So how do you know I ripped and raped out of context? Again, if you didn't read it - how can you pass judgement on the contents?
And I thank you quite publically on my blog for doing so. I believe I have mentioned it here as well. I have never doubted your skillz and my initial post on you (the short one you could understand) asked questions which you have yet to answer.

Nice attempt at diversion on the consultancy though. How could a mere mortal DARE hazard even a guess at the vast sums of money that would be due for such advice? Which is relevant to this discussion how exactly? Try to stay on point here rhican - marbles are at stake after all.

As for Inferno - let us assume that I too have some overwhelming 'public spirit' that compels me to defend him. It alters the validity of what I say - how? This is called an Ad Hominem argument for future reference. Current thinking is that you should try and steer clear of these. YMMV.

When come back - bring clue.

.

.

poor rhican (I assume this is the greeting du jour)

You have not only below par reading comprehension but it appears you are also a liar (at worst) or a complete idiot (at best). :
Wrong - I asked how you could pass comment on a post that you said you had not read. If you were genuinely unaware of the contents, you could not. Really? Is that what you read? Your refute to being told that you indulge in Ad Hominem arguments, one of the lowest forms of debate, is to resort to ... another one? You might qualify for an award for that - I'll Google 'Logical Darwin Awards' and see where you can apply.

Since the post is too complicated for you - all those single lines and all - why don't you just point out where I took something out of context. Now pay attention here 007, out of context does not mean 'edited to remove guff'. There's a good chap.
For me this is where I suspect you may be telling fibs. Unless your contention is that your statement of,

is really only mentioned to point out friction. You are maintaining that there is (I assume) friction between you and I because you helped me out. Yet I thanked you with no malice as can be easily seen - why would there be friction when you did me a favour? This point aside, you claim that this was the reason for mentioning it - so why the "I dare him [to put a value on it]"?
Umm .. no. I see you are trying very hard to read but I think we may be at a level of English that is beyond you. Undoubtedly (I know you love that word) that is what you thought I said. What I actually said was that these piles of data that you keep spewing forth mean nothing as they are out of context. Your original post (if you can remember that far back with all the spinning and a-flipping and a-flopping and a-voiding ...) placed the record number of data leaks in with your argument about responsible disclosure as if to try and tie the two together somehow. I was just giving you a statistical primer since you appear to have been in the playground during that lesson at school.

I submit you are being intellectually dishonest. I tried to engage you over your behaviour, I tried to be civil and open. These are apparently too lofty goals for you to attain. If you feel like you can play with the grown-ups about this subject - please feel free to revisit it. In the meantime may I suggest a couple of books and a link for you to enjoy.



But of course ...

poor bb

Dear rhican

I will type very slowly so you can understand. I was obviously typing too quickly earlier - my apologies for that.
By what metric do you outclass me? Try dealing in specifics my dear chap. Also, if possible, and I know it would be a huge leap from your previous posts - try to remain in the realm of fact - not fiction. FYI I speak several languages - but that wouldn't make for a good insult would it now ...
Ironic? Really? With English skills like that I can see why we may have got our wires crossed. The intended meaning is not even close to low grade or cheap you blithering idiot. The literal meaning is "to the man" or "against the man". I imagine you studied Latin at the same school you studied English and maths :|

Again, you can try to deal in facts or you can continue whining that "Mummy, that bad man pwned me on the internet". You are so badly pwned at this point that the only way you could get further pwned is to try and change channel on the TV and somehow end up trapped under the sofa, choking on the remote.


Assuming all of the above is true - the very worst case situation is that I have a crap posting style and am in a gay relationship with one or more other people. Which would be a bit of a shock to my wife

So what - it just means you had your ass handed to you by an illiterate gay slut. Feel better? Good.

Or you could try refuting some of the facts. Or make a case that doesn't involve "j00 is t3h gay bad man - stop twisting my words - I am t3h one! Pheer m3". You know - demonstrate that huge brain of yours without resorting to name calling and hair pulling instead of the weapons-grade idiocy you are currently demonstrating. Somehow I doubt you can do that unfortunately.

And that, my dear little piggy, is why I find myself needing a shower. I ignored a basic principle and wrestled with the piggy. He enjoyed it and we both got dirty.

poor bb

to bb, as the old saying goes: "Thou shall not argue with an idiot" (to make things clear, I'm talking about rhican).

Don't mind logos, he's still pissed of because I published his XSS exploit. Or perhaps it was, because I outsmarted him, and did not fall for his poor attempt. And no matter what he says, it's logos I know things

He lost his toy, and he's all upset now. That's the kind of people that hate me. They like to keep things a secret, so they have more "power".

People here seem to think its better for one really bad guy to have a powerful tool, instead of everybody having a worthless tool. Luckily I am here to teach.

Probably the smartest thing said so far in this trainwreck of a thread. Now I've made him jump through hoops to prove he is an idiot - I think I'll take your advice.

Ciao