July 31, 2004
None of the freeware versions of spyware removers will take care of this little bugger. (and I wasn't about to pay $30 to some spyware company to get rid of one bit of spyware - it's the principle of the thing) So I started googling around to find out about it.
Turns out that you can remove it manually, but the removal instructions are annoyingly long and involve reboots and safe modes etc. I figure poking yourself in the eye with a sharp stick would be more efficient if you want to cause yourself lots of pain, but I digress...
As it happens, almost everything we run on PC is on W2K - which is excellent, because the removal is much easier on W2K than it is on XP, but it's almost easier to simply blow the entire thing away and reload your OS - yes it's that much of a pain to get rid of.
Thus we come to my advice in the title of this post - download Mozilla! Firefox with Java will let you do just about everything you need to do on the web. Then you won't be bothered (at least not yet) by all the morons who think it's a really cute thing to hijack your browser. Oh, BTW - the morons who have done this, are in the business of selling adware/spyware protection. Sheesh!!!
This is the set of instructions for Win XP removal.
And this is the set of instructions for W2K removal.
Last of all - a bunch of new security patches was just released for IE yesterday! Please update your patches - the newest exploits can involve bitmap files which people haven't been too concerned about up to this point!!! The other way these holes can be exploited is by browsing to a malicious site. Anyhow, patch, patch patch - as sometimes holes can be exploited even if you aren't using IE as your default browser.
UPDATE: A couple of things I forgot to mention! First and foremost - if you have about:blank, it will NOT let you update your microsoft patches. If you try to use Windows Update to see what is necessary and you click on "Scan your system now" - about:blank will automatically hijack you back to their home page. Second - if you try to use Mozilla when you do Windows Update, it will not scan your system - this is very likely the same thing that makes Mozilla safer to use as a regular browser. So, if you want to use the Windows Update feature and have it scan your system for the latest updates - then at that time you will have to use IE. But we will hope that simply going to Microsoft for patches won't end up putting more damaging spyware on your system... although I know many who consider Windows itself to be damaging spyware *grin*.
July 29, 2004
Do you think he'll get any answers?
You'll want to check in later today at his place and find out how things went last night. Don't miss it!
July 28, 2004
FNC Alert! from Breaking News...
And this is what they have to tell me???
Good Grief - Someone at Fox has gone round the bend. Why in the world would this be considered "Breaking News"?
Yes, it was lunch hour again and Rush was talking about the John Kerry photo debacle. Now naturally, when the Kerry campaign manager Mary Beth Cahill, starts talking about NASA "leaking the photos", it does sound ridiculous. But Rush didn't even have a good response for this except to say...
Can you believe this? Here's a guy running for President, and NASA has embarrassed him according to his spokesman.
Now if only he had perused Instapundit this morning, he would have found the perfect response.
Via Howard Kurtz (I'm not going to hot link this as a registration is required and I don't want to take the time right now - if you want the link go to Instapundit)
But Kennedy Space Center spokesman Mike Rein said a video was routinely made of Kerry "as we have done for the last 40 years." He said NASA takes such footage because Kerry was in "a very confined and hazardous area" and that the pictures are always made public.
Ah, so the pictures are always made public. This is something Rush didn't know before he started his show, yet it had been on the Insta-site since last night! Not very good show prep if you ask me. Leaving blogs out of the equation, leaves you open to missing terrific opportunities to make your case.
After all, there are only so many "real news" sites that one person can keep up with on a daily basis.
Here's how they're describing it. So, head on over and enjoy!!!
So many good blogs, so little time...
UPDATE - you will notice I am an idiot and married Dana off to Mike... long day. *sigh* LOL.
July 27, 2004
Apparently Ms. H-K or Mrs. Heinz at the time, ripped into the Democratic party with zeal.
The only problem is... the year was 1975. And much as some people may hate to admit it, 30 years is a VERY LONG TIME. People are entitled to change and to change their minds.
Many conservative bloggers of today have admitted to being very liberal when they were younger, especially when they were in college and in their twenties. So, why shouldn't Ms. H-K be entitled to change over the years also. If people want to dig up stuff... please lets try and keep it to the last 5 years or so. I think there's more than enough material in that amount of time...
July 26, 2004
: The fact that 15,000 journalists are going to the convention is the best evidence that their bosses have absolutely no news judgment.
Nothing is going to happen there. It's not news when nothing happens.
I thought about this for a minute and then suddenly it hit me! This is why all of the "journalists" decided to show up. Cast your mind back, way back to December 2003 and the Iraq protests. When bloggers were the only ones covering the news. Daniel Okrent emailed Glenn to say...
...The organizers of the demonstration failed to alert the Times in advance...
See it's very simple, all you have to do is tell the journalists that you are going to make some news, and they will come see you. If you forget this crucial step, they ignore you. [pondering] I wonder who told them about 9/11. Hmmmm.
She talks about restoring civility, and even before she told the reporter to "shove it," she inferred that her party's opponents were un-American. Way to restore that civility!
I didn't post anything earlier in the day, because when I first read the story, I was willing to give Ms. H-K the benefit of the doubt. I mean, how often do we complain about reporters misquoting and mischaracterizing people? I wanted some other corroboration before saying anything. Then I got out to do my lunchtime errands and Rush Limbaugh had both quotes on tape. Muddy bad sound byte material, but still quite recognizable. Go here to listen to the sound bytes, if you've missed them, and try to ignore the stupid graphics *sigh*.
Now contrast that to the manner in which Laura Bush handles reporters. From a post I did back in February where the reporters were trying desperately to pin Mrs. Bush down on her opinion of gay marriage.
Asked how she feels about the issue personally, Mrs. Bush replies: "Let's just leave it at that."
Short, sweet, to the point. No name calling no anger. I'm sure there have been hundreds of such incidents since her husband became President , yet I have never once heard she lost her temper and told off a reporter.
I will admit right here and now, I am far more like Ms. H-K in this regard than I am like Mrs. Bush. This is why I admire our current First Lady so very much. It's much easier to lose your temper and lash out. To remain civil, even gracious, under such stress is just awe inspiring. Someday I would love to meet this woman and have a chance to talk with her a while.
As for Ms. H-K, while I admire the fact that she said something few people have the guts to say to a reporter... I have to wonder how she would standup under the pressure of being the First Lady.
30 queries taking 0.011 seconds, 86 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.