TampaYankee

Interesting article, very imformative. Thanks for sharing the information if that was the purpose. Don't loose site though that is it much more important how one lives than how one dies.

>Nobody changes their minds about their politics by these type >of posts, they're just encourage to return flames with flames. I agree and that is why we have chosen to forego a politics forum in favor of the many sites and blogs in internet land. If anything spirals off the current envents path on to hard politics and takes on momentum we will archive the discussion for posterity. :7

Well, I wasn't happy with either side last election or the one before that but that doesnt have any bearing on KYTOP's proposition regarding the issue of potential philosophy of future voters based on likelyhood that they vote as their parents. Of course that assumes that they vote. Or that that they vote in equal proportion across both political philosophies. It also is not clear how these stats accounted for the fact that members of the population tend to grow more conservative with age. I suspect that, as a practical matter, social security and medicare funding is likely to be more of a driver in the popuation attitudes at large. It still remains to be seen if the terror issue will persist to have long term legs. Still there is some truth to the maxim that the acorn doesn't fall far from the tree. Please remember to keep the discussion focused on the nonpolitical subject matter. Political discussions always manage to descend into a shouting match, even if everyone tries to be good. And for what? Few if any ever change their position anyway.

Mr. Franklin was the perfect whore and I say that with ALL DUE RESPECT. He got the goods without ever giving up any. Just charm, wit, and whispered sweet nothings. Masterful, simply masterful. ;-)

>When I think of shows on the Lifetime Network ... > >If you want to watch a comedy that doesn't try to be so >intellectually funny yet have a great edge to it you will >enjoy this show. I am only 13 minutes into it and I have >laughed loudly a few times. > VDN, please report back if you survive the entire 30 min encounter. Just slowy passing by that channel makes me itch. If you report back, I may have to invest in a bottle of Calamine. :7

You do get around, don't you? I love Franklin, wish I had met him.

Entitled: Lust in Bronze http://www.highwaysperformance.org/images/...t/2627Aug06.jpg

Well my friend, your perserverence in the face of adversity continues to amaze me! :7 Nobody is better at turning lemons into lemon curd or lemony Crème Fraîche. :9 Personally, I cannot get enough citrus. Your reputation stands with that of Marc Anthony for exploration and conquest. Thanks for the update and good wishes for a pleasant flight home. I know the dreams will be sweet.

Compliments of: www.completelynaked.org Wish he'd help me make my bed!! I certainly would lie in it. }( http://www.completelynaked.org/in_puris_na...207b5b74c_o.jpg In case of the 'Dude Your Screwed' red 'X' cut and paste the URL then remove the space after www. : www. completelynaked.org/in_puris_naturalibus/images/69871412_9207b5b74c_o.jpg I have seen many fish jump out of water -- on TV anyway. Even sharks, whales and submarines. None of them have anything on this one though. :9 http://www.completelynaked.org/in_puris_na...b688b51f7_b.jpg For those blessed with the red 'X' cut and paste the URL then remove the space after www. : www. completelynaked.org/in_puris_naturalibus/images/115592139_ab688b51f7_b.jpg

Compliments of www.completelynaked.org ([em]...to the tune of Carly Simon's Your So Vain: clouds in my coffee clouds in my coffee, and You're so vain [/em]) Buns for your coffee Buns for your coffee, oh He's so fine... http://www.completelynaked.org/in_puris_na...mages/joshd.jpg in case of the dreaded red 'X' cut and paste then remove the space after www. : www. completelynaked.org/in_puris_naturalibus/images/joshd.jpg http://www.completelynaked.org/in_puris_na...ges/swim500.jpg in case of the dreaded red 'X' cut and paste then remove the space after www. : www. completelynaked.org/in_puris_naturalibus/images/swim500.jpg http://www.completelynaked.org/in_puris_na...bletbutt500.jpg in case of the dreaded red 'X' cut and paste then remove the space after www. : www. completelynaked.org/in_puris_naturalibus/images/bubbletbutt500.jpg

>This site is going to take a LONG time >though to get anywhere because there are hardly any reviews >which is what this is meant to be about, rather than a listing >which you can find anywhere online. Not all of us are lucky enough to be born fully grown and breaking the womb at a full gate at high speed. Upstarts take time to start up -- a law of birthing. The solution to your concern lies more in your hands than in ours. Reviews are contributed by members. They take time to build. Membership grows over time. Membership experiences grow with growing membership. We don't make up reviews and we don't accept just anything thrown through the door slot. Fine brandy is made in small lots and takes time to flower to its maximum potential. We are not quite that pretentious but if we err it is in that direction. Other sites didn't grow any faster in their youth as those who have been around long enough to know, know. If all you desire is quantity, there are several venues. Our quantity will grow too but we won't sacrifice quality to inflate the numbers. Check back next year and the year after and on our fifth anniversary.

>ok I've seen some strange filtering on a message board over >the years but to filter out #### #### his pet name makes >absolutely no sense to me, then many feel i have no sense at >all anyway. To put it bluntly you are dragging the past in the door using a demeaning name you coined. Cute, it is not. Funny, it is not. Entertaining, it is not. If you dont want to leave all of the past at the door then please don't bother to drop in.

> I'd rather fuck a >dead rotting corpse in the ass, in a filthy alley with >starving rats biting at my nipples before that would ever >happen. But then again, that's just me. > It is this kind of rhetorical excess that contributed to things spinning out of control in the past. We serve food on the premises and this won't help appetites. Feel free to express contrary views, dislike or displeasure in a way that keeps the folks from tossing our Blue Plate Special. Thanks. :7

>I am sure someone has asked this in the past but when a box >with a red x appears where there should have been a picture is >there something one can do to get the picture? Thanks. > >B Hi broker, Two possibilities come to mind: corrupted pics and hot linking. Corrupted pics are just -- compressed photo code that has been corrupted so badly that the image cannot be decompressed and displayed. The software displays the 'Hey dude you're screwed' red 'X'. The hot link issues has been discussed before: http://www.maleescortreview.com/dcscript/d...sg_id=767&page= The short take is hot linking is sometimes reluctant to give up the goods. Again, the software displays the 'Hey dude you're screwed' red 'X'. The pics need to be loaded in your browser cache to see. Click 'Reply with Quote' then cut and paste URL in your browser address and click go. The pic apprears on a new page, When you return to your forum page, low and behold the pic is there. It will remain visible on subsequent visits until those cache pages are cleared for newer pages. Sorry it is so cumbersome but I dont make the internet rules of the road. If I did then I would be driving much faster in my own lane! }( P.S. Any hot tips for today?

>... but your achievements distort the bell curve! You can say that again. :7

Thanks for taking the opportunity to repost your thoughts. I'm pleased that the community has the post before it as you intended. While it does not alleviate me of the rightlfully deserved 'Dufus of the Day' status I am glad it was restored as it clearly puts the onus on me and removes any cloud from the post.

>Well, yes, but... most intruders are pretty noticeable. Agreed. Most intrusive software are annoyances and dont mind showing as long as they accomplish their goal. However, keyloggers go to great length not to be noticable. Thanks for the exchange and good night, where ever you are.

> I should >tailor my advice to run these two products with a caution to >keep a general eye on how your system is running. > I believe this is critical to maintaing a clean system. >Most people can tell when their system has gotten infected >because it generally starts running badly or at least slowly. Some indicators are more subtle than general sluggish behavior -- an unsual screen flicker when certain functions or apps are employed or the more apparent symptom when the computer activity light comes on and stays for a noticable period, all for no apparent reason. Sometimes the are background tasks like Microsoft sending updates without permission etc. Sometimes it is someone even more intrusive. It's hard to say what to watch for except behavior out of the ordinary.

KYTOP, Thanks for sharing. Always fun to read about your adventures.

BG, I regarded your initial SpySweeper update announcement at m4m with great interest that quicky deflated when you gave you assessment of the new keylooger capability. An anti-keylogging app that mires the performance so badly didn't seem of practical use. Thus I never followed up. >This review, from July 1, is a review of a >"near-final" beta version of Spy Sweeper: > >http://security.webbuyersguide.com/reviews...ty_reviews.html > >You'll note that the beta version caught and removed six of >eight key loggers (but missed two). Since then, Webroot has >improved the product again (the current build is 5.0.7). > Thanks for the link. The review is very interesting and informative. Most reviews fall short of this in breadth and depth. Even so I wish there was access to all the details. I suspect the virus makers do too. x( Also, it pretty much makes my case stated above that no single application should be relied upon. That does not mean that this one should not be employed -- it is one of the very best. But the best are not perfect -- far from it. Yes, if you could only have one then this a strong candidate. Just know that it fails on occasion. If security failures are important to one then any one package alone is insufficient. >I do disable the keylogger shield but run it occasionally just >to see if it comes up with any hits. Leaving it going all the >time slows down the system too much. > The performance is very unfortunate and caused me to shy away as I mentioned above. However, using it as you suggest, while much less than optimal, is a useful alternative to have in the bag of tricks. I am a registered owner so I'll try the update. Lord knows I have tried so many others. >Your caution about being careful is certainly well-intended >and well-heeded. But SS has been terrifically effective for >me, so it's the one I recommend now to others. If you can only have one then it is a good choice for most people. It is getting better too. However, it contains holes, critical holes if one uses the computer for online purchases and banking. People need to know that so that at least they can remain wary at the screen and not assume the fat dumb and happy path I alluded to above. I have walked that path. It holds some nasty suprises at times.

>A little-noticed provision in a pension law This is no doubt is why it was signed in the present form. Thanks for the post. New provisions affect me and a great number of us, now or later, I suspect.

I stepped on the whole thing. Nothing was left of the original post/ No individual or individuals were singled out just a remark concerning 'some posters' .

>When I was looking for things to try and fix this problem and >before I did what Boston Guy suggested, I downloaded another >anti-virus program called AVG. It totally fucked up my email >account. I couldn't access it. > >My brother said it had a "add on file" that attached >itself to outlook even after I had deleted the program. I, of >course, had never heard of it and didn't know what it was, but >when he deleted it my email worked again. > You found your own example of what I mentioned. Another called something like: #1SpyKiller or close to that. Purports to be anti-spyware for a fee, but actually downloads spyware on your system. You don't even have to do the 'Free Trial' download. Visiting the site seems to be enough. >So, because of that, I was going to ask you TY, if the program >you suggested was safe. I was leary of downloading another >anti-virus program after the trouble I had with that one. > Housecall is a free internet based antivirus removal tool by the same people that make PC-cillin, a very well reviewed AntiVirus Program (AVP) by the legitimate reviewing organizations. I have no reservations using their products or accessing their site. Sometimes viruses(trojan horses) can infect an AVP to modify the way it works. If you suspect that might have happened then it is wise to bring in an outside AVP to check your system. That is one reason to utilize Housecall. Another reason is just to have an independent look occasionally. In return Trendmicro does suggest making a tax-decutable donation to schools online. However, it is not a requirement. I find it a convenient sanity check from time to time. Because of my positive experience with it and because of their well reviewed software and a good reputation, I'm thinking of including PC-cillin and their AntiSpy software in my medicine cabinet.

All that have been around for a while have seen what has and hasn't worked at other sites; how well it worked too. Those other sites or the descendants exist for those that pefer them. If not then it is easy to create a new site. All that enter these doors know what it desired and expected. Some may not share that vision. Others may share it but are just incapable of monitoring themselves when they get excited. The end result looks the same. Ultimately it is behavior not intention that counts. That is why the Pub doors swing both ways.

>TY: > >All good advice but... (there's always a but)... > >Webroot, the makers of SpySweeper are 100% legit. I wouldn't >hesitate to recommend to others any offer of a demo period >that they make. Why I own a copy. Highly rated by both review orgs i mentioned. Also, I've been recommending SpySweeper to >other people for almost a year now. I've seen it really clean >up totally screwed-up systems. > >I personally run it on multiple machines and have done so for >almost a year. In that period, I have found not one single >example of a threat that made it past SpySweeper. Try Loxee.... I could come up with a couple of others if I had kept a record or repeated the ordeals. Essentially it is blind to keyloggers -- not the most benign of malware. BTW, so are the antivirus packages. > >If someone is running a good antivirus program and SpySweeper, >I think they're pretty well protected. But that's just my >opinion. I think that is true for those who don't stray too far off the beaten path. If one is more adventurous then I suggest your view is optimistic. But that is my experience. I may be unusually unlucky. People who are constantly roaming the net and >downloading who-knows-what may bump into something so bad that >SS can't handle it; I'd never say it won't happen. It's like >the Wild West out there. > Yes it is. TY