Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Filezilla installer is suspicious again

forum.filezilla-project.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 258 posts

Re: Filezilla installer is suspicious again

#181

Post by 9935c101ab17a66 »

ksk wrote: post #58
Joeri wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got tricked into installing adware as part of a java install, and took me many hours to get it back off my system. I don’t get why microsoft isn’t pushing all these vendors really hard to distribute through the windows store. The windows store is a graveyard compared to the mac app store, despite having a head start and a bigger target audience, and it’s basically impossible to use windows without sideloading apps.…

Because nobody really wants to give the AppStore 30% of their revenue. Having it be a percentage of the revenue instead of just a flat fee means its just a money-grab IMHO. Ironically Apple is arguing in court that Qualcomm is doing the same thing to them (charging a percentage based on retail pricing) and that the price is unfair.

You literally posted this elsewhere:

> I'm not going to tell someone how they should make their living

Be consistent. Don't tell apple how to make their living.

Re: Filezilla installer is suspicious again

#182

Post by ksk »

dang wrote: post #156
ksk wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem very confused. FileZilla wasn't "caught". They openly say that they bundle crapware. Sorry, this is not a productive conversation. Goodbye.

You've crossed into incivility in this thread. That's not allowed on HN, regardless of how wrong someone else (or everyone else) may be. If you could please (re-)read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and not do it again, we'd appreciate that.

While its obvious that I have done no such thing, I find it rather interesting that people calling other people "scum" are not reminded of "civility".

Re: Filezilla installer is suspicious again

#183

Post by ksk »

9935c101ab17a66 wrote: post #180
ksk wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because nobody really wants to give the AppStore 30% of their revenue. Having it be a percentage of the revenue instead of just a flat fee means its just a money-grab IMHO. Ironically Apple is arguing in court that Qualcomm is doing the same thing to them (charging a percentage based on retail pricing) and that the price is unfair.

lol you're out here arguing that the people who are (without FULLY disclosing it) bundling malware that downloads and compiles DATs/unsigned binaries from anon domains are in the right, but you have a problem with Apple's revenue model for the App Store?

>lol you're out here arguing that the people who are (without FULLY disclosing it) bundling malware that downloads and compiles DATs/unsigned binaries from anon domains are in the right,

No, that is a false statement.

Re: Filezilla installer is suspicious again

#184

Post by ksk »

code_duck wrote: post #135
ksk wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I do think there is some hypocrisy on the part of people (including myself) enjoying free software and services, when the revenue of those is generated by unaware people clicking on ads or accidentally installing crapware. >You CAN install binaries on other platforms but on for example linux distros their is a curated platform of packages where you can get most/all software. Sure, but things often work better w…

"things often work better when you pay people upfront rather than get something for free and let them fend for themselves"... Whoah, for a second I thought this was 1999.

I guess I must have fallen into a time machine since I just purchased Photoshop last month.

Re: Filezilla installer is suspicious again

#185

Post by ksk »

effingwewt wrote: post #119
ksk wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't support crapware but I'm not going to tell someone how they should make their living. That post looks like rabble rousing to me. I have yet to see any factual information except a whole lot of "it seems" "it appears" "I believe". I'd rather reserve judgement till the facts emerge.

Dude you are all over these comments defending indefensible behavior. What they are doing is wrong. Full Stop. You seriously sound like the admins in the forums.

Huh? I am not defending them. You are either willfully or otherwise twisting my words.

Re: Filezilla installer is suspicious again

#186

Post by ksk »

9935c101ab17a66 wrote: post #179
effingwewt wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude you are all over these comments defending indefensible behavior. What they are doing is wrong. Full Stop. You seriously sound like the admins in the forums.

I'm wagering he has some kind of connection or relationship with the software or developers. There's just no way someone would espouse the views KSK holds without some kind of external factor / ulterior motive.

I'll take you up on that wager. $10,000? I'm dead serious..

Re: Filezilla installer is suspicious again

#187

Post by ksk »

privateSFacct wrote: post #111
ksk wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is pretty much no freeware download site that doesn't bundle crapware. I guess all freeware is untrustworthy by your logic. https://www.howtogeek.com/207692/yes-every-freeware-download...

this guys is trolling, seriously, just stop responding to them. ksk - many hn readers build using free software for places like google, amazon etc, that are trusted all the way up to places like the CIA. Seriously, please troll somewhere else. Basically no one working in almost any open source project wants to be working with an author that bundles in crapware, ESPECIALLY if the author doesn't actually even control t…

I am sorry, your comment didn't make any sense to me.

Re: Filezilla installer is suspicious again

#188

Post by philliphaydon »

jijji wrote: post #178
belorn wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting off platforms is usually quite hard with most trying to be as sticky as possible. The common reason why people tend to stick to Windows is games, even if the situation has gotten better. Personally I have come to the conclusion that the best solution is virtual machines with a linux base system. Put every game that is sticky to windows into its own little container and just have hardware passed through. That…

The opposite is true for my purposes... I run linux and then use virtualbox to run windows 10 for the only app i'm using windows for, which is QuickBooks. I gave up on closed source software decades ago. With Windows, every six months you have to reinstall your machine because of malware and of course the hour(s) of lost productivity per day compared to linux. Good luck with that.

> With Windows, every six months you have to reinstall your machine because of malware and of course the hour(s) of lost productivity per day compared to linux. Good luck with that.

This stopped being true from like Windows 7. Please stop spreading FUD.

Re: Filezilla installer is suspicious again

#189

Post by lightedman »

loganabbott wrote: post #29

FYI the SourceForge version of FileZilla is clean, and has been since 2016. The official FileZilla installer has been doing this for some time now though. In case people don’t know, a lot has changed at SourceForge since my company acquired them in 2016. All projects are scanned for malware. We covered the improvements again here https://sourceforge.net/blog/brief-history-sourceforge-look-...

Guys, we can't trust you because you've still failed to clean up Slashdot like you promised. Still have APK to deal with, you still don't even have basic unicode support, and your mobile version of the site is garbage. And you promised to fix that.

Feel free to spam HN once again when you can announce you've fixed all of your problems. Until then, not many of us really want to hear from you.

Re: Filezilla installer is suspicious again

#190

Post by ksk »

rhizome wrote: post #104
ksk wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I choose to ignore irrelevant questions to avoid derailing the conversation.

Even way down here where the core of the conversation isn't happening? How would a "no" derail it?

Its the same reason that I don't think I can force you to answer any question I want. Its a point of principle.
Post reply on HN