On 11/04/14 17:11, Ian Malone wrote:
On 11 April 2014 01:45, David <dgboles(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/10/2014 8:28 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
>> On 11 April 2014 00:55, David <dgboles(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Sure. I would not really *greatly* care about tech sites password. I
>>> would be (was) concerned about my 'money' sites. The sites had to
used
>>> openssl. Which would be any Apache and another one that I can not recall
>>> at the moment.
>>>
>>> But? This time the 'ten feet tall and bullet proof because I use
Linux'
>>> Bull$$hit failed. This one is Linux centered. Period. A programer
>>> created this and added it to the code. And 'free and a no money'
>>> supported program mistake not caught for about two years.
>>
>> You know OpenSSL is not Linux? And that IIS could equally have had this bug?
>>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_Red_%28computer_worm%29 (also a good
>> reminder for anyone who thinks vulnerabilities in the news is news)
>>
>> It's also not true:
>>> A group of nice people working part time for nothing. No real
>>> resources. People with real jobs that pay. Families. And 'part time
>>> support'. I tip my hat but? Sad.
>> OpenSSL do support contracts and many of the developers offer
>> consultancy services. Painting it as something done as a part-time
>> hobby is a bit misleading.
>> (And why 'sad' exactly? Also N.B. it's often an insult in British
English)
>>
>
>
> Wow! Really?? Then you really need to talk to everyone that is saying
> that. Now!!
>
Thought I'd provide the information. Do with it what you will.
Although I am not British, I thought I was reasonably well-informed
about British colloquialisms, and I am unaware of "sad" being used as an
insult. I guess that to call someone a "sad case" is an insult, but
"sad" on its own is different.
Are you sure you didn't mean "sod"? :-)
cheers,
Rolf Turner