From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy


Alan Browne,

You returning gives us all the most promise of uplifting the content level
of this ng.

I respect you more than most of the group I associated you with, but even
if I did not respect your knowledge (e.g., you at least read Apple's White Papers as you quote them often), I would respond to you as you respond to
me.

We can agree or disagree on assessments of fact.
But if you brazenly knowingly deny facts, that's not a mark of respect.

Nor would it be a mark of respect if I were to knowingly deny facts.

Hence, I want you to be acutely aware, that if you remain respectful of me,
I will remain respectful of you.

If ever I'm NOT respectful of you moving from today forward in this
newsgroup, it will be YOU who threw the first stone.

Respect me. I'll respect you.
Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.

Deal?
--
If Chris makes the same deal, I'll remove both of you from the Apple troll
list since the 2 of you have the most promise of uplifting this ng content.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Dec 18, 2025 at 10:53:01 AM MST, "Marian" wrote <10i1f1u$sfq$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>:

Alan Browne,

You returning gives us all the most promise of uplifting the content level
of this ng.

I respect you more than most of the group I associated you with, but even
if I did not respect your knowledge (e.g., you at least read Apple's White Papers as you quote them often), I would respond to you as you respond to
me.

We can agree or disagree on assessments of fact.
But if you brazenly knowingly deny facts, that's not a mark of respect.

Nor would it be a mark of respect if I were to knowingly deny facts.

Hence, I want you to be acutely aware, that if you remain respectful of me,
I will remain respectful of you.

If ever I'm NOT respectful of you moving from today forward in this newsgroup, it will be YOU who threw the first stone.

Respect me. I'll respect you.
Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.

Deal?

The author comes across as highly concerned with status, respect, and control of social norms. Although the tone is outwardly polite, the message functions more as a conditional contract than a genuine olive branch: respect is offered only in exchange for compliance, and disagreement is implicitly framed as denial of facts or immaturity. The writer positions themselves as an authority on what counts as factual, respectful, and adult behavior, subtly placing themselves above the recipient while claiming mutuality.

Psychologically, this suggests defensiveness and sensitivity to perceived disrespect, paired with a need to preemptively assign blame if future conflict occurs. The repeated emphasis on “facts,” “respect,” and “adult behavior”
indicates prior grievance and a low tolerance for ambiguity or good-faith disagreement. Overall, it reads less as reconciliation and more as an attempt to reassert control and set terms for engagement.

https://chatgpt.com/share/69447fe8-c8b8-800c-a75b-ba001841a74c

I agree with this assessment.
--
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote in news:69448017$0$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:

On Dec 18, 2025 at 10:53:01 AM MST, "Marian" wrote <10i1f1u$sfq$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>:

Alan Browne,

You returning gives us all the most promise of uplifting the content
level of this ng.

I respect you more than most of the group I associated you with, but
even if I did not respect your knowledge (e.g., you at least read
Apple's White Papers as you quote them often), I would respond to you
as you respond to me.

We can agree or disagree on assessments of fact.
But if you brazenly knowingly deny facts, that's not a mark of
respect.

Nor would it be a mark of respect if I were to knowingly deny facts.

Hence, I want you to be acutely aware, that if you remain respectful
of me, I will remain respectful of you.

If ever I'm NOT respectful of you moving from today forward in this
newsgroup, it will be YOU who threw the first stone.

Respect me. I'll respect you.
Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.

Deal?

The author comes across

AI?
Do you have a brain?
Are you able to think on your own?
If so, cut the AI bullshit because nobody is interested.
If not, find a place where morons gather and join up.
Your local short bus club might be a good start.





--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 12/18/2025 12:53, Marian wrote:

Alan Browne,

You returning gives us all the most promise of uplifting the content level
of this ng.

I respect you more than most of the group I associated you with, but even
if I did not respect your knowledge (e.g., you at least read Apple's White Papers as you quote them often), I would respond to you as you respond to
me.

We can agree or disagree on assessments of fact.
But if you brazenly knowingly deny facts, that's not a mark of respect.

Nor would it be a mark of respect if I were to knowingly deny facts.

Hence, I want you to be acutely aware, that if you remain respectful of me,
I will remain respectful of you.
If ever I'm NOT respectful of you moving from today forward in this newsgroup, it will be YOU who threw the first stone.

Respect me. I'll respect you.
Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.

Deal?

Mutual respect should be the default mode between individuals.
Unfortunately on Usenet it seems like an olive branch has to be offered
to break the normal pattern of insults and one-upmanship.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

badgolferman wrote:

Mutual respect should be the default mode between individuals.
Unfortunately on Usenet it seems like an olive branch has to be offered
to break the normal pattern of insults and one-upmanship.

Hi badgolferman,

I agree. But it works both ways.

For example, have you and I ever been uncivil in these newsgroups?
I can't remember any (although I made a few mistakes and miscalculations).

We've always remained civil toward each other.
So why can't I remain civil with Alan Browne (and, hell, even Chris).

Both have the "potential" to bring the conversation level of this ng up.

Let's try this with Alan Browne, since he's well known, but he's also
publicly left/returned so we can start fresh.

For his part, all he has to do is act like an adult and I'll treat him as
such. Same with Chris (who is constantly calling me a Trumpist even as I've never said a good word about Trump, nor any politician, on Usenet, ever.)

Chris is calling me a Trumpist simply because he has no argument.
But I'll extend the olive branch to him even so. Moving forward.

As a starter, I'll remove them both from the Apple trolls category.

To me, Usenet is water under the bridge.
Each article can be a fresh start.

I react to what they write.

I never throw the first stone. I simply respond to theirs.

Hence, I'm asking Alan Browne (and, by extension, Chris) to be civil.
Let's see how well it works with Alan Browne (and Chris) moving forward.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 12/19/2025 08:17, Marian wrote:

badgolferman wrote:

Mutual respect should be the default mode between individuals.
Unfortunately on Usenet it seems like an olive branch has to be offered
to break the normal pattern of insults and  one-upmanship.

Hi badgolferman,

I agree. But it works both ways.
For example, have you and I ever been uncivil in these newsgroups?
I can't remember any (although I made a few mistakes and miscalculations).

We've always remained civil toward each other.
So why can't I remain civil with Alan Browne (and, hell, even Chris).

Because at some point it requires one party to admit being wrong and the
other to forgive. You and I have gone down that road, but it requires
people to be magnanimous and stop harboring resentments. Most people
don't acquire those skills, or seemingly view them as being weak. It
remains to be seen if it will work in this case.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

badgolferman wrote:

We've always remained civil toward each other.
So why can't I remain civil with Alan Browne (and, hell, even Chris).

Because at some point it requires one party to admit being wrong and the other to forgive. You and I have gone down that road, but it requires
people to be magnanimous and stop harboring resentments. Most people
don't acquire those skills, or seemingly view them as being weak. It
remains to be seen if it will work in this case.

Yup. In, oh, I don't know, two decades on Usenet, we've always been civil toward each other, even as I've made mistakes (for which I've not only apologized publicly, but also because you've accepted those apologies).

Likewise on my part, if I've apologized for a mistake I've made in the two decades on Usenet, I also immediately implemented a fix, whether that's to
my code or my posts.

An example is I was scraping indiscriminately for headers, and you got
sucked up, which I fixed so that it shouldn't ever happen again (as it has
an exclusion list now). You accepted my apology. And I never did it again.

That's what adults do when they make a mistake.

Similarly, once I got a decimal place off, which didn't change the results
(as the error wasn't in my favor so the fix was in my favor) on Covid
deaths of children as reported by the government, which Chris pointed out,
and which I openly apologized for (multiple times) as my credibility must
be stellar (since I'm a scientist & engineer at heart, and by training).

Folks like Alan Baker and "Tyrone" (whom I actually think is Alan Browne
but I have no proof of that other than the timing of when Tyone came about
just as Alan Browne left, and that Tyrone knew my past history well) love
to harp on the fact that I didn't trust Jolly Roger when he literally
screamed that Apple's iOS could do "something" that Android couldn't do.

It turned out that there is one thing Apple's iOS can do that no other
common consumer operating system does, for which, again, I profusely and
very publicly apologized (because, as always, my credibility is stellar).

I think it's illustrative, actually, that I didn't believe them simply
because they've lied so much (e.g., Jolly Roger insists iOS saves the
actual IPA when it doesn't and he insists iOS can graph Wi-Fi signal
strength for all nearby APs, etc., even though iOS simply can't do that,
and Tyrone insists iOS wasn't monolithic prior to the iOS 16 RSRs, and
that's simply dead wrong, etc.).
*It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/PZuec56EWB0>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0>

They always claim iOS can do things that iOS simply can not do.
So I don't believe a word they say.

Until I prove it to myself.
Using actual undisputed facts.

Hell, I think it hilarious that "Snit" proved a decibel is a Mbps! :)
*Snit video purportedly proving that a decibel is a megabitperseconde!*
<https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo>

They love to harp that I didn't believe them, as if they always tell the correct answer, which is kind'a funny when you think about their goals.

Their goals are simply to defend Apple to the death, no matter what, so, of course, whenever Apple is in they wrong, they will defend her anyway.

Take this recent case of Apple's highly insecure WPS database where Chris
is constantly telling me I'm "wrong" by saying it's "trivial" to query,
where I've queried it and yet, Chris is incapable of querying it. So, since he's incapable, he claims I'm wrong for saying it's "trivial", so I had to prove it to him how trivial it is (e.g., I can collect the entire database using my existing code with slight modifications to concatenate).

I think it's funny, actually, that they had NO IDEA how to prove that iOS
was actually using the port it was using. They simply guessed. I proved it.

And yet, they say I'm "wrong" for not believing that, for once, they were right. Likewise, with Chris who says I'm "wrong" because *he* can't query
the Apple WPS database, even as I've provided all the code that I used.

In summary, I think I've admitted EVERY case I've been wrong in the entire
two decades (or so) I've been on Usenet. I have no problem admitting when
I'm wrong. The reason I have no problem admitting when/if I'm wrong is
because I only care about the correct answer. I'm not here to defend Apple
to the death, no matter what. I'm here for the truth alone.

My ego isn't tied up in whether I'm initially right or wrong, but in this group, my ego is tied to the breadth that I know about Apple products.

You also I would think.
--
I am not here for my ego; nor for my amusement; but to teach & learn.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2025-12-19 05:17, Marian wrote:

badgolferman wrote:

Mutual respect should be the default mode between individuals.
Unfortunately on Usenet it seems like an olive branch has to be offered
to break the normal pattern of insults and  one-upmanship.

Hi badgolferman,

I agree. But it works both ways.
For example, have you and I ever been uncivil in these newsgroups?

You're kidding.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2025-12-19 05:35, badgolferman wrote:

On 12/19/2025 08:17, Marian wrote:

badgolferman wrote:

Mutual respect should be the default mode between individuals.
Unfortunately on Usenet it seems like an olive branch has to be offered
to break the normal pattern of insults and  one-upmanship.

Hi badgolferman,

I agree. But it works both ways.
For example, have you and I ever been uncivil in these newsgroups?
I can't remember any (although I made a few mistakes and miscalculations). >>
We've always remained civil toward each other.
So why can't I remain civil with Alan Browne (and, hell, even Chris).

Because at some point it requires one party to admit being wrong and the other to forgive. You and I have gone down that road, but it requires
people to be magnanimous and stop harboring resentments. Most people
don't acquire those skills, or seemingly view them as being weak. It
remains to be seen if it will work in this case.

LOLOOLOLOLOLLOLOLOL!
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2025-12-18 17:28, Brock McNuggets wrote:

On Dec 18, 2025 at 10:53:01 AM MST, "Marian" wrote <10i1f1u$sfq$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>:

Alan Browne,

You returning gives us all the most promise of uplifting the content level >> of this ng.

I respect you more than most of the group I associated you with, but even
if I did not respect your knowledge (e.g., you at least read Apple's White >> Papers as you quote them often), I would respond to you as you respond to
me.

We can agree or disagree on assessments of fact.
But if you brazenly knowingly deny facts, that's not a mark of respect.

Nor would it be a mark of respect if I were to knowingly deny facts.

Hence, I want you to be acutely aware, that if you remain respectful of me, >> I will remain respectful of you.

If ever I'm NOT respectful of you moving from today forward in this
newsgroup, it will be YOU who threw the first stone.

Respect me. I'll respect you.
Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.

Deal?

The author comes across as highly concerned with status, respect, and control of social norms. Although the tone is outwardly polite, the message functions more as a conditional contract than a genuine olive branch: respect is offered
only in exchange for compliance, and disagreement is implicitly framed as denial of facts or immaturity. The writer positions themselves as an authority
on what counts as factual, respectful, and adult behavior, subtly placing themselves above the recipient while claiming mutuality.

Hmm - pretty convincing!

Psychologically, this suggests defensiveness and sensitivity to perceived disrespect, paired with a need to preemptively assign blame if future conflict
occurs. The repeated emphasis on “facts,” “respect,” and “adult behavior”
indicates prior grievance and a low tolerance for ambiguity or good-faith disagreement. Overall, it reads less as reconciliation and more as an attempt to reassert control and set terms for engagement.

In my reply to the troll, I simply pointed out his narcissism and
possible psychopathy.

https://chatgpt.com/share/69447fe8-c8b8-800c-a75b-ba001841a74c

Meh - while I use GPT - it does (proven) bias to the client - so (and I
did not follow your link) I wouldn't trust that output - even though (confirmation bias alert) does seem to fit.
--
"It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
Winston Churchill

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2025-12-19 08:17, Marian wrote:

We've always remained civil toward each other.
So why can't I remain civil with Alan Browne (and, hell, even Chris).

Your past history reveals you to be ingenuine and you result to low
insults when people point out your absurdly misleading and false claims.

Classically this is where you retort: "Where, show me!" and no. Unlike
others (including myself) not getting even close to your usual rabbit
holes of stupidity.
--
"It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
Winston Churchill

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Alan Browne wrote:

Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.

Pretending to be genuine when your devotion to the enshitification of
this NG is not getting me on board your pathetic, narcissistic and
possibly psychopathic program.

Just as I ignore everything from Snit (aka Brock McNuggets), Joerg & Alan Baker, I'm not engaging with Alan Browne's disrespectful language above.

I'll simply repeat the point that Alan Browne has a chance to bring the
level of this group up if that's truly his goal, or he can decide not to.

You are a troll and if you've made one accomplishment in your life it is
the destruction and incredibly high noise to signal level in this (and other) newsgroups.

I agree with anyone who makes a logically sensible point, where I would heartily agree with Alan Browne that engaging with Snit or Alan Baker or
Joerg Lorenz, et al., has the end result as Alan Browne characterized.

However...

I don't engage with them, now, do I?

My "return" here is for my own interest - and from what I've found will likely be fleeting.

Well, your flourished grand exit theatrical pronouncement aside, I, for
one, welcome both you and Chris, where I've always assessed your
capabilities well above those who are mentioned above whom I no longer
respond to.

My promise to you, and to anyone on this newsgroup (or in life), is:
*Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.*

It's up to you to throw the first stone. Not me.

Contribute to the value of this newsgroup.
And the rest of us will follow suit.

It's your call.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Alan Browne wrote:

In my reply to the troll, I simply pointed out his narcissism and
possible psychopathy.

My promise to you, and to anyone on this newsgroup (or in life), is:
*Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.*

It's up to you to throw the first stone. Not me.
So far, that's the second stone today, but I'll ignore both of them.

You and Chris own the capacity to raise the level of this newsgroup.

Contribute to the value of this newsgroup.
And the rest of us will follow suit.

It's your call.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Alan Browne wrote:

Your past history reveals you to be ingenuine and you result to low
insults when people point out your absurdly misleading and false claims.

Classically this is where you retort: "Where, show me!" and no. Unlike others (including myself) not getting even close to your usual rabbit
holes of stupidity.

I didn't engage with the first two stones you threw today, and I'm not
going to engage with the personal remarks above as your third stone.

My participation here has always been driven by a genuine interest in the subject matter, and over the years I've contributed a substantial amount of technical detail, explanations, and problem-solving that many others have
found useful.

If you disagree with something specific, I'm always open to discussing the facts, but I'm not going to follow you into personal attacks since I
genuinely feel that you and Chris own the ability to uplift this newsgroup.

And as for the 'show me' observation, I provide cites for my facts, and likewise, I simply ask for at least a single reliable citation for yours.

That's not a 'rabbit hole'. That's basic accountability.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Dec 20, 2025 at 12:03:18 PM MST, "Marian" wrote <10i6rtl$2028$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>:

Alan Browne wrote:

Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.

Pretending to be genuine when your devotion to the enshitification of
this NG is not getting me on board your pathetic, narcissistic and
possibly psychopathic program.

Just as I ignore everything from Snit (aka Brock McNuggets), Joerg & Alan Baker, I'm not engaging with Alan Browne's disrespectful language above.

You do ignore a lot of facts. I commend you for noting that. Here are the
facts I shared that got you to freak out:

1. https://www.getastra.com/blog/security-audit/malware-statistics/ -- Android devices are 50x more likely to be infected than iOS devices, showing the starkest difference in malware prevalence.

2. https://www.comparitech.com/blog/vpn-privacy/20-current-android-malware-stats/ -- Android malware attacks reached 33.3 million in 2024; iOS attacks remain very rare.

3. https://securelist.com/mobile-threat-report-2024/115494/ -- Android is the main target for mobile malware, with Trojan banker attacks up 196%; iOS sees far fewer infections.

4. https://46745145.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/46745145/MAPS_MTD/REPORT/GEN/Global%20Mobile%20Threat%20Report%202024%20FINAL%20(1).pdf
-- Android's ecosystem is more broadly exposed to attacks than iOS.

5. https://www.kaspersky.com/resource-center/threats/android-vs-iphone-mobile-security
-- Android faces far higher malware volume; both require updates and safe practices.

6. https://www.qualysec.com/ios-vs-android-security/ -- iOS is more secure by default; Android needs careful management to match safety.

7. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/370667917_Comparative_Study_of_Information_Security_in_Mobile_Operating_Systems_Android_and_Apple_iOS
-- iOS has superior information security architecture versus Android.

8. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312279414_Security_Evaluation_of_IOS_and_Android/fulltext/587b977308ae4445c06422df/Security-Evaluation-of-IOS-and-Android.pdf
-- iOS offers better enterprise security; Android requires careful management.

9. https://www.renemayrhofer.com/courses/android-security/selected-paper/2023/Android_and_iOS_Platform_Security-A_Comparison.pdf
-- iOS shows stronger hardware and system-level security in 2023-2024.

10. https://www.approov.io/hubfs/White%20Paper/WP-Comparison%20of%20Apple%2C%20Android%20and%20Huawei%20Mobile%20App%20Security%20v1.0%20FINAL(2).pdf
-- iOS apps are more secure by default due to App Store restrictions.

11. https://www.getastra.com/blog/mobile/ios-vs-android-security/ -- iOS's controlled ecosystem reduces malware exposure; Android's openness increases
the attack surface.

12. https://www.corrata.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Mobile-Security-Whitepaper-Final-Nov-20112017.pdf
-- iOS is less susceptible to mass malware; Android's openness increases exposure.

13. https://www.lookout.com/threat-intelligence/report/q1-2024-mobile-landscape-threat-report
-- Enterprise spyware targets iOS even though Android dominates overall
malware volume.

14. https://www.lookout.com/threat-intelligence/report/q2-2024-mobile-landscape-threat-report
-- Mobile phishing and malicious web content are rising; iOS is increasingly targeted in enterprise.

15. https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2024/12/26/mobile-devices-attacks/ -- iOS faced higher phishing exposure (18.4%) than Android (11.4%), despite Android's higher malware volume.

16. https://www.cybersecurity-insiders.com/vulnerability-comparison-android-vs-ios-in-the-face-of-cyber-attacks/
-- Android is more exposed to vulnerabilities, but iOS still faces targeted attacks.

17. https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.04754 -- Android devices are significantly more prone to persistent malware infections than iOS.

18. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2105.12613 -- iOS offers stronger protection against unauthorized access; Android needs extra management.

19. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2109.13722 -- Both OSes have privacy/data collection issues; Android apps are more likely to leak sensitive information.

20. https://petsymposium.org/popets/2024/popets-2024-0047.pdf -- iOS privacy labels are slightly more effective than Android in helping users understand data collection.

21. https://www.promon.io/security-news/android-vs-ios-security -- Security depends more on user behavior, patching, and configuration than OS alone.

22. https://www.norton.com/blog/mobile/android-vs-ios-which-is-more-secure -- iOS generally offers stronger default security; user behavior is the main risk on both platforms.

23. https://www.verizon.com/business/resources/Tc13/reports/2024-mobile-security-index.pdf
-- Android is riskier in enterprise without strong management; mobile devices remain key breach vectors.

24. https://lp.zimperium.com/hubfs/Reports/2025%20Global%20Mobile%20Threat%20Report.pdf
-- Sideloaded apps and older Android devices greatly increase enterprise risk; iOS risk comes mostly from targeted attacks.

...
--
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Dec 20, 2025 at 12:13:57 PM MST, "Marian" wrote <10i6shl$17n3$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>:

Alan Browne wrote:

Your past history reveals you to be ingenuine and you result to low
insults when people point out your absurdly misleading and false claims.

Classically this is where you retort: "Where, show me!" and no. Unlike
others (including myself) not getting even close to your usual rabbit
holes of stupidity.

I didn't engage with the first two stones you threw today, and I'm not
going to engage with the personal remarks above as your third stone.

My participation here has always been driven by a genuine interest in the subject matter, and over the years I've contributed a substantial amount of technical detail, explanations, and problem-solving that many others have found useful.

If you disagree with something specific, I'm always open to discussing the facts, but I'm not going to follow you into personal attacks since I genuinely feel that you and Chris own the ability to uplift this newsgroup.

And as for the 'show me' observation, I provide cites for my facts, and likewise, I simply ask for at least a single reliable citation for yours.

That's not a 'rabbit hole'. That's basic accountability.

You did run from this... it went against your biases and made you uncomfortable:

1. https://www.getastra.com/blog/security-audit/malware-statistics/ -- Android devices are 50x more likely to be infected than iOS devices, showing the starkest difference in malware prevalence.

2. https://www.comparitech.com/blog/vpn-privacy/20-current-android-malware-stats/ -- Android malware attacks reached 33.3 million in 2024; iOS attacks remain very rare.

3. https://securelist.com/mobile-threat-report-2024/115494/ -- Android is the main target for mobile malware, with Trojan banker attacks up 196%; iOS sees far fewer infections.

4. https://46745145.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/46745145/MAPS_MTD/REPORT/GEN/Global%20Mobile%20Threat%20Report%202024%20FINAL%20(1).pdf
-- Android's ecosystem is more broadly exposed to attacks than iOS.

5. https://www.kaspersky.com/resource-center/threats/android-vs-iphone-mobile-security
-- Android faces far higher malware volume; both require updates and safe practices.

6. https://www.qualysec.com/ios-vs-android-security/ -- iOS is more secure by default; Android needs careful management to match safety.

7. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/370667917_Comparative_Study_of_Information_Security_in_Mobile_Operating_Systems_Android_and_Apple_iOS
-- iOS has superior information security architecture versus Android.

8. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312279414_Security_Evaluation_of_IOS_and_Android/fulltext/587b977308ae4445c06422df/Security-Evaluation-of-IOS-and-Android.pdf
-- iOS offers better enterprise security; Android requires careful management.

9. https://www.renemayrhofer.com/courses/android-security/selected-paper/2023/Android_and_iOS_Platform_Security-A_Comparison.pdf
-- iOS shows stronger hardware and system-level security in 2023-2024.

10. https://www.approov.io/hubfs/White%20Paper/WP-Comparison%20of%20Apple%2C%20Android%20and%20Huawei%20Mobile%20App%20Security%20v1.0%20FINAL(2).pdf
-- iOS apps are more secure by default due to App Store restrictions.

11. https://www.getastra.com/blog/mobile/ios-vs-android-security/ -- iOS's controlled ecosystem reduces malware exposure; Android's openness increases
the attack surface.

12. https://www.corrata.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Mobile-Security-Whitepaper-Final-Nov-20112017.pdf
-- iOS is less susceptible to mass malware; Android's openness increases exposure.

13. https://www.lookout.com/threat-intelligence/report/q1-2024-mobile-landscape-threat-report
-- Enterprise spyware targets iOS even though Android dominates overall
malware volume.

14. https://www.lookout.com/threat-intelligence/report/q2-2024-mobile-landscape-threat-report
-- Mobile phishing and malicious web content are rising; iOS is increasingly targeted in enterprise.

15. https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2024/12/26/mobile-devices-attacks/ -- iOS faced higher phishing exposure (18.4%) than Android (11.4%), despite Android's higher malware volume.

16. https://www.cybersecurity-insiders.com/vulnerability-comparison-android-vs-ios-in-the-face-of-cyber-attacks/
-- Android is more exposed to vulnerabilities, but iOS still faces targeted attacks.

17. https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.04754 -- Android devices are significantly more prone to persistent malware infections than iOS.

18. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2105.12613 -- iOS offers stronger protection against unauthorized access; Android needs extra management.

19. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2109.13722 -- Both OSes have privacy/data collection issues; Android apps are more likely to leak sensitive information.

20. https://petsymposium.org/popets/2024/popets-2024-0047.pdf -- iOS privacy labels are slightly more effective than Android in helping users understand data collection.

21. https://www.promon.io/security-news/android-vs-ios-security -- Security depends more on user behavior, patching, and configuration than OS alone.

22. https://www.norton.com/blog/mobile/android-vs-ios-which-is-more-secure -- iOS generally offers stronger default security; user behavior is the main risk on both platforms.

23. https://www.verizon.com/business/resources/Tc13/reports/2024-mobile-security-index.pdf
-- Android is riskier in enterprise without strong management; mobile devices remain key breach vectors.

24. https://lp.zimperium.com/hubfs/Reports/2025%20Global%20Mobile%20Threat%20Report.pdf
-- Sideloaded apps and older Android devices greatly increase enterprise risk; iOS risk comes mostly from targeted attacks.
--
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2025-12-20 11:07, Marian wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

In my reply to the troll, I simply pointed out his narcissism and
possible psychopathy.

My promise to you, and to anyone on this newsgroup (or in life), is:
*Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.*

It's up to you to throw the first stone. Not me.
So far, that's the second stone today, but I'll ignore both of them.

You and Chris own the capacity to raise the level of this newsgroup.

Contribute to the value of this newsgroup.
And the rest of us will follow suit.

It's your call.

You are so full of shit.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2025-12-20 11:13, Marian wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

Your past history reveals you to be ingenuine and you result to low
insults when people point out your absurdly misleading and false claims.

Classically this is where you retort: "Where, show me!" and no.
Unlike others (including myself) not getting even close to your usual
rabbit holes of stupidity.

I didn't engage with the first two stones you threw today, and I'm not
going to engage with the personal remarks above as your third stone.
My participation here has always been driven by a genuine interest in the subject matter, and over the years I've contributed a substantial amount of technical detail, explanations, and problem-solving that many others have found useful.

If you disagree with something specific, I'm always open to discussing the facts, but I'm not going to follow you into personal attacks since I genuinely feel that you and Chris own the ability to uplift this newsgroup.

And as for the 'show me' observation, I provide cites for my facts, and likewise, I simply ask for at least a single reliable citation for yours.

That's not a 'rabbit hole'. That's basic accountability.

Like the "fact" you presented that iOS couldn't possibly have an app tha provided SMB file sharing?

Like the "fact" that every racing driver knows how a "catenary" curve
relates to going around a corner...

...where literally the only reference you could find was where it
happened to be used in a program to model the track for wooden toy
racing cars?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Alan Browne wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:
Well, your flourished grand exit theatrical pronouncement aside, I, for

It was not "flourished", "grand" or "theatrical". Spend your projection elsewhere, troll.

Well, you can characterize your unusually public exit as you wish but I'm
not going to follow you by allowing you to drag me into an emotional
mud-fight of your choosing by that fourth stone you've thrown today.

I simply ask you to act like an adult, and I promise we'll treat you as an adult. Is that really too much to ask of you, Alan Browne?

one, welcome both you and Chris, where I've always assessed your
capabilities well above those who are mentioned above whom I no longer
respond to.

My promise to you, and to anyone on this newsgroup (or in life), is:
*Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.*

It's up to you to throw the first stone. Not me.

The problem with the Apple newsgroups is the Apple trolls infest it.

This is simply a fact.
If you want to be in that group, then keep doing what you're doing.

However...

If you want to make your return a positive element in this newsgroup, this
is a likely good moment to reset the tone and contribute in a way that strengthens the discussion.

I am willing to meet you there if that is the direction you choose.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Marian <marianjones@helpfulpeople.com> wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

Your past history reveals you to be ingenuine and you result to low
insults when people point out your absurdly misleading and false claims.

Classically this is where you retort: "Where, show me!" and no. Unlike
others (including myself) not getting even close to your usual rabbit
holes of stupidity.

I didn't engage with the first two stones you threw today, and I'm not
going to engage with the personal remarks above as your third stone.

There have been no stones.

My participation here has always been driven by a genuine interest in the subject matter

Problem is your primary subject matter is to find fault in everything
Apple. No matter how small or immaterial.

and over the years I've contributed a substantial amount of
technical detail, explanations, and problem-solving that many others have found useful.

Lol. Not even close. Your beneficial contributions can be counted on the fingers of one hand...

... after that hand had been blown up with a grenade.

If you disagree with something specific, I'm always open to discussing the facts

That's the complete opposite of the reality.

but I'm not going to follow you into personal attacks

Apart from "troll", "low IQ" and "stupid". Yeah sure.

since I
genuinely feel that you and Chris own the ability to uplift this newsgroup.

And as for the 'show me' observation, I provide cites for my facts

No you don't. You extrapolate and exaggerate way beyond the sources you
cite.

likewise, I simply ask for at least a single reliable citation for yours.

Again, you don't. You make up strawmen that you expect others to defend.

That's not a 'rabbit hole'. That's basic accountability.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Marian <marianjones@helpfulpeople.com> wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

In my reply to the troll, I simply pointed out his narcissism and
possible psychopathy.

My promise to you, and to anyone on this newsgroup (or in life), is:
*Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.*

Says the person who started a thread attacking a person's IQ. How is that
being an adult?

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Chris wrote:

I didn't engage with the first two stones you threw today, and I'm not
going to engage with the personal remarks above as your third stone.

There have been no stones.

My participation here has always been driven by a genuine interest in the
subject matter

Problem is your primary subject matter is to find fault in everything
Apple. No matter how small or immaterial.

and over the years I've contributed a substantial amount of
technical detail, explanations, and problem-solving that many others have
found useful.

Lol. Not even close. Your beneficial contributions can be counted on the fingers of one hand...

... after that hand had been blown up with a grenade.

If you disagree with something specific, I'm always open to discussing the >> facts

That's the complete opposite of the reality.

but I'm not going to follow you into personal attacks

Apart from "troll", "low IQ" and "stupid". Yeah sure.

since I
genuinely feel that you and Chris own the ability to uplift this newsgroup. >>
And as for the 'show me' observation, I provide cites for my facts

No you don't. You extrapolate and exaggerate way beyond the sources you cite.

likewise, I simply ask for at least a single reliable citation for yours.

Again, you don't. You make up strawmen that you expect others to defend.

That's not a 'rabbit hole'. That's basic accountability.

As I wrote to badgolferman and to Alan Browne, I have always been civil
with those who are civil to me & I strive to continue that here despite
your attempts to drag this conversation into a Snit-like-Baker-like abyss.

Hence, I am not going to respond to the stones you are throwing in my direction. They do not help the discussion and they do not move the
newsgroup forward.

What matters to me is raising the level of the conversation back to
technical substance. That is where I contribute immensely to this
newsgrpoup (e.g., outlining how the Apple WPS database works), and that is where this group has historically been at its best.

When I bring up issues such as the privacy implications of the Apple WPS database, I am doing so because the underlying technology and its
consequences are worth examining. These are factual questions about how
systems behave, not personal ones.

If you disagree with something I have stated, point to the specific
technical claim in its own thread and I will address it directly.

That is how adults resolve differences and how useful information gets produced. I am not interested in trading insults with you, and I am not
going to follow you into that direction.

Bear in mind that I don't even respond to Alan Baker or to Snit or to
Joerg, which you do respond to them, so heed my words that my goals are to
ask you & Alan Browne to act like adults on this newsgroup moving
forwarded.

I am here to discuss the technology, the data, and the implications, and if
you and Alan Brown act like adults, I will treat you like adults.

Deal?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Chris wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

In my reply to the troll, I simply pointed out his narcissism and
possible psychopathy.

My promise to you, and to anyone on this newsgroup (or in life), is:
*Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.*

Says the person who started a thread attacking a person's IQ. How is that being an adult?

I've been civil to everyone here who has been civil, Chris. Ask Ant, for example, or badgolferman, if I've ever been anything but respectful with
them.

If you act like an adult, I treat you as an adult.
It's not complicated.

I am here to discuss the technology, the data, and the implications.

If you and Alan Brown choose to keep the conversation at an adult level, I
will meet you there.

If, separately, you want to challenge something I have said, point to the specific technical claim and open a specific thread on that topic alone.

I will address it directly.
That is the only kind of exchange I am interested in having with you.

In summary, this is your chance, and that from Alan Browne, to uplift this newsgroup by acting like an adult.

When you act like an adult, people will respond to you as adults do.
Deal?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Marian wrote:

Chris wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

In my reply to the troll, I simply pointed out his narcissism
and possible psychopathy.

My promise to you, and to anyone on this newsgroup (or in life),
is: *Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.*

Says the person who started a thread attacking a person's IQ. How
is that being an adult?

I've been civil to everyone here who has been civil, Chris. Ask Ant,
for example, or badgolferman, if I've ever been anything but
respectful with them.

If you act like an adult, I treat you as an adult.
It's not complicated.
I am here to discuss the technology, the data, and the implications.
If you and Alan Brown choose to keep the conversation at an adult
level, I will meet you there.
If, separately, you want to challenge something I have said, point to
the specific technical claim and open a specific thread on that topic
alone.

I will address it directly. That is the only kind of exchange I am
interested in having with you.

In summary, this is your chance, and that from Alan Browne, to uplift
this newsgroup by acting like an adult.
When you act like an adult, people will respond to you as adults do.
Deal?

It's not possible to reason with unreasonable people.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Marian <marianjones@helpfulpeople.com> wrote:

Chris wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

In my reply to the troll, I simply pointed out his narcissism and
possible psychopathy.

My promise to you, and to anyone on this newsgroup (or in life), is:
*Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.*

Says the person who started a thread attacking a person's IQ. How is that
being an adult?

I've been civil to everyone here who has been civil, Chris.

Untrue. I've been civil with you, yet you still chose to call me a troll.

You may not like that I've challenged you to stick to your initial claim,
but that does not mean I am uncivil. An "adult" would know that and not
stoop to name calling.

Would an adult start a whole off-topic thread simply to bully someone?

Ask Ant, for
example, or badgolferman, if I've ever been anything but respectful with them.

Well, Ant only really asks direct questions and badgolferman only
contributes minimally and usually in tacit support of your wild claims.
That's aside to his very useful monthly stats.

If you act like an adult, I treat you as an adult.
It's not complicated.

With you it is always complicated.

I am here to discuss the technology, the data, and the implications.

Only in your narrow terms and mostly as attempts to boost your own ego.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:

Marian wrote:

Chris wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

In my reply to the troll, I simply pointed out his narcissism
and possible psychopathy.

My promise to you, and to anyone on this newsgroup (or in life),
is: *Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.*

Says the person who started a thread attacking a person's IQ. How
is that being an adult?

I've been civil to everyone here who has been civil, Chris. Ask Ant,
for example, or badgolferman, if I've ever been anything but
respectful with them.

If you act like an adult, I treat you as an adult.
It's not complicated.
I am here to discuss the technology, the data, and the implications.
If you and Alan Brown choose to keep the conversation at an adult
level, I will meet you there.
If, separately, you want to challenge something I have said, point to
the specific technical claim and open a specific thread on that topic
alone.

I will address it directly. That is the only kind of exchange I am
interested in having with you.

In summary, this is your chance, and that from Alan Browne, to uplift
this newsgroup by acting like an adult.
When you act like an adult, people will respond to you as adults do.
Deal?

It's not possible to reason with unreasonable people.

Agreed. The right people won't understand it, though.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2025-12-20, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:

Marian wrote:

Chris wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

In my reply to the troll, I simply pointed out his narcissism
and possible psychopathy.

My promise to you, and to anyone on this newsgroup (or in life),
is: *Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.*

Says the person who started a thread attacking a person's IQ. How
is that being an adult?

I've been civil to everyone here who has been civil, Chris. Ask Ant,
for example, or badgolferman, if I've ever been anything but
respectful with them.

If you act like an adult, I treat you as an adult.
It's not complicated.
I am here to discuss the technology, the data, and the implications.
If you and Alan Brown choose to keep the conversation at an adult
level, I will meet you there.
If, separately, you want to challenge something I have said, point to
the specific technical claim and open a specific thread on that topic >>alone.

I will address it directly. That is the only kind of exchange I am >>interested in having with you.

In summary, this is your chance, and that from Alan Browne, to uplift
this newsgroup by acting like an adult.
When you act like an adult, people will respond to you as adults do.
Deal?

It's not possible to reason with unreasonable people.

In steps little badgolferman to defend his favorit trolldaddy.
--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2025-12-20 12:59, badgolferman wrote:

Marian wrote:

Chris wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

In my reply to the troll, I simply pointed out his narcissism
and possible psychopathy.

My promise to you, and to anyone on this newsgroup (or in life),
is: *Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.*

Says the person who started a thread attacking a person's IQ. How
is that being an adult?

I've been civil to everyone here who has been civil, Chris. Ask Ant,
for example, or badgolferman, if I've ever been anything but
respectful with them.

If you act like an adult, I treat you as an adult.
It's not complicated.
I am here to discuss the technology, the data, and the implications.
If you and Alan Brown choose to keep the conversation at an adult
level, I will meet you there.
If, separately, you want to challenge something I have said, point to
the specific technical claim and open a specific thread on that topic
alone.

I will address it directly. That is the only kind of exchange I am
interested in having with you.

In summary, this is your chance, and that from Alan Browne, to uplift
this newsgroup by acting like an adult.
When you act like an adult, people will respond to you as adults do.
Deal?

It's not possible to reason with unreasonable people.

Like you?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2025-12-20 12:27, Marian wrote:

Chris wrote:

I didn't engage with the first two stones you threw today, and I'm not
going to engage with the personal remarks above as your third stone.

There have been no stones.

My participation here has always been driven by a genuine interest in
the
subject matter

Problem is your primary subject matter is to find fault in everything
Apple. No matter how small or immaterial.

and over the years I've contributed a substantial amount of
technical detail, explanations, and problem-solving that many others
have
found useful.

Lol. Not even close. Your beneficial contributions can be counted on the
fingers of one hand...

... after that hand had been blown up with a grenade.

If you disagree with something specific, I'm always open to
discussing the
facts

That's the complete opposite of the reality.

but I'm not going to follow you into personal attacks

Apart from "troll", "low IQ" and "stupid". Yeah sure.

since I
genuinely feel that you and Chris own the ability to uplift this
newsgroup.

And as for the 'show me' observation, I provide cites for my facts

No you don't.  You extrapolate and exaggerate way beyond the sources you
cite.

likewise, I simply ask for at least a single reliable citation for
yours.

Again,  you don't. You make up strawmen that you expect others to defend. >>> That's not a 'rabbit hole'. That's basic accountability.

As I wrote to badgolferman and to Alan Browne, I have always been civil
with those who are civil to me

You're a liar.

And that's not uncivil: that's just a fact.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Dec 18, 2025 at 12:53:01 PM EST, "Marian" <marianjones@helpfulpeople.com> wrote:

Alan Browne,

You returning gives us all the most promise of uplifting the content level
of this ng.

Not as long as you are still here.

I respect you more than most of the group I associated you with, but even
if I did not respect your knowledge (e.g., you at least read Apple's White Papers as you quote them often), I would respond to you as you respond to
me.

You don't respect anyone here who calls out your lies and bullshit.

We can agree or disagree on assessments of fact.
But if you brazenly knowingly deny facts, that's not a mark of respect.

You are the only person here who denies facts. BTW, an adult does not "assess" facts. An adult accepts them.

Nor would it be a mark of respect if I were to knowingly deny facts.

Yet you do it daily.

Hence, I want you to be acutely aware, that if you remain respectful of me,
I will remain respectful of you.

Oh the irony.

If ever I'm NOT respectful of you moving from today forward in this newsgroup, it will be YOU who threw the first stone.

You don't respect anyone here. Every topic you start here is LOADED with stones. "Look how stupid the Apple Trolls are". Not believing your obvious lies does not make me stupid. It actually makes YOU stupid for expecting me to believe your absurd lies.

Respect me. I'll respect you.
Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.

You don't know how to ACT like an adult, because you are NOT an adult.

Deal?

Only if you start acting like an adult.

Stop posting your opinions as facts. Stop posting absurd lies. Stop posting links that not only don't support your absurd claims but often state the very opposite of what you are claiming. Stop running away when someone DOES post facts that disprove your claims.

iOS is not monolithic. Apple did not "plead guilty" in France. iPhones are
more efficient than Android phones. iPhones are more secure than Android phones. Tracking a home router does not track people. iOS can run SMB servers.
iOS can connect to Windows/Linux/MacOS/Unix shared drives/folders via SMB using just the iOS Files app that is on every iOS device.

Are you going to continue denying these facts? If so, then YOU are not an adult.

I suspect you will continue to insult me and call me stupid. But in order for your insults to bother me, I would first have to respect your opinion.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Chris wrote:

Marian <marianjones@helpfulpeople.com> wrote:

Chris wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

In my reply to the troll, I simply pointed out his narcissism and
possible psychopathy.

My promise to you, and to anyone on this newsgroup (or in life), is:
*Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.*

Says the person who started a thread attacking a person's IQ. How is that >>> being an adult?

I've been civil to everyone here who has been civil, Chris.

Untrue. I've been civil with you, yet you still chose to call me a troll.

You may not like that I've challenged you to stick to your initial claim,
but that does not mean I am uncivil. An "adult" would know that and not
stoop to name calling.

Would an adult start a whole off-topic thread simply to bully someone?

Ask Ant, for
example, or badgolferman, if I've ever been anything but respectful with
them.

Well, Ant only really asks direct questions and badgolferman only
contributes minimally and usually in tacit support of your wild claims. That's aside to his very useful monthly stats.

If you act like an adult, I treat you as an adult.
It's not complicated.

With you it is always complicated.

I am here to discuss the technology, the data, and the implications.

Only in your narrow terms and mostly as attempts to boost your own ego.

What I am asking of both you and Alan Browne (particularly of Alan Browne
since he left and returned so he's able to start fresh), is that we keep
the discussion on this ng at an adult, professional technical civil level.

My approach is simple: when people engage civilly, I respond in kind.

If they defend Apple to the death no matter what using inane factual
denials coupled with absurd illogical nonsensical excuses, I'll disagree.

But I've never disagreed with anyone who presents a logically sensible statement, on this newsgroup, or on any newsgroup, as I care about fact.

People who present logically sensible viewpoints are acting like adults.
When people act like adults, I treat them like adults.

That's been my experience with Ant, with badgolferman, and with anyone else
who sticks to the technical topics without resorting to inane excuses.

While we all realize that no adult conversation is ever possible with some
of the people who post here whom we've plonked, I assess that both you and
Alan Browne are capable of contributing valuable technical insight here.

Likewise possibly with Haemactylus Tyrone & -hh, who also own the capacity
to make logically sensible factually supported technical statements.

If we can all keep the focus on the technology, actions & Apple product
instead of employing absurd excuses expressly to protect and preserve
Apple's honor at all costs, this newsgroup will be far better for it.

The choice is yours.

Act like an adult, and I'll treat you like an adult.
Deal?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Tyrone wrote:

On Dec 18, 2025 at 12:53:01 PM EST, "Marian" <marianjones@helpfulpeople.com>
wrote:

Alan Browne,

You returning gives us all the most promise of uplifting the content level >> of this ng.

Not as long as you are still here.

I respect you more than most of the group I associated you with, but even
if I did not respect your knowledge (e.g., you at least read Apple's White >> Papers as you quote them often), I would respond to you as you respond to
me.

You don't respect anyone here who calls out your lies and bullshit.

We can agree or disagree on assessments of fact.
But if you brazenly knowingly deny facts, that's not a mark of respect.

You are the only person here who denies facts. BTW, an adult does not "assess"
facts. An adult accepts them.

Nor would it be a mark of respect if I were to knowingly deny facts.

Yet you do it daily.

Hence, I want you to be acutely aware, that if you remain respectful of me, >> I will remain respectful of you.

Oh the irony.

If ever I'm NOT respectful of you moving from today forward in this
newsgroup, it will be YOU who threw the first stone.

You don't respect anyone here. Every topic you start here is LOADED with stones. "Look how stupid the Apple Trolls are". Not believing your obvious lies does not make me stupid. It actually makes YOU stupid for expecting me to
believe your absurd lies.

Respect me. I'll respect you.
Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.

You don't know how to ACT like an adult, because you are NOT an adult.

Deal?

Only if you start acting like an adult.

Stop posting your opinions as facts. Stop posting absurd lies. Stop posting links that not only don't support your absurd claims but often state the very opposite of what you are claiming. Stop running away when someone DOES post facts that disprove your claims.

iOS is not monolithic. Apple did not "plead guilty" in France. iPhones are more efficient than Android phones. iPhones are more secure than Android phones. Tracking a home router does not track people. iOS can run SMB servers.
iOS can connect to Windows/Linux/MacOS/Unix shared drives/folders via SMB using just the iOS Files app that is on every iOS device.

Are you going to continue denying these facts? If so, then YOU are not an adult.

On the contrary, I have thanked you as the most important person on this newsgroup whom I respected enough to bother to test your claims on iOS.

With the possible exception of you, in fact, nobody here owned the skills
to test EXACTLY which port, which could be hidden deep in the GUI iOS used.

It took effort to tease out of the Windows GUI exactly which port iOS used. Without those extensive tests, a claim is worthless without that proof.

You shall remember that I thanked you openly that you were the only one I trusted enough to go to the trouble of testing the wild claims, Tyrone.

As with that conversation, I'd like to offer an olive branch to those on
this newsgroup who can act like an adult when Apple topics come up.

That way we can keep this conversation on a more constructive level.

We clearly disagree on a number of points, but disagreement doesn't have to turn into personal attacks from you that I then need to respond to which
takes both of us away from hashing out the confusion like adults.

Sure, we have plenty of technical disagreements, but we can remain civil.
a. You and I don't agree on how iOS was delivered prior to iOS 16 RSRs
b. You and I use different words for Apple's criminal case in France
c. You and I use different sources for tests of iPhone "efficiency"
d. You and I differ greatly in understanding privacy tracking tools
e. You and I use completely different definitions of phone "security"
etc.

The fact you misunderstand, or I misunderstand, isn't what causes the stone throwing on this newsgroup anyway. What causes the stone throwing is the
desire by some people to go to great lengths to defend everything Apple
does, to they death, no matter what, using the most inane of excuses.

An example is nospam claimed that automatic call recording wasn't on Apple devices because it was illegal, and yet, it's on Apple devices today.

Another example is nospam claimed that torrents aren't on iOS devices
because they're illegal, and yet macOS devices can torrent all they want.

It's when people have the same intense desire to defend everything Apple
does to the death, no matter what, using the first (always absurd) excuse
they can come up with, that this newsgroup often devolves into a cesspool.

I say facts about Microsoft on the Windows newsgroup, and that doesn't
happen. Likewise with Firefox on the Mozilla newsgroup. And on Android.

It's only on the Apple newsgroup that telling the truth about Apple
products devolves into a discussion where we have to wade through the most preposterously absurd excuses for Apple's behavior, simply because of the propensity of some to defend Apple's actions to the death, no matter what, using the first (always inane) excuses for why Apple did what Apple clearly did.

Let's start fresh. Usenet is water under the bridge.

If you say something logically defensible, I'll always agree with it.
And if you say something preposterously absurd, I'll disagree with it.

I'm here to discuss facts, share sources, and correct misunderstandings
when they come up and I'm happy to do that respectfully.

It's obvious I treat Ant respectfully, for example.
He asks questions. I answer them.

Since Ant acts like an adult, I treat Ant like an adult.
Why not you?

If you have "issues" you need to work out, let's put them each in a
separate thread, and we can work them out together, as adults.

Act like an adult, I'll treat you like an adult.
Deal?

I suspect you will continue to insult me and call me stupid. But in order for your insults to bother me, I would first have to respect your opinion.

I'm not interested in trading insults or questioning each other's motives.
That doesn't help anyone, and it certainly doesn't raise the quality of discussion in this group. If we both focus on the substance of the topic
and treat each other with basic respect, the conversation will be better
for everyone involved.

So here's what I'm offering: I'll stay focused on facts and keep things
civil, and I hope you'll do the same. If we disagree, we can do it without assuming the worst about each other.

If you're willing to move forward on that basis, I'm on board.
Act like an adult, and I'll treat you as an adult.

Deal?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Marian wrote:

The choice is yours.

Act like an adult, and I'll treat you like an adult.
Deal?

Of all the people you listed, it seems Chris is the most reasonable and adult-like. He will surely be willing to turn over a new leaf when he
realizes the value both of you can bring to the overall knowledge of
this group.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Dec 20, 2025 at 10:42:05 PM EST, "Marian" <marianjones@helpfulpeople.com> wrote:

Sure, we have plenty of technical disagreements, but we can remain civil.
a. You and I don't agree on how iOS was delivered prior to iOS 16 RSRs

That's because you are flat out wrong. If you had a SINGLE iOS device, you would know that updates are all different sizes. And RSRs are not even being issued any longer. I have not seen one in years.

I have a couple iPad Air 2s and iPod touch 7s. All are maxed out at iOS 15.8.5. The most recent update was September 12, 2025. Rest assured that update was NOT a 5GB download. BTW that update also destroys ANOTHER absurd claim of yours, the "poor support" of Apple devices. The Air 2 was released on October 16, 2014. That's 11 YEARS of support. Is there an 11 year old Android device on the planet that is still getting OS updates?

When the next update comes along, it will again be 100 MB or so. Do you have
an older iOS device? Do you want to look at the size of the next update?

b. You and I use different words for Apple's criminal case in France

I don't use "words". I use facts. The case was settled out of court. France OFFERED the settlement. When the plaintiff offers to settle, it means they
know they have no case (or at best a slim chance of winning) so they SETTLE
for a small fine instead. Since the case was settled OUT OF COURT, no one
is judged to be "guilty".

Yes, $27.4 million IS a small fine for Apple. They made $124 billion that
year. That's the equivalent of me paying a $22 fine to settle something out
of court AND not be found guilty of anything.

c. You and I use different sources for tests of iPhone "efficiency"

Yes, because I use multiple sources that prove the point. You ignore those. iPhones run longer (or the same) than Android phones that have larger batteries. Which is more efficient?

d. You and I differ greatly in understanding privacy tracking tools

Yes, because you think tracking something (that rarely moves anyway AND is not associated with me AT ALL) is somehow tracking me. It is not.

e. You and I use completely different definitions of phone "security"
etc.

Yes. I use multiple sites (some that YOU provided in your attempt to show
that Android is more secure) that ALL show that the vast majority of security issues/malware happen on Android. You use a single site that says iOS had 3 more zero-day patches than Android last year. Even with that, iOS is STILL
way less likely to be infected. Thus, iOS is way more secure than Android.

So obviously, you are going to continue your absurd, undocumented claims. No one is shocked. As you stated, ignoring facts is not what adults do.

I am not interested in "making a deal" with you. I don't "make deals" with children. If you continue to spout your absurd claims, I (and others) will continue to point them out and prove you wrong. That is not "defending Apple
to the death". It is defending truth.

And BTW, when you ARE proven wrong, that's when YOU start calling people stupid. Or you just run away from the topic. Or just say you will now ignore someone. This is not what adults do.

Yes, you did actually apologize to me, after days of beating you over the head and proving that SMB servers work on iOS. You claimed to be "Furiously Googling" in your attempt to prove us wrong. Why didn't you install the SMB Server on one of your "many" iOS devices and just run it? That is what an adult would have done.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Dec 20, 2025 at 1:33:58 PM MST, "Marian" wrote <10i717l$2gnn$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>:

Chris wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

In my reply to the troll, I simply pointed out his narcissism and
possible psychopathy.

My promise to you, and to anyone on this newsgroup (or in life), is:
*Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.*

Says the person who started a thread attacking a person's IQ. How is that
being an adult?

I've been civil to everyone here who has been civil, Chris. Ask Ant, for example, or badgolferman, if I've ever been anything but respectful with them.

If you act like an adult, I treat you as an adult.
It's not complicated.

I am here to discuss the technology, the data, and the implications.

If you and Alan Brown choose to keep the conversation at an adult level, I will meet you there.

If, separately, you want to challenge something I have said, point to the specific technical claim and open a specific thread on that topic alone.

I will address it directly.
That is the only kind of exchange I am interested in having with you.

In summary, this is your chance, and that from Alan Browne, to uplift this newsgroup by acting like an adult.

When you act like an adult, people will respond to you as adults do.
Deal?

You started making personal attacks when I noted your claim iOS users are no more safe than Android ones was contrary to evidence. No personal attacks on
my side, just noting that the EVIDENCE says iOS users are less likely to be
hit by security issues. Here is the evidence. As far as I know you have not shown any counter studies nor expert opinion. You do repeatedly point to a database that does not back the contrary view.

1. https://www.getastra.com/blog/security-audit/malware-statistics/ -- Android devices are 50x more likely to be infected than iOS devices, showing the starkest difference in malware prevalence.

2. https://www.comparitech.com/blog/vpn-privacy/20-current-android-malware-stats/ -- Android malware attacks reached 33.3 million in 2024; iOS attacks remain very rare.

3. https://securelist.com/mobile-threat-report-2024/115494/ -- Android is the main target for mobile malware, with Trojan banker attacks up 196%; iOS sees far fewer infections.

4. https://46745145.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/46745145/MAPS_MTD/REPORT/GEN/Global%20Mobile%20Threat%20Report%202024%20FINAL%20(1).pdf
-- Android's ecosystem is more broadly exposed to attacks than iOS.

5. https://www.kaspersky.com/resource-center/threats/android-vs-iphone-mobile-security
-- Android faces far higher malware volume; both require updates and safe practices.

6. https://www.qualysec.com/ios-vs-android-security/ -- iOS is more secure by default; Android needs careful management to match safety.

7. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/370667917_Comparative_Study_of_Information_Security_in_Mobile_Operating_Systems_Android_and_Apple_iOS
-- iOS has superior information security architecture versus Android.

8. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312279414_Security_Evaluation_of_IOS_and_Android/fulltext/587b977308ae4445c06422df/Security-Evaluation-of-IOS-and-Android.pdf
-- iOS offers better enterprise security; Android requires careful management.

9. https://www.renemayrhofer.com/courses/android-security/selected-paper/2023/Android_and_iOS_Platform_Security-A_Comparison.pdf
-- iOS shows stronger hardware and system-level security in 2023-2024.

10. https://www.approov.io/hubfs/White%20Paper/WP-Comparison%20of%20Apple%2C%20Android%20and%20Huawei%20Mobile%20App%20Security%20v1.0%20FINAL(2).pdf
-- iOS apps are more secure by default due to App Store restrictions.

11. https://www.getastra.com/blog/mobile/ios-vs-android-security/ -- iOS's controlled ecosystem reduces malware exposure; Android's openness increases
the attack surface.

12. https://www.corrata.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Mobile-Security-Whitepaper-Final-Nov-20112017.pdf
-- iOS is less susceptible to mass malware; Android's openness increases exposure.

13. https://www.lookout.com/threat-intelligence/report/q1-2024-mobile-landscape-threat-report
-- Enterprise spyware targets iOS even though Android dominates overall
malware volume.

14. https://www.lookout.com/threat-intelligence/report/q2-2024-mobile-landscape-threat-report
-- Mobile phishing and malicious web content are rising; iOS is increasingly targeted in enterprise.

15. https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2024/12/26/mobile-devices-attacks/ -- iOS faced higher phishing exposure (18.4%) than Android (11.4%), despite Android's higher malware volume.

16. https://www.cybersecurity-insiders.com/vulnerability-comparison-android-vs-ios-in-the-face-of-cyber-attacks/
-- Android is more exposed to vulnerabilities, but iOS still faces targeted attacks.

17. https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.04754 -- Android devices are significantly more prone to persistent malware infections than iOS.

18. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2105.12613 -- iOS offers stronger protection against unauthorized access; Android needs extra management.

19. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2109.13722 -- Both OSes have privacy/data collection issues; Android apps are more likely to leak sensitive information.

20. https://petsymposium.org/popets/2024/popets-2024-0047.pdf -- iOS privacy labels are slightly more effective than Android in helping users understand data collection.

21. https://www.promon.io/security-news/android-vs-ios-security -- Security depends more on user behavior, patching, and configuration than OS alone.

22. https://www.norton.com/blog/mobile/android-vs-ios-which-is-more-secure -- iOS generally offers stronger default security; user behavior is the main risk on both platforms.

23. https://www.verizon.com/business/resources/Tc13/reports/2024-mobile-security-index.pdf
-- Android is riskier in enterprise without strong management; mobile devices remain key breach vectors.

24. https://lp.zimperium.com/hubfs/Reports/2025%20Global%20Mobile%20Threat%20Report.pdf
-- Sideloaded apps and older Android devices greatly increase enterprise risk; iOS risk comes mostly from targeted attacks.
--
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Dec 20, 2025 at 8:42:05 PM MST, "Marian" wrote <10i7qac$14tn$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>:

Since Ant acts like an adult, I treat Ant like an adult.
Why not you?

Your failure to be able to treat people like an adult is an issue with you,
not those you target.
--
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

sticks wrote:

On this idiot golfer man when he replies to me, I see the full address
as well as the user name.

What's interesting about this "sticks" fella, is that he is in a different category from those like Alan Baker, Jolly Roger, and Snit (Brock).

Generally I lump "sticks" into the same category as Joerg Lorenz,
Rudy Wieser, MikeS and Kerr-Mudd, John (and sometimes VanguardLH).

Since I haven't studied them all that well, I'd like to ask this "sticks"
guy to point us to a thread on this ng where he's authored great value.

Maybe a tutorial?
Or maybe an explanation that helped someone solve a problem?

In summary, let's ask this sticks fella to point to content of his that
added appreciable value to the knowledge level of this Apple newsgroup
so that we can better get to know what he stands for and what he is about.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Tyrone wrote:

Sure, we have plenty of technical disagreements, but we can remain civil.
a. You and I don't agree on how iOS was delivered prior to iOS 16 RSRs

That's because you are flat out wrong. If you had a SINGLE iOS device, you would know that updates are all different sizes. And RSRs are not even being issued any longer. I have not seen one in years.

I have a couple iPad Air 2s and iPod touch 7s. All are maxed out at iOS 15.8.5. The most recent update was September 12, 2025. Rest assured that update was NOT a 5GB download. BTW that update also destroys ANOTHER absurd claim of yours, the "poor support" of Apple devices. The Air 2 was released on
October 16, 2014. That's 11 YEARS of support. Is there an 11 year old Android device on the planet that is still getting OS updates?

When the next update comes along, it will again be 100 MB or so. Do you have an older iOS device? Do you want to look at the size of the next update?

Let's take this up, as civil adults, in its own separate thread because UNDERSTANDING how iOS releases is one of the most basic things to know.

There is a complexity in the answer so anyone with only a simple
understanding will NEVER be able to understand what I'm claiming.

Before RSRs existed, iOS updates were monolithic at the OS level, even if
the device downloaded only a delta. The monolithic nature of iOS has
absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the size of any individual iOS device's delta. This is the most critical concept to first understand.

Let's take it up in its own separate thread, because anyone who claims that
the DELTA is what I'm talking about, doesn't understand how iOS releases.

From: Marian <marianjones@helpfulpeople.com>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Almost nobody on this ng understands how iOS released prior to
iOS 16 RSRs
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2025 19:28:32 -0700
Message-ID: <10iaacg$15pq$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>

b. You and I use different words for Apple's criminal case in France

I don't use "words". I use facts. The case was settled out of court. France OFFERED the settlement. When the plaintiff offers to settle, it means they know they have no case (or at best a slim chance of winning) so they SETTLE for a small fine instead. Since the case was settled OUT OF COURT, no one is judged to be "guilty".

Yes, $27.4 million IS a small fine for Apple. They made $124 billion that year. That's the equivalent of me paying a $22 fine to settle something out of court AND not be found guilty of anything.

For years, Alan Baker tried to tell us all that Apple is above the law
simply because Apple can pay any fine that the law legally allows.

That's an absurd excuse for Apple's sordid behavior, don't you think?
That since Apple is filthy rich, Apple can break the law with abandon.

It's like saying I can kick the neighbor's dogs all I want simply because
the fine is only ten bucks so I can be morally, legally and ethically wrong simply because I can afford the statutory legal criminal penalty.

Let's ignore that ridiculous excuse that Apple is so rich, they're above
the law, since it's not defensible on any legal, moral or logical sense.

I'm going to respond in a separate thread so that we can hash this out.

From: Marian <marianjones@helpfulpeople.com>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,misc.phone.mobile.iphone
Subject: Clarifying the Nature of Apple's French Criminal Settlement
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2025 20:01:46 -0700
Message-ID: <10iacar$2c07$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>

c. You and I use different sources for tests of iPhone "efficiency"

Yes, because I use multiple sources that prove the point. You ignore those. iPhones run longer (or the same) than Android phones that have larger batteries. Which is more efficient?

For years, people like Chris have been so confused by "efficiency" claims
that they end up mixing up battery life with efficiency.

They are not the same thing.

Battery life is a function of battery capacity, workload, display power, thermal limits, background task policy, and many other factors.

A phone can last a long time simply by being aggressive about throttling or power saving. That does not make the hardware efficient. It just means the phone is tuned to save power.

Efficiency is energy consumed per unit of work.

That is why the EU created a standardized, audited energy label for smartphones. It measures actual energy consumption, not marketing claims.
<https://9to5mac.com/2025/06/20/iphone-and-ipad-now-come-with-eu-energy-labels-heres-what-they-reveal/>

When the EU labels went live on June 20, 2025, every iPhone received a B rating. This is reported by Heise, which states plainly that "the iPhone
gets a B" under the new EU energy label system. Apple did not receive an A rating at launch. Later, Apple published its own methodology and said the phones "qualified" for A, but that was Apple's interpretation, not the EU's rating.
<https://www.heise.de/en/news/New-EU-labels-Apple-criticizes-test-methods-downgrades-iPhone-and-iPad-10455657.html>

Apple used their classic stall-blame-and-deny tactic, which doesn't
surprise anyone, simply because their phones were all less efficient.
<https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-criticizes-EU-Energy-Label-following-poor-ratings-given-for-the-iPhone-and-iPad.1042477.0.html>

Still, Apple's excuses being what Apple does, the fact is that the only regulated, independent efficiency metric we have is the EU label, and that rating was B for all prior iPhones at launch. That is the factual
definition of efficiency in this context.
<https://www.techrepublic.com/article/news-apple-iphone-ipad-eu-energy-labels/>

Battery life is not efficiency.

And, Apple has improved their efficiency rating since then, so you're
trying to argue that Apple realized how bad their efficiency was, so they
took steps only later in this year to rectify that specific deficiency.

Which is true so I agree with you.
Apple got caught with its pants down on efficiency claims.
<https://www.bgr.com/tech/8-things-we-learned-from-the-iphone-energy-labels-apple-was-forced-to-add-in-europe/>

Which I knew was going to happen since I've been saying it for years.
But we can discuss this topic because Apple is improving efficiency.

From: Marian <marianjones@helpfulpeople.com>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: iPhone "Efficiency": Marketing vs Measured Data
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2025 21:14:57 -0700
Message-ID: <10iagk2$1csu$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>

Note: Apple was forced to improve RAM also; but that's another topic.
Also Apple was forced to improve batteries too; again, another topic.

d. You and I differ greatly in understanding privacy tracking tools

Yes, because you think tracking something (that rarely moves anyway AND is not
associated with me AT ALL) is somehow tracking me. It is not.

Here's the key thing we need to do to gain an appreciation for privacy.

I suggest anyone else who thinks a BSSID is "just a number" begin to
separate the object being tracked from the person being inferred.

This is a very common but very incorrect assumption:
"If the thing being tracked isn't me, then I'm not being tracked."

That is factually wrong, and the academic research we have been citing
makes that abundantly clear.

We need to take the time to understand how modern tracking systems work. Because there are layers of complexity involved that interplay together.

The privacy risk in Apple's WiFi Positioning System is not what most think
it is. The core issue is not whether the scanning device is tracked.

The core problem is that the WiFi access point itself becomes a traceable object because Apple publishes its GPS coordinates in a global database.

I've proved it's trivial to obtain the entire WPS database for the mere
cost of modifying the public FOSS scripts and a few GB of disk space.

Apple's WPS stores billions of BSSIDs along with their latitude and
longitude. Anyone can query those coordinates. If a BSSID moves, its
movement can be tracked. If that BSSID is inside a car, an RV, a backpack,
a travel router, a MiFi hotspot, or even a home router that gets relocated, then the person carrying it is tracked indirectly.

This is exactly what the University of Maryland paper "Surveilling the
Masses with Wi-Fi-Based Positioning Systems" demonstrated. The researchers tracked cars, delivery vehicles, people, and sensitive facilities simply by watching BSSIDs move in Apple's database. No user device needed to be compromised. The BSSID itself is the tracking beacon.

It was trivial for me to reproduce their results.
a. I created sequential (or random) valid BSSIDs
b. I looked them up and found where they were located
c. That gave me the next nearest 400 BSSIDs also

From that list, I could expand outward (if I felt like it, and I do not).
Which is exactly what the researchers said could be done (read the paper).

Once I have a BSSID of interest, I could track its movements.
Which I proved was trivial (where I set movement at 100km distance).

Again, that's exactly what the researchers said could be done.
And I did it.,

Apple's system is so different from everyone else's system that it was
trivial for me, a nobody, to do it - using open source code out there.

This is the primary, documented, peer-reviewed risk. It does not depend on speculation about Apple's internal behavior. It is observable, measurable,
and repeatable. Anyone with a script can look up the GPS coordinates of any BSSID in the database and monitor its movement over time.

Separately, it is also true that Apple receives the location of the device
that reports nearby BSSIDs, because that is how the database is built. That
is a different issue, and Apple does not publish that data publicly. But it shows that both the reporting device and the BSSID itself become part of Apple's location infrastructure.

The important point is that the BSSID does not need to be "associated with
you" for this to reveal your movements. If the BSSID moves with you, then tracking the BSSID is tracking you. That is the core finding of the
academic research, and it is the part that cannot be dismissed.

From: Marian <marianjones@helpfulpeople.com>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Assessing the Privacy Impact of Apple's WiFi Positioning System
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2025 21:34:15 -0700
Message-ID: <10iaho7$2osq$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>

e. You and I use completely different definitions of phone "security"
etc.

Yes. I use multiple sites (some that YOU provided in your attempt to show that Android is more secure) that ALL show that the vast majority of security issues/malware happen on Android. You use a single site that says iOS had 3 more zero-day patches than Android last year. Even with that, iOS is STILL way less likely to be infected. Thus, iOS is way more secure than Android.

So obviously, you are going to continue your absurd, undocumented claims. No one is shocked. As you stated, ignoring facts is not what adults do.

No serious security expert claims "iOS is way more secure".
There isn't one in the entire world, in fact, that you can find.

It's obvious why.
There isn't a professional security researcher on the planet who says that.

It's only Apple marketing that implies that.
Not serious researchers.

You are apparently attempting to reduce a very complex subject to a single metric (malware prevalence), and that is not how security professionals evaluate operating system security. Malware rates are not the definition of security. They are one symptom of a much larger system.

Here are some of the much more complicated facts that matter:

CISA KEV data does not show iOS as "way more secure." When you query the
CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities database, iOS and Android have roughly similar numbers of actively exploited CVEs over time. That is the only U.S. government maintained list of real-world, in-the-wild exploited vulnerabilities. It does not show iOS as dramatically safer.

Zero-day exploitation rates do not show iOS as "way more secure." Google Project Zero's annual reports show that Apple repeatedly ships code that
has never been fuzzed or tested with modern techniques. Project Zero has publicly stated that Apple's code quality and testing coverage lag behind industry best practices. Again, this is not my opinion; it is documented research.

iOS's monolithic update model slows down patch deployment. Before Rapid Security Responses existed, any fix to any system component required a full
OS rebuild and full QA cycle. That is why iOS historically took longer to
patch certain classes of bugs. Android's modular architecture (APEX,
Mainline, Play Services) allows many components to be patched
independently. Update speed is a major part of security.

Malware statistics do not prove OS-level security.
Malware prevalence is heavily influenced by:
a. market share
b. sideloading behavior
c. user behavior
d. distribution channels
e. regional differences

Furthermore, mere economic incentives for attackers Malware rates do not measure kernel security, sandboxing, exploit mitigations, patch velocity,
or code quality. They measure user exposure, not OS architecture.

No serious security expert claims "iOS is way more secure."

Security researchers consistently say the opposite: both platforms have strengths and weaknesses. iOS has a strong sandbox and strong hardware security, but slow patch cycles and opaque code quality. Android has a
larger attack surface and more malware, but faster patching for many
components and better transparency. Security is not a scoreboard. It is a system.

The only meaningful way to compare security is by looking at real-world exploited vulnerabilities, patch timelines, exploit mitigations, and code quality. When you look at those metrics, the picture is mixed, not
one-sided.

So yes, you and I use different definitions of "security."

I use the definitions that professional security researchers use.
You are using malware statistics alone. In addition to malware stats,
I am using CISA KEV data, Project Zero research, patch velocity, exploit mitigations, and code quality.

Those are the metrics used by actual security professionals.

From: Marian <marianjones@helpfulpeople.com>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Security Is Far More Comprehensive Than Simple Malware Statistics
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2025 22:06:24 -0700
Message-ID: <10iajkh$l9v$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>

I am not interested in "making a deal" with you. I don't "make deals" with children. If you continue to spout your absurd claims, I (and others) will continue to point them out and prove you wrong. That is not "defending Apple to the death". It is defending truth.

Each of your issues above has it's own thread.
If you wish to act like an adult, argue your technical points there please.

And BTW, when you ARE proven wrong, that's when YOU start calling people stupid. Or you just run away from the topic. Or just say you will now ignore someone. This is not what adults do.

If you want to discuss the technical facts, I created a thread for each and every one of your technical points above. That's what an adult does.

If you want to call me names for discussing the facts, that is your choice,
but it does not move the discussion forward. I am not interested in trading personal remarks.

I am interested in the data, the research, and the technical details.
Please add them in the aforementioned technical thread for each topic.

Yes, you did actually apologize to me, after days of beating you over the head
and proving that SMB servers work on iOS. You claimed to be "Furiously Googling" in your attempt to prove us wrong. Why didn't you install the SMB Server on one of your "many" iOS devices and just run it? That is what an adult would have done.

When I point out information from CISA, Project Zero, EU energy labels, or peer-reviewed research, that is not "spouting absurd claims." Those are documented facts. You are free to disagree with my conclusions, but calling
me a child does not change the underlying evidence.

If you want to be part of bringing the level of this newsgroup to the adult level, then that is your choice. All I am asking for is an adult discussion based on verifiable information instead of personal insults. If you want to continue the conversation at that level, I am happy to do so. If not, I
will stick to the technical topics and ignore the name-calling anyway.

See the aforementioned threads expressly to flesh out these topics:
Subject: Almost nobody on this ng understands how iOS releases
Message-ID: <10iaacg$15pq$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>

Subject: Clarifying the Nature of Apple's French Criminal Settlement
Message-ID: <10iacar$2c07$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>

Subject: iPhone "Efficiency": Marketing vs Measured Data
Message-ID: <10iagk2$1csu$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>

Subject: Assessing the Privacy Impact of Apple's WiFi Positioning System
Message-ID: <10iaho7$2osq$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>

Subject: Security Is Far More Comprehensive Than Simple Malware Statistics
Message-ID: <10iajkh$l9v$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

badgolferman wrote:

Marian wrote:

The choice is yours.

Act like an adult, and I'll treat you like an adult.
Deal?

Of all the people you listed, it seems Chris is the most reasonable and adult-like. He will surely be willing to turn over a new leaf when he realizes the value both of you can bring to the overall knowledge of
this group.

Hi badgolferman,

I'm not so sure but I'm willing to give Chris a chance by ignoring his
calling me a Trumpist when he has no other way to deny the facts.

The problem we have to get Chris to overcome, which he's capable of doing,
is that he consistently says "cite please" (much like Alan Baker does) when those cites have been provided to him so many times, it's just him
stalling.

Entire threads were devoted to this topic that Chris seems so completely ignorant of that he claims "cite please" when he's been given those cites.
From: Marian <marianjones@helpfulpeople.com>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: What did Google's project zero really say about Apple
never testing much of their iOS code?
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2025 11:34:16 -0700
Organization: BWH Usenet Archive (https://usenet.blueworldhosting.com)
Message-ID: <10ic2v8$307u$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>

It's hard to even have a discussion with people who refuse to read cites.
And yet, they deny them. Out of what? Sheer ignorance.

What kind of adult does that?

If all people do is deny the facts, and require the facts to be cited
over and over again, and yet they don't read them, but still deny them,
then no adult conversation will be possible with those kinds of people.

Let's hope Chris can rise to the occasion in these recent threads.
Let's hope Chris reads the cites at least, before denying they exist.
--
Part of being an adult is acting like an adult, where simply claiming all facts we're ignorant of can't possibly exist is not what adults should do.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote in news:69485a44$0$19$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:

On Dec 20, 2025 at 1:33:58 PM MST, "Marian" wrote <10i717l$2gnn$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>:

Chris wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

In my reply to the troll, I simply pointed out his narcissism and
possible psychopathy.

My promise to you, and to anyone on this newsgroup (or in life),
is: *Act like an adult. I'll treat you as an adult.*

Says the person who started a thread attacking a person's IQ. How is
that being an adult?

I've been civil to everyone here who has been civil, Chris. Ask Ant,
for example, or badgolferman, if I've ever been anything but
respectful with them.

If you act like an adult, I treat you as an adult.
It's not complicated.

I am here to discuss the technology, the data, and the implications.

If you and Alan Brown choose to keep the conversation at an adult
level, I will meet you there.

If, separately, you want to challenge something I have said, point to
the specific technical claim and open a specific thread on that topic
alone.

I will address it directly.
That is the only kind of exchange I am interested in having with you.

In summary, this is your chance, and that from Alan Browne, to uplift
this newsgroup by acting like an adult.

When you act like an adult, people will respond to you as adults do.
Deal?

You started making personal attacks when I noted your claim

Get lost you filthy fucking troll.

https://tinyurl.com/WhatIsSnit
https://tinyurl.com/Snitliesmethods
https://tinyurl.com/Snit-Reviews

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote in news:69485ff0$0$24$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:

On Dec 20, 2025 at 8:42:05 PM MST, "Marian" wrote <10i7qac$14tn$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>:

Since Ant acts like an adult, I treat Ant like an adult.
Why not you?

Your failure to be able to treat people like an adult is an issue with
you, not those you target.

Get lost you filthy fucking troll.

https://tinyurl.com/WhatIsSnit
https://tinyurl.com/Snitliesmethods
https://tinyurl.com/Snit-Reviews
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Dec 21, 2025 at 9:00:32 PM MST, "Marian" wrote <10iafp0$b2b$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>:

sticks wrote:

On this idiot golfer man when he replies to me, I see the full address
as well as the user name.

What's interesting about this "sticks" fella, is that he is in a different category from those like Alan Baker, Jolly Roger, and Snit (Brock).

Generally I lump "sticks" into the same category as Joerg Lorenz,
Rudy Wieser, MikeS and Kerr-Mudd, John (and sometimes VanguardLH).

Since I haven't studied them all that well, I'd like to ask this "sticks"
guy to point us to a thread on this ng where he's authored great value.

Maybe a tutorial?
Or maybe an explanation that helped someone solve a problem?

In summary, let's ask this sticks fella to point to content of his that
added appreciable value to the knowledge level of this Apple newsgroup
so that we can better get to know what he stands for and what he is about.

You act like you are one people have to prove themselves to. Weird.
--
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2