Path: ...!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!apd.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Apd" Newsgroups: alt.computer.workshop Subject: Re: FORGERY Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2020 02:08:02 +0100 Organization: ad hoc Lines: 40 Message-ID: References: <3498b3a9-2a15-47d2-9b60-91099ce06c8co@googlegroups.com> <1421306b-b952-492e-89f3-186d153cbff6o@googlegroups.com> Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2020 01:09:10 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: apd.eternal-september.org; posting-host="825cf2b1603e0e003ea15e0d4e946f69"; logging-data="26212"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+zTDmQPDugfRrrFIVqcOCN" Cancel-Lock: sha1:oEUZ5IbrzbVfgDtHCX9L9XHNx9Y= X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Bytes: 3274 "Snit" wrote: > Apd wrote: >> "Snit" wrote: >>> Diesel wrote: >>>> Snit wrote: >>>>> On 6/12/20 3:11 AM, Apd wrote: >>>>>> He was speaking about code in general, not any particular piece >>>>>> of software. He said as much. >>>>> >>>>> I have agreed he may have changed topics away from Carroll's >>>>> Usenet flood bot. He does tend to wander a lot as he posts. >>>> >>>> You *didn't* understand what Apd wrote, or, you did, and are trying >>>> to twist it into something else entirely. Which is it? >>> >>> It is my understanding he said you changed topics away from Carroll's >>> flood bot code to code in general. If he disagrees he can tell me. >> >> No I didn't say he changed topics. The talk about code in general was >> directly related to the topic of the bot code itself. > > How? You were talking about the output the flood-bot generates. You said one had to see the code. Diesel said you don't need to see the source code to "determine what the program most likely is, if the programs output can be sampled". He then gave a 'not-seeing-the-source-code' example of how a program disassembly, despite looking nothing like its source, will reveal what the program is doing. I would probably have used a different example to do with examining the output. However, what he wrote was all in context and there was no topic change or implication of having the flood-bot source. See Diesel's post: http://al.howardknight.net/?ID=158278349300