User talk:User9669

Archive 2004-2005 Archive 2006 Archive 2007 Archive 2008 Archive 2009 Archive 2010 Archive 2011 Current 2012

why

in your response to me on reference desk:computing spider, you said it was kids. i was just wondering why you think it was kids. it would be great if you could get back to me on that. thanks, Jake1993811 (talk) 04:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I edited down a reference to "script kiddies". They are called script kiddies because they are mostly teenagers who are angry about not being on the football team or not getting to date the hot chick in school (or not getting to date anyone at all) or failing their organic chemistry test or whatever. Teenagers tend to have an immature reaction to disappointment. They react by attacking someone else completely unrelated. The general psychiatric point of view is that they feel really small so they attack something they know they can beat to feel bigger (this continues in immature adults with actions such as driving a big car and cutting people off just to feel bigger). So - why are they "script" kiddies? They don't have the knowledge (or education) to do much. So, they download scripts from others. They don't know how the scripts work, but they know what the scripts do. They download a script that posts something to every page on Wikipedia. they use the script to add "I love Avril Lavigne" to every Wikipedia article. Somehow, that makes up for getting turned down for a date. Yes - it is very possible that the person is technically an adult. Mentally, the person is a kid. -- kainaw ™ 20:05, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1: if a pro wrote the script, why didn't it spoof the user-agent header? 2: if your saying all that to make me mad, i didn't say i disagreed with you. nor do i necessarily disagree with what you said here. so it doesn't make me mad. 3: your very funny. Jake1993811 (talk) 22:34, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Originally, there was no need to spoof the user-agent header. So, some ass wrote a script to spam Wikipedia and anyone who wanted could download it and run it. Of course, it is easy for someone to write a script that spoofs the user-agent header, but it turns out that the people who are putting out scripts to spam Wikipedia just decided not to do so. I don't know why. I wasn't saying this to anger you in any way. My original comment (in the thread) was just to explain why Wikipedia implemented that "feature". In here, I was just explaining I used "kids" instead of "script-kiddies" because I felt someone might take offense to "script-kiddies". I think it is funny. I try to be funny. But, humor is subjective. Most people don't think I'm funny. They think I'm just an asshole. -- kainaw ™ 13:58, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

Hi Kainaw, thanks for your help at the Computing ref desk. I'm at a time when I'm unclear about where I'm heading, and it's great to get advice from people who have been there. Is your PhD thesis available online? I'd be curious to read it. Regards, IBE (talk) 10:52, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My best suggestion is to talk to your committee. It is your responsibility to talk to them. It is not their responsibility to talk to you. That's the mistake I made. I didn't talk to my committee for the first two years. I kept running into problems. As for my thesis, I'm still working on getting it published. Then, depending on who publishes it, it may or may not be online. My survey paper was published, but it is not available online because it was published as a chapter in a textbook. If it had been in a journal, it would likely be available. As for the topic, my thesis is on using log files from search engines to predict future usage of the search engine. Then, expected resources can be preloaded and the users can shave a few seconds off every search. For some people, that can add up to a significant time savings. For others, it is not noticeable at all. So, my thesis isn't anything spectacular. -- kainaw ™ 14:09, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated - I've taken your advice. Good luck with getting the thesis published - it may not be spectacular to you, but it sounds good all the same to me, fwiw. IBE (talk) 17:13, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jon Driver

Hi, in view of your previous involvement, you may wish to comment on the discussion at Talk:Jon Driver#Request. TerriersFan (talk) 02:00, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboard

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. BarkingFish 17:49, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to policy, I cannot edit Wikipedia until my legal issue with WMF is resolved. So, I cannot edit the ANI. This is not a "threat". I am legally requesting that my donations be returned because I very strongly oppose my hard-earned money to be used as a political baby toy for Jimbo's personal interests. -- kainaw ™ 18:03, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While I generally sympathize, and agree that this blackout thing has the risk of seriously damaging wikipedia's credibility, I think you should retract your on-screen legal threat, and take it offline, maybe in direct correspondence with Jimbo. He's the face of wikipedia, and he should realize the risk he's taking by doing this. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:29, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would, but according to WP:NLT and the WMF, I cannot edit anything except my talk page to directly respond to other editors. That "threat" is not on my talk page. I'm rather surprised that the WMF hasn't permanently blocked my account already. -- kainaw ™ 18:32, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's nonsense. You aren't blocked yet. If you wanted to retract, you could. Don't wikilawyer around removing it by saying you aren't allowed to. --Onorem ♠Dil 18:37, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk to the WMF if you do not like their policies. It even states on WP:NLT that users cannot edit Wikipedia until the legal problem is closed. It is not closed. -- kainaw ™ 18:38, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you requesting to be blocked? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:51, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am purposely obeying what I've been told. I was told that I cannot edit Wikipedia with the exception of responses here, so that is all I am doing. I feel that disobeying that request will certainly make it harder to continue pressing for a return of my donations to the WMF. -- kainaw ™ 18:54, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the deal. Either a legal threat exists, and that legal threat precludes your editing pages beyond your user talk page, or no legal threat exists and you're free to amend or withdraw any comments being construed as such elsewhere on the project. If it's the first case, then I'm going to go ahead and block you indefinitely - in this way your status is clear. If it's not, then could you please retract your comments about litigation? You should note, however, that some of your requests (such as revocation of contributions) are flat impossible. The others (refund of donations) will not be helped by continued grandstanding and threats. If you have a serious inquiry, you need to transmit it appropriately to the foundation through their legal advisor. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 19:01, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously guys. Take a deep breath, do something nice tomorrow, and everything will be fine... -- Luk ^talk 19:03, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What I would most prefer is that the comment be replaced with something along the lines of "legal issue with the WMF removed." I could really care less who does it. But, I truly feel that the WMF wants me to edit Wikipedia just to make it very easy for them to easily stop communicating with me instead of simply bouncing me from one phone number to another. Being blocked by admins here is neither here nor there. As I have been effectively kicked out of the Wikipedia community because I disagree with using Wikipedia as a political toy, there is no need to edit Wikipedia. I would like to replace my user page with a statement that this account was active, but was blocked due to a disagreement with this blockout, but (again) I do not want to have such a tiny edit be used by the WMF to refuse to continue talking to me. -- kainaw ™ 19:07, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)So...you don't want to edit another page to retract your threat because you feel that if you do, it will make it more difficult going through with your threat. OK. Makes perfect sense. Don't say you would remove it if you were allowed to when you have no desire to remove it. --Onorem ♠Dil 19:08, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've removed the legal threat on Jimbo's talk page. Do whatever you wish with your userpage; so long as you don't call for or threaten legal action on-wiki, I care not. You did threaten to hack and vandalize the site, however, and that is still under discussion at ANI. You may also wish to review WP:NCR, as I believe your comments here and elsewhere are doing nothing but making a frightful exhibition of yourself. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 19:26, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. -- kainaw ™ 19:28, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]