On 2026-09-04, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-09-03 10:09, Lawrence D?Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2026 16:30:15 +0930, Maria Sophia wrote:
Those scripts proved I could collect a list of every single access
point in Apple's database, just as researchers Eric Rye and Dave
Levin did, using a simple perl script which proved the results of
their paper, and which went further to prove that my own
hidden-broadcast SSIDs were in that database.
I don?t understand what you?re complaining about, exactly. Your wi-fi
network broadcasts its existence to all and sundry, and yet you feel
upset when somebody collects that information and passes it on.
I guess it is because the SSID is terminated in _nomap, which is
documented as a flag to Apple and others to not store this SSID in their
maps. But Apple is/was mapping them all the same.
I got the impression they were claiming that their SSID was hidden,
which makes it irrelevant as to whether it has "_nomap" at the end
of it, but that Apple had somehow discovered and logged it nonetheless.
It seems highly implausible.
On Sep 4, 2026 at 8:34:25?PM EDT, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
On 2026-09-05, Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
This is about privacy.
Not security.
This is about the *perception* of privacy. Like telling people they
don't have to worry about closing their curtains, they just need to
close their eyes -- if they can›t see the people outside looking in,
then those looking in can't see them!
Hi Lawrence,
I say with all respect that your statement is too wrong to accept as is. >>> What you just said, I've heard a thousand times before, from many people. >>>
And yet, it's no different than what I've heard by asking the guy next to >>> me at the gas pump since the 1960's why he puts premium in a Honda Civic. >>>
For over five decades, people have been parroting what someone told them. >>> None of them actually understand a word that they're obviously parroting. >>>
Same here...
Again, I respect you for your technical acumen which is greater'n mine.
But I can't tell if you know privacy differences between these situations: >>> a. iPhone owner happens to walk by my house
b. Android owner happens to walk by my house
Do you know the difference in terms of what happens, or not, with respect >>> to my unique AP BSSID & GPS location (both of which are exactly my house)? >>>
I do.
A. So does Apple.
B. So does Mozilla. And Google.
Mozilla respects a hidden access point broadcast (i.e., it's set to null). >>> So does Google (surprisingly).
i. But not Apple.
ii. And yet, Apple loudly & vociferously proclaims to care about privacy. >>>
That's the part that is the most hurtful.
Apple brazenly lies, with a huge "what me?" seemingly innocent smile.
Yet, Apple immediately removed my BSSID/GPS from their WPS database.
Because they know what I know about the lack of privacy in that
regard.
It may well be I'm the only one in the world who is honored so by Apple. >>> But that's not my point as I care about everyone's privacy. Not just mine. >>>Do you have any intention of letting anyone else know what the issue is?
Another question for you, Lawrence, again, because I respect your acumen. >>>
Do you know the difference between these two situations:
a. iPhone owner happens to walk by my house & it uploads my BSSID/GPS? >>> b. Android owner happens to walk by my house & it uploads my BSSID/GPS? >>>
What happens then?
Do you know?
I do.
Anyone who can't answer those queries, can't possibly understand the issue. >>
There is no issue. This person is a known Apple Troll whose only goal in life
is to "make Apple look bad".
In today's episode, he is convinced that the SSID on a router can track you. So if you sell your old router AND the person who bought it does not change the SSID, he thinks that proves that you have moved and now live at the current address where the router is.
Of COURSE, the person who bought it is going to change the SSID. Or may even keep the factory default because OF COURSE you are going to reset the router to factory defaults when you sell it. AND what if you setup your NEW router with the same SSID that you had on the old one? What happens now? Do I now live in 2 places at once?
Either way, there is No Problem.
And what if I change the SSID of my router weekly? Have 4 different people come thru my address each month?
This whole thing is beyond absurd AND is typical of the BS this troll posts. Apple did not change ANYTHING "at his request". Apple only removed his SSID from their DB to get him to STFU and go away.
He will reply with more gibberish and hand waving, claiming I don't understand
"the issue". That is his standard M.O.
The last time I replied to a topic this moron started, he was asking "What music playing apps do you use on iOS/iPadOS that are (1) free and (2) continue
to play when the screen shuts off". He did not even know that the included music playing app on iOS/iPadOS does both AND he did not even know what it was
called. Not to mention that click-wheel iPods from 2005 were doing
this also.
In short, he knows NOTHING about Apple, iOS, iPhones or anything else even vaguely related to Apple. Look at his previous "PSA" on how to transfer files
from Windows to an iPad. He jumps thru multiple hoops by installing software on both the Windows PC and the iPad. He does not know that the INCLUDED Files App on iOS/iPadOS can connect to Windows PCs. And Macs and Linux. And can transfer files in both directions.
Again, all in his goal of making Apple "look bad". But he so fucking stupid that he does not realize that it is only himself who looks bad.
Nuno Silva wrote:
Look, I'm not saying the topic couldn't have been better explained, with
less spaghetti-looking detours and more explicit statements. That it could.
I will respond to you only *after* you read the paper...
*Surveilling the Masses with Wi-Fi-Based Positioning Systems*
<https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14975>
Chris wrote:
I don't remember whether you addressed this ... how does someone who
hasn't visited your address (i.e they already know where you live)
discover what the BSSID of your router is?
Apparently it's a complete invasion of privacy in the same way google maps >> having actual pictures of his house and the phone book having his name,
address *and* phone number isn't.
Hi Andy and Chris,
I'm going to give you an example of how absurd your attempt at ridiculing
the documented situation is, using your own analogies, by way of impact.
Your questions are good ones, but it's getting tiresome to answer them over and over and over and over and over and over again, so please think first.
The question is the wrong question, as it's kind of like asking what's so dangerous about everyone in the world having your social security number.
Hm, yes? If the identifier is constant and is tied to a location you're
in frequently, like where you live, it can be used to track that.
Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
[...]
Hm, yes? If the identifier is constant and is tied to a location you're
in frequently, like where you live, it can be used to track that.
As others have mentioned, this all has been 'discussed' umpteen times Sofar, this thread is not bringing any new information, viewpoints, <whatever>.
A summary of the previous times:
At best, a home router's BSSID is tied to a *household*, *not* to a *person*, which is 'Arlen''s 'privacy concern'.
'Arlen' has a wife. What is the BSSID's location 'tracking'? 'Arlen'?
His wife? His dog?
Case in point: I'm sometimes 18000km away from the location of my
router. Quite a bit of a (location) tracking error, don't you think?
My advice/request: Let it rest. The rest of us would appreciate not
seeing the same non-arguments over and over again.
[...]
Carlos E.R. wrote:
My advice/request: Let it rest. The rest of us would appreciate not
seeing the same non-arguments over and over again.
[...]
The new information, in not a clear form...
Hi Carlos,
<exasperated-sarcasm> because of the ignorance exhibited by some posters...
Let's ignore, for the moment, how *desperate* Franklin Slootweg is to troll
But you can, can't you.
HINT: *Simply L@@K at the SUBJECT of this thread for the hidden answer...*
Isn't it amazing how well we hid from Frank what's new in the SUBJECT line!
</exasperated-sarcasm> due to the ungodly ignorance being exhibited here...
Not a single person who trolled this thread shows any understanding of
it.
On 2026-09-07, Maria Sophia wrote:
Not a single person who trolled this thread shows any understanding of
it.
The gist of it is that any person you regard as not having understood it
is "trolling" by your book. So this is almost tautological.
Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> writes:
[...]
Then you have the trolls like Keith Thompson claiming that running python[...]
on Windows to prove what Apple & Android devices do by default with respect >> to Wi-Fi protocols has absolutely nothing to do with running python on
windows to prove how Apple & Google devices differ from how they handle
Wi-Fi metadata.
WTF?
That is, of course, not at all what I wrote.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt by assuming that you actually understood my point, which is that you are writing multiple long
posts on comp.lang.python with no content about programming in
Python, and that that's inappropriate. Assuming that you're
intelligent enough to understand that, I can only conclude that
you are deliberately lying about me.
(On the other hand, if you actually believe what you wrote above,
that raises more serious concerns about your veracity.)
The fact that you would lie about something so easily verifiable
does not fill me with confidence that you're being truthful about
whatever issue you're talking about with respect to Apple and Wi-Fi.
It's obviously something that you consider very important, so you
might consider not behaving in a manner that will piss off reasonable
people and lead them to question your honesty.
I lack both the background and the interest to directly verify or
refute your claims. For all I know, everything you've been saying
might be perfectly accurate. But because of the reputation you've constructed for yourself here, I can't be sure of that.
I urge everyone participating in this thread to *at least* drop comp.lang.python from the "Newsgroups:" header line, even if Maria
adds it back. (I've left it in place for this followup, since I'm
discussing topicality in comp.lang.python.)
Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
On 2026-09-06, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-09-06 17:37, Jon Ribbens wrote:
1. Apple are storing the location of "hidden" WiFi Access Points.
(My opinion: low priority.)
Only Apple?
I think that is what Maria is saying, and I have no information to the
contrary.
Allegedly: Apple are adhering to this exclusion, but are not also
excluding BSSIDs which are not broadcasting any SSID at all (i.e.
"hidden" networks). Other organisations (e.g. Google) do exclude such
"hidden" networks.
And if it is hidden they would not see if the SSID ends in _nomap.
But is there a consensus that hidden SSIDs should not be listed? In
writing? Maybe there is such a consensus now.
To me it's fairly intuitive that if someone has taken the unusual step
of explicitly marking their network as "hidden", then its location
should not be included in these databases - especially given the fact
that the "_nomap" SSID method doesn't work for "hidden" networks.
I guess the challenge here is how can they know not to add the MAC address
if the SSID with the "_nomap" request invisible.
Related: What did Arlen (aka Maria) achieve? That Apple agreed to
remove all hidden and _nomap entries, or that they removed only his
entry?
My impression is that as a result of Maria's communications with them,
Apple updated their documentation to note that "hidden" networks are
still listed in their database, and removed Maria's own BSSID(s) from
the database.
That's purely a correlation. It could be a coincidence. And is there any evidence that the documentation did change? We only have his say so.
On 2026-09-07, Keith Thompson wrote:
Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> writes:
[...]
Then you have the trolls like Keith Thompson claiming that running python >>> on Windows to prove what Apple & Android devices do by default with respect >>> to Wi-Fi protocols has absolutely nothing to do with running python on[...]
windows to prove how Apple & Google devices differ from how they handle
Wi-Fi metadata.
WTF?
That is, of course, not at all what I wrote.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt by assuming that you actually
understood my point, which is that you are writing multiple long
posts on comp.lang.python with no content about programming in
Python, and that that's inappropriate. Assuming that you're
intelligent enough to understand that, I can only conclude that
you are deliberately lying about me.
(On the other hand, if you actually believe what you wrote above,
that raises more serious concerns about your veracity.)
The fact that you would lie about something so easily verifiable
does not fill me with confidence that you're being truthful about
whatever issue you're talking about with respect to Apple and Wi-Fi.
It's obviously something that you consider very important, so you
might consider not behaving in a manner that will piss off reasonable
people and lead them to question your honesty.
I lack both the background and the interest to directly verify or
refute your claims. For all I know, everything you've been saying
might be perfectly accurate. But because of the reputation you've
constructed for yourself here, I can't be sure of that.
I once thought like you did and still gave them the benefit of
doubt. (Check the "How does whatsapp work?" thread (subjects changed
halfway several times, rooted at [1]) on comp.mobile.android.) Then they attacked you and Frank in this fashion.
[1] <n1ua9ltc3losq5kj0lfkh8lim4t3bp4npf@4ax.com>
In the end, they destroyed any value their words could have had. In the
past few hours there was another post with nice words to somebody else,
but those words mean nothing, for all it takes is a small bit flip
somewhere and you're suddenly a "troll" to them.
I urge everyone participating in this thread to *at least* drop
comp.lang.python from the "Newsgroups:" header line, even if Maria
adds it back. (I've left it in place for this followup, since I'm
discussing topicality in comp.lang.python.)
Yeah, indeed. But which groups are you reading, of the remaining ones?
Chris wrote:
Or, worse, trackable information like your car's number plate?
Hi Chris,
I get it you are desperate to defend Apple to the death, no matter what... But that analogy of the car license plate in a Flock system is absurd.
For anyone to claim that, means they didn't read the paper.
*Surveilling the Masses with Wi-Fi-Based Positioning Systems*
<https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14975>
Once you read that paper,
Chris wrote:
My impression is that as a result of Maria's communications with them,
Apple updated their documentation to note that "hidden" networks are
still listed in their database, and removed Maria's own BSSID(s) from
the database.
That's purely a correlation. It could be a coincidence. And is there any
evidence that the documentation did change? We only have his say so.
Removing all but alt.internet.wireless from the f'up
First off, we discussed this in December, in gory detail, and we covered EXACTLY what the Apple documentation said, and we discussed EXACTLY that I went to a my next-door neighbor, who is an executive at Apple to get it corrected, and we discussed, THEN, that it wasn't documented, for God's
sake.
Moreso, as we know now, it's corrected.
<https://support.apple.com/en-ie/102515>
Nobody, in my decades on Usnent, has ever found a fact I've claimed to be a fact, ever to be wrong, and if, perchance, I make a typo or a forgetful
faux pas, everyone knows I admit to it immediately, as what matters is only the facts that remain in the Usenet record for generations to read later.
Carlos E.R. wrote:
Keith Thompson argues that your post is off topic in comp.lang.python,
because you are not discussing python code. You simply posted a link
that contains a reference to a Python program and said you run it. You
are not discussing the code itself or making any question about it.
And he is right, IMNSHO.
People can't understand what the issue is if they don't understand the breadcrumb trail from your router access point to my Win10 python runs.
They just can't.
Their stone-age knowledge of networking doesn't prepare them for it.
Keith didn't understand that you have to run the python code that was
pointed to in the very first post, Carlos, which Jon found easily.
Carlos E.R. wrote:
The point we are saying is not what you claim it to be. It is not about
Apple storing and publishing BSSIDs of hidden SSIDs. This is bad
behaviour by them. Ok. But our point is that you gain nothing by making
your AP hidden in the first place.
Hi Carlos,
I disagree.
The answer to *this* question, will tell you why what you said is wrong:
Q: Will Google's WPS database contain a BSSID:GPS pair for an access point
whose SSID broadcast is set to hidden (i.e., empty or null)?
A: Please answer "yes", or "no".
I know the answer to that question.
You clearly do not.
Once you know the answer to that question, you'll see why what you said,
is dead wrong.
I could ask the same question of the Mozilla MLS, but it's now defunct,
but they document this (and we published that documentation elsewhere).
Only Apple ignores the clear privacy intent of setting a hidden SSID.
Nobody else.
Just Apple. (to our knowledge)
Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:
Chris wrote:
Or, worse, trackable information like your car's number plate?
Hi Chris,
I get it you are desperate to defend Apple to the death, no matter what... >> But that analogy of the car license plate in a Flock system is absurd.
It's notable to everyone here that you are consistently and obstinately not answering the core question. Why is the collection of public information
that does not relate to an individual a privacy risk?
The Flock issue is off topic here so the only thing I'll say is that this a consequence of lack of American's trust in government. That leaves the door open to commercial companies to collect data and sell it to government agencies with little to no oversight.
In the UK we have the ANPR system which does the same thing, but is run by and for the law enforcement agencies. It's use is controlled and regulated. There are no issues.
For anyone to claim that, means they didn't read the paper.
*Surveilling the Masses with Wi-Fi-Based Positioning Systems*
<https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14975>
Once you read that paper,
I have and have understood it better than you.
R.Wieser wrote:
I don't remember whether you addressed this ... how does someone
who hasn't visited your address (i.e they already know where you live)
discover what the BSSID of your router is?
What you mention there has been explained to him in the thread here
[Tutorial: Query the Apple database with Python for your access point BSSID] >> <10h1qmr$2alo$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
First, let's address Andy's point because Andy didn't read the paper,
so Andy thinks it's about individuals, and not about the masses.
*Surveilling the Masses with Wi-Fi-Based Positioning Systems*
<https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14975>
Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-09-07 20:11, Nuno Silva wrote:
On 2026-09-07, Maria Sophia wrote:
Not a single person who trolled this thread shows any understanding of >>>> it.
The gist of it is that any person you regard as not having understood it >>> is "trolling" by your book. So this is almost tautological.
Correct...
Please don't even bother to read this unless you're NUNO SILVA.
(it's about his disgusting propensity to troll without ever adding
value)
Carlos E.R. wrote:
Keith Thompson argues that your post is off topic in comp.lang.python,
because you are not discussing python code. You simply posted a link
that contains a reference to a Python program and said you run it. You
are not discussing the code itself or making any question about it.
And he is right, IMNSHO.
People can't understand what the issue is if they don't understand the breadcrumb trail from your router access point to my Win10 python runs.
They just can't.
Their stone-age knowledge of networking doesn't prepare them for it.
Keith didn't understand that you have to run the python code that was
pointed to in the very first post, Carlos, which Jon found easily.
The instant I read the paper, I found and ran the Python code on Win10.
Why can Jon and I do it, but Keith complains he can't read the paper?
BTW, Keith can whine all he wants that Python code isn't python code.
But it's clear he's just whining about something he didn't even read.
More to the point, I don't bring the paintings on my wall with me when I >>> move, but that doesn't mean that nobody brings their paintings with them. >>>
I did not say "nobody". That's you reading what is not in what I said.
Jesus Christ, Carlos. Have you never once taken a course in basic
logic?
Because you don't own a red car, you claim (in effect) red cars can't
exist. Your entire rebuttal consist of that? WTF? It's ridiculous.
For some odd reason, your claim that because you do it one way, that you think that refutes the fact that BILLIONS of people do it differently.
I wouldn't mind if you made that preposterous argument only once, as I'd
only need to point out your nonsensical bizarre point of view only once.
But you've been foisting that grotesque farcical rebuttal on us since we started investigating this issue, oh, since way back in December 2026.
[...]The fact you get your access point from the ISP, while true, is an absurd >>> way of your attempt to refute the facts proposed in this respected paper. >>I don't refute anything, except that you can only track a minority of
users worldwide.
Clearly you did not read the paper. Read it Carlos.
Do not respond until you've shown you read the paper, please.
If someone hasn't read the paper, they can't possibly understand the
issue.
On 2026-09-08 01:46, Nuno Silva wrote:[...]
In the end, they destroyed any value their words could have had. In the
past few hours there was another post with nice words to somebody else,
but those words mean nothing, for all it takes is a small bit flip
somewhere and you're suddenly a "troll" to them.
Him. It is only one person doing this.
On 2026-09-08, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-09-08 01:46, Nuno Silva wrote:[...]
In the end, they destroyed any value their words could have had. In the
past few hours there was another post with nice words to somebody else,
but those words mean nothing, for all it takes is a small bit flip
somewhere and you're suddenly a "troll" to them.
Him. It is only one person doing this.
(That was singular they, I do not care what their gender is, other than
using the appropriate wording. Given that seems to be a female name and people are referring using "he" and Arlen did seem to me like a male
name, I just erred on the side of caution and went with they/them.)
(But nevermind me, I'm apparently just trolling.)
Ok, suppose I run the scripts, and have in my power the BSSIDs and SSIDs
of the entire world.
Carlos,
Ok, suppose I run the scripts, and have in my power the BSSIDs and SSIDs
of the entire world.
And thats another of Arlens problems : You can't just retrieve records from that database.
You could plug your own BSSID into the database and get a number of other, near BSSIDs which you than also query (rinse and repeat), hoping to spread
it like a water-ripple, any kind of "dead space" stops that ripple.
IOW, if there is any distance between the town you're in and the next town over you won't see that one in your results. And as good-old 'Murrica has a LOT of "dead space" (neighbours lliving miles apart) the chance that Arlens "the entire world" is nothing more than *very* wishfull thinking.
I had intended, in that other thread, to put that forward to Arlen. But seeing that he could not even grasp that the translation from a persons name to that persons (routers) BSSID was already wrought with problems I thought better of it.
Regards,
Rudy Wieser
He is not a man that discovers his true self is feminine and changes his >name. I would respect that.
Carlos E.R. wrote:
He is not a man that discovers his true self is feminine and changes
his name. I would respect that.
Or one could just use initials and make folks guess...sweetie... ;)
On 2026-09-08 09:10, Chris wrote:
Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:
Chris wrote:
Or, worse, trackable information like your car's number plate?
Hi Chris,
I get it you are desperate to defend Apple to the death, no matter what... >>> But that analogy of the car license plate in a Flock system is absurd.
It's notable to everyone here that you are consistently and obstinately not >> answering the core question. Why is the collection of public information
that does not relate to an individual a privacy risk?
The Flock issue is off topic here so the only thing I'll say is that this a >> consequence of lack of American's trust in government. That leaves the door >> open to commercial companies to collect data and sell it to government
agencies with little to no oversight.
And the lack of data protection laws like the GDPR in Europe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation
On 2026-09-08 17:47, Lane W wrote:
Why do you call him/her Arlen if his/her preferred name is Maria?
Are you from the 70s?
Because he is not Maria.
He is a nameshifter, he changes his name eventually. We have known him
for a long time as Arlen in the past, so that's the name we stick to,
not the name he uses at the current time.
I strongly dislike that he is using a woman's name, so I refuse to
call him by that.
He is not a man that discovers his true self is feminine and changes
his name. I would respect that.
On Tue, 8 Sep 2026 22:18:02 +0400, Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:
Well, that's a problem. I'm getting old (78 currently), tired and
lazy. Debating the finer points of some technology eventually turns
into an endless time burn. Your endless discussion with "Carlos E.R."
is a good example. Carlos seems to baiting you with less than
brilliant one-line comments, which usually results literary effluvia
from you. All that does is waste everyone's time. Yours is wasted
because you write more than anyone is willing to read. My time is
wasted, but I just don't have the time to read the entire thread. I
suspect the typical Usenet reader thinks in a similar manner.
On 2026-09-10 04:46, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 8 Sep 2026 22:18:02 +0400, Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:
...
Well, that's a problem. I'm getting old (78 currently), tired and
lazy. Debating the finer points of some technology eventually turns
into an endless time burn. Your endless discussion with "Carlos E.R."
is a good example. Carlos seems to baiting you with less than
brilliant one-line comments, which usually results literary effluvia
from you. All that does is waste everyone's time. Yours is wasted
because you write more than anyone is willing to read. My time is
wasted, but I just don't have the time to read the entire thread. I suspect the typical Usenet reader thinks in a similar manner.
Baiting! Interesting idea, but no, I have no such intention. Not
knowingly, at least.
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-09-10 04:46, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 8 Sep 2026 22:18:02 +0400, Maria Sophia
<mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:
...
Well, that's a problem. I'm getting old (78 currently), tired and
lazy. Debating the finer points of some technology eventually turns
into an endless time burn. Your endless discussion with "Carlos E.R."
is a good example. Carlos seems to baiting you with less than
brilliant one-line comments, which usually results literary effluvia
from you. All that does is waste everyone's time. Yours is wasted
because you write more than anyone is willing to read. My time is
wasted, but I just don't have the time to read the entire thread. I
suspect the typical Usenet reader thinks in a similar manner.
Baiting! Interesting idea, but no, I have no such intention. Not
knowingly, at least.
Agreed. (You) Refusing to get engaged in his sprees of insults, misrepresentations, lies, etc., is in *no* way 'baiting'. Quite the
opposite. Any and all baiting is purely on 'Arlen''s side.
That said, (obviously) no ill feelings at all towards Jeff.
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-09-10 04:46, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 8 Sep 2026 22:18:02 +0400, Maria Sophia
<mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:
...
Well, that's a problem. I'm getting old (78 currently), tired and
lazy. Debating the finer points of some technology eventually turns
into an endless time burn. Your endless discussion with "Carlos E.R." >>>> is a good example. Carlos seems to baiting you with less than
brilliant one-line comments, which usually results literary effluvia
from you. All that does is waste everyone's time. Yours is wasted
because you write more than anyone is willing to read. My time is
wasted, but I just don't have the time to read the entire thread. I
suspect the typical Usenet reader thinks in a similar manner.
Baiting! Interesting idea, but no, I have no such intention. Not
knowingly, at least.
Agreed. (You) Refusing to get engaged in his sprees of insults,
misrepresentations, lies, etc., is in *no* way 'baiting'. Quite the
opposite. Any and all baiting is purely on 'Arlen''s side.
That said, (obviously) no ill feelings at all towards Jeff.
I concur. Although, the curt responses from Carlos are a symptom of being >vilified for days by Arlen.
I also tend to ignore one-line replies because they tend to contain
little or nothing of value.
Whether this was intentional trolling by Carlos, or frustration
dealing with Alren, is unknown.
All I saw was long and repetitive comments by Arlen
Jeff,
I also tend to ignore one-line replies because they tend to contain
little or nothing of value.
Whether this was intentional trolling by Carlos, or frustration
dealing with Alren, is unknown.
You already said it yourself :
All I saw was long and repetitive comments by Arlen
Arlen is well know for ignoring everything he doesn't want to hear, and keep reposting his own "truths" - even if they have been shown to be wrong.
And as you probably have noticed by now, everyone who does not agree with
him is either dumb, or a troll.
| Sysop: | Jacob Catayoc |
|---|---|
| Location: | Pasay City, Metro Manila, Philippines |
| Users: | 4 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 497099:24:06 |
| Calls: | 182 |
| Files: | 744 |
| D/L today: |
6 files (5,132K bytes) |
| Messages: | 73,551 |