In a previous article, set...@ix.netcom.com (Scott Earnest) says:

Happy New Year!

Remco de Korte
R.S.I.
http://www.xoom.com/RSI/

Some people like Scott Earnest just don't realize how valuble virus
source code
can be for learning things like I/O handeling! I do not have any pascal
source code
but if you goto http://www.geocities.com and do a search.. you should
come up
with many results!

Clifford Roche

I also find it ethically irresponsible to distribute code or binaries freely,
considering that you have no way of knowing to what ends the code will be used
("please send me virus source-code" certainly doesn't imply any understanding
or responsibility), and in some places transmission may be considered an
illegal act.

Not to mention asking for virus code in a PASCAL group.  Very few, if any
viruses are written in Pascal, and those few that I've seen act more like
trojans than actual viruses.  One, of them, FROGGY.PAS I think, cross-links
directories and requires a decent sector editor like Norton DiskEdit to
repair.

Thank you.  You stand corrected.

Programmer beware.

A recent study was conducted in the uunited states!
55% of all compyter errors were caused by human errors
10% by crackers
5% by hackers
and 3% by virueses and other malicouse codeing!

Sveral of thousands of virus coding exists (working) but are not put into
circulation.. instead they are swapped with other application writers and studied
for their purposes of learnin computer language! ONLY 1% of these viruses make it
into circulation 50% of that being accidental infection on their own computer..
Then only 25% of that 1% makes it to keep infecting because they are eihter found
out and destroyed or todays advanced
virus scaaners such as Norton antivirus detected virus like activities and deleted
these!

I learned most of my programming studying virus codeing! Mostly ASM! And none of
the viruses that I wrote or studied either infected my computer nor anyone elses!

last of all I did not give him any source coding... I merely told him where he
could search for it.. If he wanted it bad eno0ugh anyway he would have eventually
searched for it!

(O mu gawd, therz uh VIRUS inn yer spelcheker!)

This has gone far enough.  I will probably killfile this thread if follow-ups
get any more absurd.

Clifford Roche <fluffy...@hotmail.com> wrote in article
<34ACF362.EC9F9...@hotmail.com>...

Since those days of glory the term hacker seems to have become somewhat
debased. What do you mean by hacker, and how does it differ from cracker?
Or do you mean that 5% of computer errors were caused by the software being
written by people who weren't up to the job? How would that be measured?
And where is the other 27%?

:hacker: /n./  [originally, someone who makes furniture with an
   axe] 1. A person who enjoys exploring the details of programmable
   systems and how to stretch their capabilities, as opposed to most
   users, who prefer to learn only the minimum necessary.  2. One who
   programs enthusiastically (even obsessively) or who enjoys
   programming rather than just theorizing about programming.  3. A
   person capable of appreciating {hack value}.  4. A person who is
   good at programming quickly.  5. An expert at a particular program,
   or one who frequently does work using it or on it; as in `a Unix
   hacker'.  (Definitions 1 through 5 are correlated, and people who
   fit them congregate.)  6. An expert or enthusiast of any kind.  One
   might be an astronomy hacker, for example.  7. One who enjoys the
   intellectual challenge of creatively overcoming or circumventing
   limitations.  8. [deprecated] A malicious meddler who tries to
   discover sensitive information by poking around.  Hence `password
   hacker', `network hacker'.  The correct term for this sense is
   {cracker}.

   The term `hacker' also tends to connote membership in the global
   community defined by the net (see {network, the} and
   {Internet address}).  It also implies that the person described
   is seen to subscribe to some version of the hacker ethic (see
   {hacker ethic}).

   It is better to be described as a hacker by others than to describe
   oneself that way.  Hackers consider themselves something of an
   elite (a meritocracy based on ability), though one to which new
   members are gladly welcome.  There is thus a certain ego
   satisfaction to be had in identifying yourself as a hacker (but if
   you claim to be one and are not, you'll quickly be labeled
   {bogus}).  See also {wannabee}.

Scott Earnest <setech@_ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<34AF6CE0.AB1BE6B@_ix.netcom.com>...

That sounds like an improper tool to me! Thanks for the extra info.

I would assume that all but the simplest programs would be beyond
the grasp of anyone trying to learn something as basic as i/o
handling.  

    ...red

When you're dealing with Microsoft software,  an axe is the best tool in order
to cure bugs and errors!

Have a nice day!