Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

What the hell is OpenCandy?

<< < (90/99) > >>

cmpm:
You are OpenCandy's dream come true.
--- End quote ---

No, not even close.

You nor anyone here can read minds.
Nor have you read this thread apparently....
Which is fine, like no problem, jump right in.

I said "...out of sync with SOME of the general thinking here."
--- End quote ---

A contradiction in terms, imo, but say what you want to.
I'd appreciate no back-handed insults, thanks.
I'm not OC's dream come true...that's just wrong to even think it.
Even about a developer who is using OC.

cmpm:
the overreaction would be the leaving the forums just because a few people here like OC
--- End quote ---

Thanks wraith808 for clarifying that for me.

That is what I meant more then "the general thinking here" thing.
Which I don't know where that could have come from in this thread.
But there it is. An opinion I suppose....

40hz:
I guess I'll just bid adieu.  It is clear I am very out of sync with some of the general thinking here...in that I cannot see how anyone would conclude that this "method" has any coat of acceptability whatsoever.

I say that because, to me, if anything is being done (installed or info sent to wherever) before the user has a chance to prevent it, that unquestionably (in my opinion) constitutes unacceptable behavior.
-movrshakr (April 10, 2011, 03:46 PM)
--- End quote ---

No need to walk away. But you might want to tone it down just a bit. We're all friends here. Even when we're arguing over something and sound like we're a bunch of 5-year olds.  ;D

I think if you read the entire thread you'll discover that the "general thinking" (such as it is) has not  been in agreement with OC's arguments. If anything there are two camps that are in complete disagreement over OC in this thread.
 :)

 

Renegade:
Clearly, you have no problem with someone, without your permission, installing software on your machine, or sending off data about you or your machine--as does OpenCandy.
-movrshakr (April 10, 2011, 04:15 PM)
--- End quote ---

This is the kind of thing that I've been trying to debunk.

I've looked into what OC is doing and checked the data. It's not doing that. Here's a post I did that shows what is happening: Opening Up OpenCandy. That walks through a low-level look at the installer, the network traffic, and the information in that network traffic.

One thing I did not point out in there, is that the network traffic is NOT encrypted. So it's wide open to see! Now, if you were trying to do naughty things, wouldn't you try to hide? 

If it were doing naughty things, I wouldn't have started using it.

I am not out to change opinions on the topic. Like I've said before, that's simply stupid.

What I have been trying to do is to set straight some facts.

Well, I did go off on a tangent about language usage and red herrings. But that's kind of a nit-picky issue.

J-Mac:
I guess I'll just bid adieu.  It is clear I am very out of sync with some of the general thinking here...in that I cannot see how anyone would conclude that this "method" has any coat of acceptability whatsoever.

I say that because, to me, if anything is being done (installed or info sent to wherever) before the user has a chance to prevent it, that unquestionably (in my opinion) constitutes unacceptable behavior.
-movrshakr (April 10, 2011, 03:46 PM)
--- End quote ---

I agree to an extent; just not as passionately as you. Mainly though I just want to keep Renegade from getting cranked back up... see if we can save him from destroying his keyboard in this thread!   ;D

Jim

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page