1 2
92CelicaHalfTrac
92CelicaHalfTrac SuperDork
1/17/12 1:51 p.m.

Virii.

Grizz
Grizz HalfDork
1/17/12 1:54 p.m.

That sounds homoerotic.

Dude, I got virii at starbucks today.

Stop humping the baristas.

Or would that be baristii?

Karl La Follette
Karl La Follette Dork
1/17/12 3:02 p.m.

Thanks will keep aware of that email tag

Osterkraut
Osterkraut SuperDork
1/17/12 3:13 p.m.
Duke wrote: Not to mention that most of your favorite magazine is produced on Macs.

I assure you, Whooty Aficionado is produced using Windows.

T.J.
T.J. SuperDork
1/17/12 10:34 p.m.

If the plural of virus is virii then is the plural of anus anusi?

I'm going with viruses and anuses, but not simultaneously.

MG Bryan
MG Bryan HalfDork
1/17/12 11:34 p.m.
T.J. wrote: If the plural of virus is virii then is the plural of anus anusi? I'm going with viruses and anuses, but not simultaneously.

For your point to work, you would have had to pluralize anus as anii.

ValuePack
ValuePack Dork
1/17/12 11:46 p.m.
T.J. wrote: I'm going with viruses and anuses, but not simultaneously.

It's a damn shame that'll never make the mag.

triumph7
triumph7 Reader
1/18/12 8:29 a.m.

Back to the point, don;t open the emails, just go to Facebook and look at the notifications. No viruses, no anii........

Giant Purple Snorklewacker
Giant Purple Snorklewacker SuperDork
1/18/12 9:24 a.m.
Grizz wrote: At this point the whole "Macs don't get viruses" is horseE36 M3 marketing and blind fanboyism. Only real reson they used to be virus proof is because nobody was bothering to make a virus for computers that barely got used by anyone.

The real reason is that Linux, OS-X, Solaris, etc... are Unix based and they are true multi-user systems. A user can only damage his own stuff unless they run as root and so virii tend to be of the pesky kind that proliferate themselves via email rather than do damage to the host. It isn't that they don't exist - they are just much easier to avoid, find, and dispatch because only one user is effected by downloads. It IS possible to run code at a higher level (buffer overwrite exploits, etc) - it is just not as easy without physical access to the machine. Most *nix systems were designed for server/enterprise use and that market came late to Windows development.

Windows has made great strides in this direction since XP/Win2003 server but it still carries a huge legacy that isn't so easy to undo. It uses a centralized database and fairly permissive defaults that make it pretty easy for a user running code to gain control over system file/execution space.

Basically what I'm saying is - it isn't market share alone - it is the design of the OS and it's most proliferated configuration that is it's downfall.

1988RedT2
1988RedT2 SuperDork
1/18/12 10:12 a.m.

In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker:

Very well stated!

GameboyRMH
GameboyRMH GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
1/18/12 2:00 p.m.
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: Virii.

No, wrong, it's actually viruses, as wrong as it sounds, been through long discussions about dead languages on this...

1988RedT2
1988RedT2 SuperDork
1/18/12 2:15 p.m.
GameboyRMH wrote:
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: Virii.
...been through long discussions about dead languages on this...

Killed off by virii, no doubt!

Giant Purple Snorklewacker
Giant Purple Snorklewacker SuperDork
1/18/12 3:07 p.m.
1988RedT2 wrote:
GameboyRMH wrote:
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: Virii.
...been through long discussions about dead languages on this...
Killed off by virii, no doubt!

Borne by meeces no doubt.

mmosbey
mmosbey GRM+ Memberand Reader
1/18/12 8:58 p.m.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote:
Grizz wrote: At this point the whole "Macs don't get viruses" is horseE36 M3 marketing and blind fanboyism. Only real reson they used to be virus proof is because nobody was bothering to make a virus for computers that barely got used by anyone.
The real reason is that Linux, OS-X, Solaris, etc... are Unix based and they are true multi-user systems. A user can only damage his own stuff unless they run as root and so virii tend to be of the pesky kind that proliferate themselves via email rather than do damage to the host. It isn't that they don't exist - they are just much easier to avoid, find, and dispatch because only one user is effected by downloads. It IS possible to run code at a higher level (buffer overwrite exploits, etc) - it is just not as easy without physical access to the machine. Most *nix systems were designed for server/enterprise use and that market came late to Windows development. Windows has made great strides in this direction since XP/Win2003 server but it still carries a huge legacy that isn't so easy to undo. It uses a centralized database and fairly permissive defaults that make it pretty easy for a user running code to gain control over system file/execution space. Basically what I'm saying is - it isn't market share alone - it is the design of the OS and it's most proliferated configuration that is it's downfall.

Yes, also file metainformation. Marking a given file as executable or not is a good idea.

1 2

You'll need to log in to post.

Our Preferred Partners
0u4aZSWEDuoBdqm3mgSxgzgqId9kNJGCrLiSdJxwdB2asf6SaP6LVwM4lUlqGaSU