Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] Microsoft Windows Worries US National Co-ordinator for Security and Counterterrorism

Roy Schestowitz wrote:

__/ [ Maverick ] on Thursday 12 April 2007 02:08 \__


Tim Smith wrote:


In article <26y8dnew93ev$.dlg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


First, it did not happen in 1998.  It happened in 1997.  Second, They did
not send out tugs to tow it in to port, the Yorktown had auxillary
propulsion systems it used to return under power.  Third, The incident was
largely blown out of proportion due to misquoting by the Government
Computer News magazine.

Also, the Yorktown was running an out of date, and obsolete version of the
SMCS software with the data safeguards deliberately disabled.

http://www.gcn.com/print/17_32/33639-1.html?topic=news


From that article:

"NT played no role in the Yorktown¢s LAN crash, Baker said."

Further, the source of the story, Anthony DiGiorgio, claims he was
misquoted and never said the things the author claims he said.

http://www.gcn.com/print/17_20/33292-1.html


...and fifth, this has been discussed numerous times in this group.  It
is extremely unlikely that Roy is not aware of the details.  Hence, yet
again, he's posting something he knows is incorrect, because he believes
that lying is OK if it is a pro-Linux lie.



Where did he lie?


I posted a link to a story from a reputable source, with some snippets.

I pointed out that, as the Register reports, British subs run Windows
(Windows 2000, IIRC). I also emphasised that they can only trust code which
they are allowed to see (in readable form).


It is funny that they (the trolls) spin this towards the USS Yorktown problem. Two different situations and they yak about this being already hashed over.


But notice the crickets are still chirping after the question?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index