourself, if you want it Agent Ransack will find it by offering more than a few ways to search

Agent Ransack and I looked hard for anything related to the original config.xml or any parts of the file, I wanted to find that file or any parts of it anywhere on my system, if for no other reason help explain the existence of the CWX directory.- Yet I alone seem to know of the cache scan and a 500K file that left without a trace as my firewall should of warned me (I don't use the windows firewall)

I felt a need to issue a warning, it's what I do, help others I spent 7 years in the newsgroup: 24hoursupport.helpdesk cause I could do just that, no question was off limits but 99% of them were computer related. It's turned political and has been for years

I would of appreciated a warning found nothing in any config.xml file and questioned the poster myself but removed it as something I had no use for it from what I found. I have to wonder if others scans had already left as a 15 day wait between capture and it's disappearance is damn odd as well, I block a hell of a lot of sites, causing it stick around is not far fetched.

I don't see the post with the scan and wouldn't be surprised if it has been deleted. This CWX and what I know has caused me nothing but problems.
I'll send the scan to anyone who wishes to view it, even post it to a newsgroup just not on any web sites again.

User Journal

Journal Journal: I now feel it important enough that you know of and remove this item,

it has the potential of causing some major problems for you (or anyone).

Update notice: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3035583/ Opening a + will show you the files involved. Do noticed your told nothing of what it's suppose to do.
Update reference #: KB3035583

The directory in question is located at Windows/System32/GWX. You can't read the files where they are, most will give wrong path errors (at least what I was getting). The files are protected, and best left alone.
Disconnect yourself from the Internet. I now feel it will send the results itself if tampered with.

To remove the directory (many ways I'm sure, I just did it the way I always do) boot up with another OS (I use MiniXP supplied with Hiren's boot disk 15, in a pinch you can cobble a Boot CD/pen drive using www.Bootdisk.com). Just boot into MiniXP (or other) go to the GWX directory and move it to a Pen Drive (or where ever, just off your system - as it's possible for Win7+ to find and use it from any location (maybe not, but possible)).

Picture shows location of the collected scanned results (UrFile - Config.xml)).

(What was found on my system Apr 3rd and 4th - it was sent after I found the directory Apr 19th - no edits) -log not included this post

Win7+ = Win7 and anything above

Scanned results = Your broswer(s) caches are recorded verbatim, then appended to a log file (config.xml), just over a days worth of activity (in my case).

User Journal

Journal Journal: Don't need any fancy phone after all.

I have a Samsung S5 ($700) for it's 17.9 MegPix camera, problems with the bill forced me to get a back up phone. I picked up a "track phone"; a Samsung "Gusto 3" and while it won't do anything special it's a damn nice phone and once my contract is up I'll be getting a track phone from now on. S5=$100 a month with limits, Gusto=$35 a month, the phone itself cost $10 with unlimited texting and phone calls. I purchased the cheapest one I could find.

All is fine now but have to carry two phones.
S5 battery last half a day, the "Gusto 3" weeks. And if your into photography you'll know of my disappointment of the S5's ISO of 40.

User Journal

Journal Journal: Murder is such a thin line, with two sides.

If you commit such an act your condemned by the legal system for the rest of your life. If in the "line of duty" not a problem at least for the last three that got away with it (read article under video). This happened just last night in my fair city.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-0uqFTBclo one question: why didn't they tackle him? I was told (so hearsay) that he took 16 bullets, everybody wanted in on it.

This happened last night and is part of a larger Mexican "center" - those who live there and those who cater their wares to the Mexicans in particular. I shop the Mexican stores as it's authentic, so my Coca-Cola contains sugar and not that corn syrup crap.


So I get pulled over more now, but this just isn't right, so many options available and they chose wrong.

User Journal

Journal Journal: Opera 12 with flash support, and edit "hidden" Opera 26+ settings.

No flash support forced me update to Opera 26 while keeping Opera 12 installed. Opera 26 got it's own program directory Opera26, but both versions share a common directory, .ini, or registry/registries settings. While both also have different Appsdata directories (both local and roaming) they meet up some place (I haven't dug too deep, it just works and I'm good with that).

I now have the use of Opera 12 with flash support, it took /. to show me Opera 26 no longer allows me to reply to messages (requires flash) yet Opera 12 will, giving me my old and fav browser back.

Fluke? Yes. Can you do the same thing? No clue. Security issues? ?

To edit "hidden" settings in Opera 26 and higher use the address - Opera:flags
I was able to edit the tabs to open as the far right tab (old Opera default), instead of every other browser style, being next to the tabbed window your viewing.

User Journal

Journal Journal: Adobe releases emergency Flash update 2-20-14

ASLR vastly decreases the chances that a remote-code-execution attack will succeed by loading downloaded scripts in a different memory location each time the computer is rebooted. The attackers behind the campaign discovered by FireEye found a way to bypass ASLR on computers running older software. Specifically, PCs running Windows XP, Windows 7 with the now-unsupported 1.6 version of Oracle's Java, and Windows 7 with a now out-of-date version of Office 2007 or Office 2010 don't benefit from the protection of ASLR.

Readers should remember that versions, 11.7.700.261, or earlier of Flash, regardless of the platform they run on, contain the underlying vulnerability.

User Journal

Journal Journal: BF3's window disappearing, appears BF3 has crashed, or BF3.exe stops

As you can see I'm awful wordy this is no exception, I had thought it already posted here...

---First you can fix BF3 very easily by reinstalling your audio drivers. (not so weird if you think about it.)

---- BF3's window disappearing or appears BF3 has crashed. ----

I couldn't play two or three maps of BF3 in a row without the BF3's window
turning Gray then disappearing, "BF3 window" because I thought it was due
to being full screen (in a way it was).

I didn't know if it was my setup, even server side or client side - the opportunity
to find that out was...blocked.

Understand my games ran just fine, then all of a sudden Gray, Black, and I'd
reboot myself to reset what might of been wrong (flush the ram).

I use the Event Viewer (eventvwr.msc) all the time. Win7's is much more useful
than the past Windows OS's but it was only showing a "0 (zero) bit bucket error" (nothing).

So took another approach, debugging the only .DMP file left from a crash and found my problem:
yep a "Windows User Experience Enhancement".

A Timeout Detection and Recovery error, in other words my video card was so busy it didn't
have time to report back it's well being - So the system would reset the video card, taking BF3 with it. While my video card is top of the line, BF3 graphics are rather intense.

My .dmp file was located here X:\Windows\LiveKernelReports\WATCHDOG\

There are registry entries that can fix this at:
the keys must be entered as they aren't there by default

TdrLevel - turn on and off Timeout detection
TdrDelay - change the time out period
TdrDdiDelay - time to reset the graphics stack
TdrLimitTime - time limit TDR's are allowed ( I'll be tweaking)
TdrLimitCount - number of TDR's are allowed ( I'll be tweaking)

Taking the easy way out I just disabled the TDR,

Recently I had rebooted and entered a map with the same players,
I had left. All the chat's were about the lag they were seeing, lot's of people,
lots of lag - not me, the game played just fine. Seems to be just a matter of time
before most are hit with the same problem, just they didn't crash or online to say
they had.

Collected at different times my Event Viewer error messages claimed:
I had run out of Graphic memory or so fragmented it was unusable, another:
"ReportDescription=A problem with your video hardware caused Windows to stop working correctly.",
yet another:
"The Desktop Window Manager is experiencing heavy resource contention.
Scenario : Video memory resources are over-utilized and there is thrashing happening as a result.

"Ultimately, this crash is due to game/software developers and graphics card
manufacturers (such as ATI/AMD and NVidia) developing buggy devices and
software and not playing by the rules and standards dictated for a specific
platform like Windows. There are many cases of similar events happening on
UNIX/Linux systems, so this problem is not specifically isolated to Windows." /Quote

My system:
ASUS P6X58D Premium MotherBoard
Intel Core i7-950 3.8Ghz 1.2 Volts
CORSAIR DOMINATOR 6GB TR3X6G1600C8D Memory 1806Mhz at 1.60volts
EVGA GTX 570 video card (not overclocked)
CORSAIR H-50 Cooling Hydro (CPU water cooler)
CORSAIR HX850 Silver Certified, Modular power supply
3 HD - 2 CD all unspectacular :}

where one should start - also a copy of what my debug output looked like (guess how I found the site).

TDR explanations, registry settings (Win7 and above)

User Journal

Journal Journal: Solved windows 7 event viewer not working

Working on a web site with kompozer, until then figured I'd place things that could help others here.

Like Windows 7's Event Viewer not working anymore, claiming the service isn't running

Bottome line:
The trick is to rename
to say:

RtBackup will recreate itself and everything will be back to normal.

Windows 7 event viewer (eventvwr.msc) has grown up.

Understand Win7 is a new OS for me installed for BattleField3. BF3 is also what I'm
mostly fixing or tweaking the OS for as well. This is also the first time I've ever used
permissions always installing windows on a FAT 32 format

XP and below you would use the event viewer to get a clue to your problem, with Win7 it
actually helps a lot.

I was using the event viewer to track down my problem of not being able to play BF3 2 or 3 games
in a row without the BF3 screen fading to gray then disappear, of course near the end where I'd
lose everything I'd gained.

Now weirdness enters the very day I took a serious approach at this problem.
I kept track of the times I was in game, it ended, the next started, and time of crashes
so I could track the times later in the Event Viewer.

Down to work I opened the Event Viewer and it won't, it quit working, claiming the service
needed to be running first, the service was indeed running.

The event viewer is dependent upon the Task Scheduler and it the event viewer, and between the two
there was a time I wasn't sure what if any services were working.

I tried a repair install of Win7 and couldn't because of SP1 - rough day I have another version of Win7
and two versions of XP I can boot into as well as the CD drives, I think I used them all to attack
the problem from the outside. Working with permissions (sidestepping them) and trying to get a copy
of Win7 to install. While maintaining everything or no data loss, I'm not one to format and start over.

Next day different approach - I finally found the answer at

The trick is to rename
To say:

RtBackup will recreate itself and everything will be back to normal. Simple as that.

I couldn't rename RtBackup. Working with permissions for so long I went into my XP64 OS to
work with it, only to find the directory was "Read Only" sigh...

BTW my cure all ERUNT wouldn't work (permissions) or this post would be much shorter or not at all.
Before I do anything I'll run ERUNT just in case. http://www.larshederer.homepage.t-online.de/erunt/

User Journal

Journal Journal: BF3 - how to cripple or crash any Windows OS with it.

Looking for a post I posted I came across this article (not the right one):

Battlefield 3 Performance: 30+ Graphics Cards Tested http://games.slashdot.org/story/11/10/29/1922214/battlefield-3-performance-30-graphics-cards-tested

I know how to crash a system with any video card running BF3, Bold statement as it's not totally the video cards fault and a crash isn't always the result; but you will have a lot of problems until you reboot.

Running BF3 without pagefile.sys or disk cache, will crash or or severely cripple the OS.

After playing for a while you will be asked politely to quit BF3 as your running out of resources - windows 7 also request shutting down it's charm (DMV.exe) and other services.

Thing here is all the requests are behind the BF3 game screen, you'll start loosing control of any equipment your in, or other odd stuff pertaining to input.

I have 6 Gigs of ram and BF3 is the only application where a Pagefile is required, even Photoshop runs without one now.

Yet for all it's problems BF3 is a very enjoyable game that I play daily but now with a pagefile on a slow drive. My video card: EVGA GTX570

Slashdot Top Deals

The power to destroy a planet is insignificant when compared to the power of the Force. - Darth Vader