OT: SPYWARE/TROJAN and Off Topic!

[numskully]

Graeme Dice, why are you attacking Norfleet with Posts? to me, it makes sense that he is trying to figure this dilemma out.

[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by numskully:
Graeme Dice, why are you attacking Norfleet with Posts? to me, it makes sense that he is trying to figure this dilemma out.

I'm attacking him because he's not trying to figure out. He's already made up his mind that the world is out to get him.

[Inigo Montoya]

Norfleet,

I have found your Posts to be quite helpful in the past. You have demonstrated an excellent grasp of the game and I have appreciated your gaming wisdom.

I feel very sorry for you. Your existence must be lonely and filled with the constant perception of danger. I sense isolation, mistrust, and fear in your postings in this thread. It saddens me for your sake.

I may be a naive and trusting fool, but I have found Johan Osterman and Kristoffer O to be reliable sources of information in the past. I tend to trust folks who have proven themselves trustworthy in the past and distrust people who have proven themselves to be untrustworthy. That's my paradigm and it leads me to feel secure, happy, connected, and unafraid. Yes, occasionally I may be hurt when someone I trusted betrays me, but I survive... and I enjoy life. You may be safe and protected on your island of mistrust and persectory delusion, but at what cost? Your paradigm of "If they can hurt me, they will hurt me" stems from a sense that you are too fragile to bear the hurt.

Rather than having the ultimate defenses and being completely "safe," why not strive to be resilient enough that you would allow yourself to take reasonable risks? Allow yourself to be vulnerable if the benefits outweigh the risk. For example, I might find someone attractive and want to approach them, but I fear they might reject me. With your worldview, I never introduce myself. If I open myself to that person, I could get hurt or betrayed. Much better to stay where I am, safe and alone... I urge your to instead embrace life and take reasonable, calculated risks. You may get hurt, get your heart broken or even lose some privacy from time to time, but the rewards far outweigh risks.

I hope you can hear and understand the wisdom I try to give you.

With Great Respect,

Inigo

[numskully]

Graeme Dice: you should be a lawyer, you could disprove character quick

where were you when OJ was in trail?

[Norfleet]

Originally posted by Cainehill:
Hey! This would explain why he keeps kicking my furry arse when he hosts!

I don't host. I arrange hosting with a third party. I'm mildly concerned with the consequences of leaving a funny app running constantly where everyone knows about it. Somebody else's computer is much safer and more expendable.

Say - speaking of fortresses on top of another, what happens if a fortress is built in a province that turns out to contain a magic site fortress (River Fortress for example, or Firbolg Fortress)?

You keep your built fortress. The magic site fortress only appears if you did not have a previously existing fortress.

Originally posted by Inigo Montoya:
I tend to trust folks who have proven themselves trustworthy in the past and distrust people who have proven themselves to be untrustworthy.

It is paradoxically the case that the untrustworthy are safer than those you feel are trustworthy. The untrustworthy have demonstrated their untrustworthiness to you already, whereas those who appear trustworthy may simply be attempting to gain your trust so as to better betray you in the future. Knowing the motivations behind somebody's allegiance is always better, of course, but I favor the devil I know over the devil I do not.

Originally posted by Inigo Montoya:
For example, I might find someone attractive and want to approach them, but I fear they might reject me.

I find that I'm usually the one doing the rejecting, being that I am a man of exacting standards, but I see the point. Nonetheless, you should always wear body armor.

Rather than having the ultimate defenses and being completely "safe," why not strive to be resilient enough that you would allow yourself to take reasonable risks? Allow yourself to be vulnerable if the benefits outweigh the risk.

An Arab proverb states, "Trust in Allah, but tie your camel." I tried experimenting with that advice once. Just to be on the safe side, I wore body armor. It paid off in very nicely when he proceeded to shoot me in the back. As the saying goes, it is better to be perpetually suspicious than occasionally cheated.

[ April 08, 2004, 05:03: Message edited by: Norfleet ]

[Inigo Montoya]

[quote]Originally posted by Norfleet:

It is paradoxically the case that the untrustworthy are safer than those you feel are trustworthy. The untrustworthy have demonstrated their untrustworthiness to you already, whereas those who appear trustworthy may simply be attempting to gain your trust so as to better betray you in the future. Knowing the motivations behind somebody's allegiance is always better, of course, but I favor the devil I know over the devil I do not.

I disagree. Let's say I'm thinking of leaving my child with a babysitter for the night. You would select the pedophile with the known track record for being untrustworthy with children because you know his motivations are to molest your child. I, on the other hand, would select my mother. You are certainly right, my mother could have been waiting all these years pretending to love me, but secretly harbouring devious motivations. But when I weigh the risks, the individual who has proven himself to be untrustworthy is not as you put it, "safer." You can leave your child with the pedophile, but I don't see how you think you are safer doing so.

[Norfleet]

Originally posted by Inigo Montoya:
But when I weigh the risks, the individual who has proven himself to be untrustworthy is not as you put it, "safer." You can leave your child with the pedophile, but I don't see how you think you are safer doing so.

Certainly he is. You know for certain he is a pedophile, so you absolutely do not leave your children with him. His state is known to you. Somebody else, on the other hand, COULD be a pedophile, but you do not KNOW this. His known untrustworthiness allows you to react appropriately with an informed decision. Knowledge of his motivations, furthermore, allows you to manipulate him using these motivations. A "trustworthy" individual whose motives are less well known is much harder to control.

[ April 08, 2004, 05:25: Message edited by: Norfleet ]

There is no need to get personal or drag pedophilia into a discussion. The question was posed, in however ungainly a manner and it was answered and cleared. I hope anyone who reads through this thread at least gets the facts straight.

No Illwinter is not using Spyware, they are using a tracking system for Multiplayer games to prevent piracy. They have every right and should use every measure they have at their disposal to combat it as it is their product that is being pirated, not yours. (though it may well be if you let your CD-Key slip). If you are playing SP there is no reason to worry about any sort of tracking measures.

Whatever your personal feelings of internet or life paranoia, tracking, piracy, should be, could be, would be, please don't try to drag IW's protection of their property into that perception.

[Norfleet]

Originally posted by Graeme Dice:
It's nice to see that you are willing to destoy the property of others on a whim, and aren't at all concerned about whether your behaviour is illegal.

Well, those who would take what is mine have it coming. It is better to destroy everything you own than allow it to be taken from you by the enemy.

[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by Norfleet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Graeme Dice:
It's nice to see that you are willing to destoy the property of others on a whim, and aren't at all concerned about whether your behaviour is illegal.

Well, those who would take what is mine have it coming. It is better to destroy everything you own than allow it to be taken from you by the enemy.

---

You might want to make sure that your statements apply to the things you are talking about. There's a world of difference between destroying things you own, and destroying things other people own, which is illegal and immoral. Excuse me if I don't have much respect for someone who's admitted that they don't respect the property of others.