BBC's awful tech/mydoom coverage

[Veronica Loell]

TG wrote / skrev:

> Anyone listen to the BBC interviewing a Microsoft employee this last
> weekend? At one point the questioner ask the MS person whether mydoom
> effected only Microsoft computers. The guy flat-out lied and said that
> "no, it effects all computers". Worse than MS' standard disinformation
> was the lack of any follow-up from the BBC. It's bad enough when US
> commercial media skews every story in favor of advertising dollars
> but the BBC's failure, at both the interviewer and editorial levels,
> is disappointing. Such laggard journalistic standards lend credence to
> the findings in the Hutton report.
>
> Teer

Like every other massmailing worm the flood of email effects any
computer running a mailserver, and also anyone trying to download email
from a mailserver. Don't see how that is disinformation, rather a
strangely phrased question if that was not what the journalist meant.

[Jack Taylor]

"TG" <teergrub@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:juGTb.12325$XF6.240232@typhoon.sonic.net...

> Anyone listen to the BBC interviewing a Microsoft employee this last
> weekend? At one point the questioner ask the MS person whether mydoom
> effected only Microsoft computers. The guy flat-out lied and said that
> "no, it effects all computers". Worse than MS' standard disinformation
> was the lack of any follow-up from the BBC. It's bad enough when US
> commercial media skews every story in favor of advertising dollars
> but the BBC's failure, at both the interviewer and editorial levels,
> is disappointing. Such laggard journalistic standards lend credence to
> the findings in the Hutton report.

Hmm! About as good as your vocabulary. 'effects all computers' indeed? ITYF
you mean AFFECT. Effect is what it has, affect is what it does. ;-))

[Beardy]

TG wrote:

> Anyone listen to the BBC interviewing a Microsoft employee this last
> weekend? At one point the questioner ask the MS person whether mydoom
> effected only Microsoft computers. The guy flat-out lied and said that
> "no, it effects all computers". Worse than MS' standard disinformation
> was the lack of any follow-up from the BBC. It's bad enough when US
> commercial media skews every story in favor of advertising dollars
> but the BBC's failure, at both the interviewer and editorial levels,
> is disappointing. Such laggard journalistic standards lend credence to
> the findings in the Hutton report.
>
> Teer

[OT] I am certain that "Teer" is heavily copyrighted in all the Solaris
newsgroups - wouldn't want any confusion to set in ;-)

[Kevin Clark]

TG wrote:

> Anyone listen to the BBC interviewing a Microsoft employee this last
> weekend? At one point the questioner ask the MS person whether mydoom
> effected only Microsoft computers. The guy flat-out lied and said that
> "no, it effects all computers".

Maybe he thought the questioner meant did it only affect computers at
Microsoft (seeing as that was where he was from). In reply he meant no,
no just theirs, everyones computer was a risk.

[Grant Edwards]

On 2004-02-03, TG <teergrub@spamcop.net> wrote:

> Anyone listen to the BBC interviewing a Microsoft employee
> this last weekend? At one point the questioner ask the MS
> person whether mydoom effected only Microsoft computers. The
> guy flat-out lied and said that "no, it effects all
> computers". Worse than MS' standard disinformation was the
> lack of any follow-up from the BBC.

I run Linux, and it sure has affected my computer: I'm getting
hit by the e-mails just as hard as anybody running MS-Windows.

If the reporter wanted to know if mydoom only _infected_
computers running MS-Windows, then the git should have asked
that. If he indeed asked if it only _affected_ MS computers,
then the answer from MS is strictly correct (if a bit
disingenuous in it's limited scope).

--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! You can't hurt
at me!! I have an ASSUMABLE
visi.com MORTGAGE!!

[Rich Teer]

On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Beardy wrote:

> [OT] I am certain that "Teer" is heavily copyrighted in all the Solaris
> newsgroups - wouldn't want any confusion to set in ;-)

And trademarked! :-)

--
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA

President,
Rite Online Inc.

Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: [url]http://www.rite-online.net[/url]

[Bill Unruh]

TG <teergrub@spamcop.net> writes:

]Anyone listen to the BBC interviewing a Microsoft employee this last
]weekend? At one point the questioner ask the MS person whether mydoom
]effected only Microsoft computers. The guy flat-out lied and said that
]"no, it effects all computers". Worse than MS' standard disinformation

The mydoom virus DOES affect all computers. My mailbox has been
innundated with both MyDoom and bounce messages from stupid sites which
bounce mydoom and is slower because of having to deal with it.
And I run Linux. A linux computer cannot be used to
propagate mydoom, which is what you mean, but the computer is affected
by it. Ie, he did not lie. However, the interviewer could have been a
bit more knowledgeable in the question he asked.

]was the lack of any follow-up from the BBC. It's bad enough when US
]commercial media skews every story in favor of advertising dollars
]but the BBC's failure, at both the interviewer and editorial levels,
]is disappointing. Such laggard journalistic standards lend credence to
]the findings in the Hutton report.

[Richard Tobin]

In article <bvombu$585$1@string.physics.ubc.ca>,
Bill Unruh <unruh@string.physics.ubc.ca> wrote:

>The mydoom virus DOES affect all computers.

It has had absolutely no effect on any of mine.

-- Richard
--
Spam filter: to mail me from a .com/.net site, put my surname in the headers.

FreeBSD rules!

[Richard Steiner]

Here in comp.os.linux.misc,
[email]richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk[/email] (Richard Tobin) spake unto us, saying:

>Bill Unruh <unruh@string.physics.ubc.ca> wrote:
>

>>The mydoom virus DOES affect all computers.

>
>It has had absolutely no effect on any of mine.

No impact on mine, either. Thanks, Postini! :-)

--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> [url]http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner[/url] >>>---> Eden Prairie, MN
OS/2 + eCS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
Applications analyst/designer/developer (14 yrs) seeking employment.
See web site above for resume/CV and background.

[Jim Slager]

There are several ways to interpret the question: computers made by MS,
computers at MS, computers running MS OS, etc. I can think of no possible
interpretation in which the answer is anything but accurate and truthful.

"TG" <teergrub@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:juGTb.12325$XF6.240232@typhoon.sonic.net...

> Anyone listen to the BBC interviewing a Microsoft employee this last
> weekend? At one point the questioner ask the MS person whether mydoom
> effected only Microsoft computers. The guy flat-out lied and said that
> "no, it effects all computers". Worse than MS' standard disinformation
> was the lack of any follow-up from the BBC. It's bad enough when US
> commercial media skews every story in favor of advertising dollars
> but the BBC's failure, at both the interviewer and editorial levels,
> is disappointing. Such laggard journalistic standards lend credence to
> the findings in the Hutton report.
>
> Teer

[Rich Teer]

On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Jim Slager wrote:

Please don't top post.

> There are several ways to interpret the question: computers made by MS,
> computers at MS, computers running MS OS, etc. I can think of no possible
> interpretation in which the answer is anything but accurate and truthful.

Obviously the interviewer asked the wrong question and/or the M$
spokesman deliberately interpreted in his best interests. The
question posed should have been "Is MyDoom only propegated by
computers running an M$ operating system and/or email client?".

The answer to that, is of course, yes.

--
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA

President,
Rite Online Inc.

Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: [url]http://www.rite-online.net[/url]

[Alan Connor]

On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 23:11:15 GMT, Rich Teer wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Jim Slager wrote:
>
> Please don't top post.

Right! He can't top post but YOU can have an overly-large signature that
amounts to nothing but spam.

I wonder who would do business with an obvious hyocrite and scofflaw?

>

>> There are several ways to interpret the question: computers made by MS,
>> computers at MS, computers running MS OS, etc. I can think of no possible
>> interpretation in which the answer is anything but accurate and truthful.

>
> Obviously the interviewer asked the wrong question and/or the M$
> spokesman deliberately interpreted in his best interests. The
> question posed should have been "Is MyDoom only propegated by
> computers running an M$ operating system and/or email client?".
>
> The answer to that, is of course, yes.
>
> --
> XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX
>
> XXXXXXXXX,
> XXXX XXXXXX XXX.
>
> XXXXX: +Y (YYY) YYY-YYYY
> XXX: XXXX://XXX.XXXX-XXXXXX.XXX

Information in sig obscured by switching letters for X and numbers for Y,
but otherwise untouched.

A clear Netiquette violation: The limit for sigs is 4 lines.

And it is downright SLEAZY to use the Usenet as a vehicle for
commercial ads.


AC

[Dave Hinz]

On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 00:32:00 GMT, Alan Connor <zzzzzz@xxx.yyy> wrote:

> On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 23:11:15 GMT, Rich Teer wrote:

>>
>>
>> On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Jim Slager wrote:
>>
>> Please don't top post.

>
> Right! He can't top post but YOU can have an overly-large signature that
> amounts to nothing but spam.

Let's see - Rich Teer, long time and valued contributer to comp.unix.admin.
You, well, who knows.

> I wonder who would do business with an obvious hyocrite and scofflaw?

Law? Yeah, it's more than 4 lines, but his quality posts have historically
distracted me from noticing that his sigfile is longer than suggested.

> A clear Netiquette violation: The limit for sigs is 4 lines.
>
> And it is downright SLEAZY to use the Usenet as a vehicle for
> commercial ads.

And yet, Rich provides signal, while you provide...what's that word again?
Oh yeah, "noise".

[Bev A. Kupf]

On 4 Feb 2004 02:01:02 GMT,
Dave Hinz (davehinz@spamcop.net) wrote:

> Let's see - Rich Teer, long time and valued contributer to comp.unix.admin.
> You, well, who knows.
>

>> I wonder who would do business with an obvious hyocrite and scofflaw?

>
> Law? Yeah, it's more than 4 lines, but his quality posts have historically
> distracted me from noticing that his sigfile is longer than suggested.

Let's spend a moment on this 4 line signature nonsense. It has its
historical origins when our nntp spools were on 200 MB disks, and UUCP
feeds were on 2400 bps modems (yes, I realize that there are many here
who preceed 200 MB disks and 2400 bps - but you get the frickin' idea).

The limit is completely irrelevant today. Top-posting on the other
hand is _not_. It remains as hard to follow a thread that is messed
up top-posting today as it was twenty years ago.

And like Dave Hinz, I've never noticed the length of Rich Teer's signature.
The content of his posts are sufficient to capture my attention.

Beverly
--
Bev A. Kupf
"The lyfe so short, the craft so long to lerne" -- Chaucer
Tintin turns 75 <http://www.tintin.com>

[Grant Edwards]

In article <Pine.SOL.4.58.0402031508560.20308@zaphod.rite-group.com>, Rich Teer wrote:

>> There are several ways to interpret the question: computers
>> made by MS, computers at MS, computers running MS OS, etc. I
>> can think of no possible interpretation in which the answer is
>> anything but accurate and truthful.

>
> Obviously the interviewer asked the wrong question

Yes.

> and/or the M$ spokesman deliberately interpreted in his best
> interests.

Of course he did. That's the job of a spokesman.

--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! If this is the DATING
at GAME I want to know your
visi.com FAVORITE PLANET! Do I get
th' MICROWAVE MOPED?

[Roger Marquis]

In comp.unix.solaris Rich Teer <rich.teer@rite-group.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Jim Slager wrote:
>Please don't top post.

Oh come on Rich, Jim's post was perfectly legible. Unless you limit
your complaints to those top posters who aren't clear, and broaden
them to include bottom posts that fail to trim quotes, you're simply
being pedantic. Better to stick to the technical subject matter.

Speaking of which, Slashdot has a story today about the BBC linking
myDoom to Linux.
<http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=95603&cid=0&pid=0&startat=&thresho ld=1&mode=thread&commentsort=3&op=Change>
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3457823.stm>

Hard to ignore the implications i.e, that they've sold the editorial
policy to MS. Not unlike our own once-impartial NPR. Sad reflection
on journalistic ethics. Be glad Dan Gillmor doesn't work for either
of these "news" organizations. <http://www.dangillmor.com/>

--
Roger Marquis
Roble Systems Consulting
[url]http://www.roble.com/[/url]

[Jim Slager]

I'm relatively new to these newsgroups and didn't realize there was any
policy against top posting. I simply chose to reply directly to Rich's
original post because I wasn't addressing the previous reply. I'm still not
clear what the objection to top posting is.

But, anyway, if someone asked me "whether mydoom effected only Microsoft
computers" I would first assume he meant affected as in "influenced" rather
than effected which means "brought about" (although maybe these words mean
something else in UK). Then there would be the problem of what "Microsoft
computers" means which I probably would have decided meant computers running
MS sw but could also mean computers at MS since mydoom was expected to
attach those as it did SCO's. So, I think the question might have been a
good question and the answer was truthful and accurate. Of course I didn't
hear the interview so maybe this one question is not representive of the
whole interview. I searched the BBC's website but couldn't find a
transcript.

In any case, I guess it has always been pretty clear that the mainstream
media doesn't really have the expertise needed to cover technical issues.
As for whether the whole issue of mydoom should be taken as evidence that MS
is too busy making money to deliver a good product, which I think is the
real issue behind the original post, I don't think the answer is clear. For
some strange reason when I find myself with people who attack MS then I end
up defending MS while if I find myself with people defending MS then I
attack MS. I'm not usually such a contrarian. While unix is a wonderful
operating system it is at least twice as old as windows and 4x? as old as NT
and has never been subjected to maybe a billion unsophisticated consumers.
So it is just not fair to compare them. As to whether there is any excuse
for the latest XP computers to be propagating mydoom, if they do, I think
that is a fair question.

Sorry for all the verbage.

"Roger Marquis" <not-for-mail@roble.com> wrote in message
news:bvtq8v$af$1@news.mainstreet.net...

> In comp.unix.solaris Rich Teer <rich.teer@rite-group.com> wrote:

> >On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Jim Slager wrote:
> >Please don't top post.

>
> Oh come on Rich, Jim's post was perfectly legible. Unless you limit
> your complaints to those top posters who aren't clear, and broaden
> them to include bottom posts that fail to trim quotes, you're simply
> being pedantic. Better to stick to the technical subject matter.
>
> Speaking of which, Slashdot has a story today about the BBC linking
> myDoom to Linux.
>

<[url]http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=95603&cid=0&pid=0&startat=&thresho ld=1&[/url]
mode=thread&commentsort=3&op=Change>

> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3457823.stm>
>
> Hard to ignore the implications i.e, that they've sold the editorial
> policy to MS. Not unlike our own once-impartial NPR. Sad reflection
> on journalistic ethics. Be glad Dan Gillmor doesn't work for either
> of these "news" organizations. <http://www.dangillmor.com/>
>
> --
> Roger Marquis
> Roble Systems Consulting
> [url]http://www.roble.com/[/url]

[Chris Baker]

Some people get all pissy over topposting although if you're following a
thread it's perfectly acceptable. On the other people get pissy over bottom
posting because they have to scroll down. Only solution is to remove what
you're replying to which doesn't aid following the thread.

If you're responding to various points within a previous post point-by-point
then obviously top posting isn't gonna work, but otherwise it's fine.

Generally what gets on everyone's nerves more than top/bottom posting is
people leaving the entire previous posts in and only addressing one point of
them rather than trimming the unneeded.

> I'm relatively new to these newsgroups and didn't realize there was any
> policy against top posting. I simply chose to reply directly to Rich's
> original post because I wasn't addressing the previous reply. I'm still

not

> clear what the objection to top posting is.

As for the actual topic, I think generally the bbc aims more at a general
audience who might not even realise linux exists or what it is, and thus
it's a lot easier to say "pcs are affected" rather than "windows pcs are
affected". It is just a technicality (ok innaccuracy) but it's not really
something to get upset about because people in the know can filter what is
meant whereas people not in the know can't

[Steve O'Hara-Smith]

On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 10:20:03 -0800
"Jim Slager" <jslager@inameU_NO_WHATcom> wrote:

JS> I'm relatively new to these newsgroups and didn't realize there was
JS> any policy against top posting. I simply chose to reply directly to
JS> Rich's original post because I wasn't addressing the previous reply.
JS> I'm still not clear what the objection to top posting is.

A: Because it inverts comment and response.

Q: Why is top posting bad.

--
C:>WIN | Directable Mirrors
The computer obeys and wins. |A Better Way To Focus The Sun
You lose and Bill collects. | licenses available - see:
| [url]http://www.sohara.org/[/url]

[joe@invalid.address]

"Chris Baker" <chris_21m@hotmail.com> writes:

> Some people get all pissy over topposting although if you're
> following a thread it's perfectly acceptable. On the other people
> get pissy over bottom posting because they have to scroll down. Only
> solution is to remove what you're replying to which doesn't aid
> following the thread.

Well, no. The solution is to edit what you're replying to so that you
only quote the relevant bits, and then reply to them.

> If you're responding to various points within a previous post
> point-by-point then obviously top posting isn't gonna work, but
> otherwise it's fine.

Until someone else wants to respond, in which case you wind up with a
mix, which turns into something very difficult to follow.

> Generally what gets on everyone's nerves more than top/bottom
> posting is people leaving the entire previous posts in and only
> addressing one point of them rather than trimming the unneeded.
>

> > I'm relatively new to these newsgroups and didn't realize there
> > was any policy against top posting. I simply chose to reply
> > directly to Rich's original post because I wasn't addressing the
> > previous reply. I'm still not clear what the objection to top
> > posting is.

How easy is it to follow this discussion?

Subject: Re: help
From: top-poster <top-poster@someplace.else>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 22:01:41 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.unix.shell
Organization: Top-posters United

Wait a minute. If your computer isn't on, how are you posting this?
clueless <clueless@someplace.somewhere> writes:

> I did. What do I do now?
>
> top-poster <top-poster@someplace.else> writes:
>

> > Push the button. If that doesn't work, go to
> > [url]http://www.microsoft.com[/url]
> >
> > clueless <clueless@someplace.somewhere> writes:
> >

> > > How do I turn my computer on?
> > >
> > > --
> > > This is my tagline. It's not much, but it's mine
> > >

> >
> > --
> > This is my tagline, and it's the best there is.

>
> --
> This is my tagline. It's not much, but it's mine

--
This is my tagline, and it's the best there is.

Also take a look at

[url]http://catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html[/url]
[url]http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html[/url]
[url]http://members.fortunecity.com/nnqweb/[/url]
[url]http://www.guckes.net/mail/editing.html[/url]

Having said that, different groups have different preferences about
this. Some don't mind it while others do. It's polite (at least) to
abide by the preferences of the group you're in. It's also easier for
someone to help you if you make the thread easier to follow.

joe
--
I think people should be able to make up their own minds for me
- Monty Python