[squidgemelent]

1.

Originally Posted by Deathclaw

Hahaha. Wow you are actually a braindead moron. As a matter of fact a DDoS is just packet spamming. Multiple sources or not is completly irrelevant.

Originally Posted by Deathclaw

2.

Originally Posted by Deathclaw

Hahaha. Wow you are actually a braindead moron. As a matter of fact a DDoS is just packet spamming

Originally Posted by Deathclaw

3.

Originally Posted by Deathclaw

[DDoS is just packet spamming.] What about the DDoS that don't don't involve packet spamming? Do they involve black magic then?

Originally Posted by Deathclaw

since this quote doesnt give an example this is the only place i need to pipe in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ping_of_death
an example of a DDoS attack that doesnt rely on packet spam. just a single malformed packet can derail the system


why take part in the argument when deathclaw takes both sides for you?

[~Ahmed~]

Originally Posted by RockSolid

Deathclaw I will not read all that.. But u mentioned wiki... Really? You really got an education? If you did those people in your education system wouldnt tell you to acknowledge wiki as a source. Idiot. Ill go on there right now and change the wording. Just kidding I actually dont care. But your still an ignorant idiot. Didnt even read what xen is arguing.

you're*

[Smaehtin]

Originally Posted by ~ahmed~

you're*

<3

[Deathclaw]

Originally Posted by squidgemelent

1.



2.



3.



since this quote doesnt give an example this is the only place i need to pipe in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ping_of_death
an example of a DDoS attack that doesnt rely on packet spam. just a single malformed packet can derail the system


why take part in the argument when deathclaw takes both sides for you?

The argument of you idiots was that a DDoS is NOT packet spamming.

Originally Posted by squidgemelent

a ddos must come from multiple sources
packet spam is defined by the fact it comes from a single source

[squidgemelent]

Originally Posted by Deathclaw

The argument of you idiots was that a DDoS is NOT packet spamming.

yup youre right. that was the argument. as quoted by you who was quoting an official source, ddos is the attempt to make a machine or network resource unavailable, not packet spam. packet spamming can be used through multiple sources to achieve a ddos, but you can also ddos without packet spamming. ergo, ddos is not packet spam

this is also very clear in my actual full quote, though for some strange reason it seems that someone went into the quote in your post and erased my third bullet point which directly mentions this! gee, how strange.

[Smaehtin]

Originally Posted by Smaehtin

^

[DIRTY~XII]

Just from reading this thread I got my Computer Science degree.

[~Ahmed~]

I hope you all drown in your own biotic waste, you ****ers.

[Deathclaw]

Originally Posted by Deathclaw

The argument of you idiots was that a DDoS is NOT packet spamming.

If this was the argument as you confirmed already then this statement confirms that you guys were wrong:

Originally Posted by squidgemelent

packet spamming can be used through multiple sources to achieve a ddos.

Apparently you don't know how simple logic works.

[~Ahmed~]

Originally Posted by Deathclaw

If this was the argument as you confirmed already then this statement confirms that you guys were wrong:



Apparently you don't know how simple logic works.

A year went by and you still argue like a 4th grader.

[squidgemelent]

Originally Posted by Deathclaw

Apparently you don't know how simple logic works.

yeah... i dont know how logic works...

- ddos can be achieved by packet spam
- ddos can be achieved without packet spam

a ddos is just packet spamming. true or false?

Originally Posted by Deathclaw

a DDoS is just packet spamming.

lol

[Deathclaw]

Originally Posted by squidgemelent

yeah... i dont know how logic works...

- ddos can be achieved by packet spam
- ddos can be achieved without packet spam

a ddos is just packet spamming. true or false?


lol

Mate you confirmed already that you were wrong. Idk why you still want to argue.

[aaaa]

I got this last week...

Keep it up guys

[squidgemelent]

Originally Posted by Deathclaw

Mate you confirmed already that you were wrong. Idk why you still want to argue.

piss poor reply. this entire page is hilarious. posting sources that counter your own arguments, editing quotes of others, and failing the easiest syllogism of all time. and you still have this much pride. may i suggest you try the classic deathclaw semantics argument next?

[Schnifschnaf]

Originally Posted by squidgemelent

piss poor reply. this entire page is hilarious. posting sources that counter your own arguments, editing quotes of others, and failing the easiest syllogism of all time. and you still have this much pride. may i suggest you try the classic deathclaw semantics argument next?

Originally Posted by Mr.Xen

That means the login servers are either screwed up of TQ's own accord, or someone is DDoS'ing them so no one can log on (considering the wave of attacks that is what's happening).

Originally Posted by squidgemelent

his post was 100% accurate sweetie

Well aren't you a fine one to talk