jaclaz

I don't think that having they discovered the coins on their own property, and being the coins so old, there can be any issue about property: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_trove http://www.muenzgeschichte.ch/downloads/laws-usa.pdf unlike banknotes, coins do not have a serial number, and unlike - say - a painting or a statue or a jewel/ring/bracelet/etc. they are not distinguishable from similar items of the same mint. As such it would be really hard to connect them to any robbery or more generally to any felony and/or connect them to the original proprietor, though it is possible that local Law requires to give 'em in custody to the Police, to be returned if after an adequate period of time if no claim (or no valid claim) is made by the original proprietor. The real issue , as I see it, is the IRS (and State taxes), JFYI: http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2014/02/26/couple-finds-10-million-in-gold-coins-taxes-take-half/ jaclaz

The thingy seems fairly recent/still in development: http://www.anyburn.com/tutorials/history.htm Try contacting the Author, it is possible that there is a "regression bug" of some kind or maybe there is a mistake in the part that suggests 98/Me compatibility. jaclaz

No and no (and no ). Meaning that there exist NOT AFAIK any Toshiba USB stick controller (but Toshiba memory chips are often used) and that the idea was that you ran th etools and posted their output (so that I can help you find the right production tool on some "terrifying" Russian , not "freakish" Chinese pages ) and no, the NTFS is not an issue in itself, though depending on a few settings in the actual OS the filesystem journaling features may accelerate flash wear. jaclaz

Queer , from the looks of it it should be using pretty much "standard" System device interfaces/whatever. jaclaz

If talking of Audio CD's, what about self-burning audio CD archives? For NO apparent reason, if not a shameless plug , meet CASBAH: http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=21123 http://reboot.pro/topic/4023-tool-casbah/ and previous ISO2SFX : http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=18845&hl= and later selfburner: http://reboot.pro/topic/4398-release-cd-selfburner/ Though the .cmd's will work only on 2K and later NT based OS, I am afraid, cannot say about damian666's thingy. jaclaz

@fernando JFYI, some "previous art" is here: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/171134-downgrade-win-7-to-win-xp/ jaclaz

Maybe it needs to be carefully cleaned after a too literal use of the device. Seriously now, it sounds like a controller issue of some kind. I personally would try to "zap" the thingy (let's call it "low level formatting") with it's manufacturer tool (where available). Normally these softwares do have also a "testing" provision (it is well possible that the issue is within the actual memory chips and not in the controller/settings). Start by identifying the actual device and the controller in it: http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=it&ie=UTF8&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://www.usbdev.ru/files/&usg=ALkJrhh0pb9R-yf6Uk2SVs1qrHLBHeb4YA It is possible that one or the other of the three "main" tools (CheckUDisk, ChipEasy, ChipGenius) will provide different/wrong information, so I recommend to run all three of them and compare results. jaclaz

If you want the "old" way (MS original) you need the msi45sdk.msi "Microsoft Installer 4.5 SDK" which was available as separate download and can still be found on the net by searching a bit. If you want the "new" way (MS original) you need the "Windows Installer SDK" which is - I believe - inside the more generic Windows SDK (currently for Windows 7): Then, once you have the actual needed files/tools, you will have to learn to use them, particularly Orca.exe , and just like the mentioned Insted, the Wix toolset, these thingies here: http://dennisbareis.com/makemsi.htm http://msi2xml.sourceforge.net/ (nice BTW ) you will likely fall in what cannot be defined but "the worst nightmare a sentient being can experience before death" , the matter is so mindboggingly complex, the approach is made so stupidly (and without actual need IMHO) difficult (and the documentation, as always either sucks or it is non-existent, or is mis-referencing the one or the other technology or it is lost forever in one or the other re-arrangements of the MS site) that I personally lost any hope several years ago to get the hang of it. Besides time, dedication and efforts, you will need some luck, I believe. To give you an idea of the complexity of the topic (and the general ignorance about it by most of the good MS MVP's and the like) there is even someone that has made a job/carreer out of this stuff (the site contains quite a bit of nice information, BTW): http://www.contactez.net/ Good luck . jaclaz

My guess is that there (as usual/normal when MS is incolved) a misunderstanding or overlapping of names. IPD is a "nice new name" for a "generic" approach, "Delta Compression". There are two basic MS "engines" for it: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb417345.aspx the good ol' PatchAPI (please read as "mspatchc.dll" for creation and "mspatcha.dll" for expansion) and the new MSDELTA (please read as "msdelta.dll"). The SFXCAB Substitute uses the former and not the latter, and it is possible that it creates something that *somehow* is only compatible with "pure" mspatcha.dll and not with the expand.exe from Vista which likely uses (primarily or exclusively) msdelta.dll, or it is well possible that the result is only compatible with the SFX stub. jaclaz

Just to keep things as together as possible, it seems like the Windows 7 version of WUSA.EXE has an added switch /extract: http://www.verboon.info/2010/09/extracting-cab-files-from-microsoft-update-standalone-package-msu/ http://www.thewindowsclub.com/windows-update-stand-alone-installer-improvements-in-windows-7 jaclaz

See if this fits the bill: http://www.anyburn.com/index.htm http://www.anyburn.com/download.htm jaclaz

Doesn't Uniextract work on those files? http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/159-universal-extractor/ http://legroom.net/software/uniextract (cannot say if a recent version added the capability) Can you post a link to one of these files using IPD compression? (possibly a smallish one) Have you tried Insted instead (pun intended )? http://www.instedit.com/ jaclaz

Naah, rest assured it was dripping enough , it's my own that is a bit less evident due to my (only for today's special ) lower-than-normal level of grumpiness which forced me into adding some politically correct note... jaclaz

Maybe connected, maybe not , the new "spot verification service" and the new "online self-healing" model: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/09/redesigning-chkdsk-and-the-new-ntfs-health-model.aspx Also most probably unconnected, but there are hints that there is something changed at a "lower" level than the filesystem driver (at least when AF disks are involved): http://www.forensicfocus.com/Forums/viewtopic/t=11431/postdays=0/postorder=asc/start=0/ Just for the record, it is not the first time (historically) that for mysterious reasons a filesystem driver (or however *something* influencing data access or transfer speed) is much slower than a previous release, even on a much simpler filesystem such as FAT16 or FAT32: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/125116-fat16-vs-fat32-vs-ntfs-speed-on-usb-stick/ and however there are so many "queer" behaviours when it comes to "real life" disk speed/access that I guess we could spend an entire lifetime doing tests each one of which will contradict the result of the earlier one. And this time undoubtedly not connected, but a good example of how sometimes MS changes things (quite relevant) and says nothing about the changes, we have recent evidence that a TexFAT version 2.0 was introduced silently in Windows Phone 7 (or maybe 7.5): http://www.forensicfocus.com/Forums/viewtopic/t=11393/ jaclaz

Which is fine anyway , as I am doing this pro bono: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro_bono or - even better - as Professional courtesy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_courtesy Though of course I am sorry I didn't meet fully a fellow MSFNer's expectations. jaclaz

Don't forget the much more relevant Towel Day (though there is still plenty of time before it) : http://towelday.org/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Towel_Day jaclaz

The THREE addresses are BOTH adsense. Fascinating. That's good , as I NEVER said that you said that the .dll was calling home, I said how I doubted that the .dll was calling those addresses. Of course I did not check "it" out, first thing because you did not ask to check "it" out for you (you asked about decompiling the .dll, which made, makes and will make no sense whatsoever, for the reasons exposed). Quick layman comparison : Q. My car does not start, can someone check the tires pressure for me? A. No, you check your tires pressure and I doubt that your left front tire being at 32.362 psi is connected with the car failing to start. jaclaz

Hmmm. Pi-day 2014 is near: http://www.piday.org/ The 2013 day was celebrated nicely, with a Pi pie : http://www.robynsonlineworld.com/2013/03/celebrate-pi-day-3-14-and-einsteins-birthday/ To celebrate this year, I will post about Milü (or Zulü) an old fraction (old in the sense that it has been documented since roughly 460 A.D.) 355/113: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milü http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zu_Chongzhi jaclaz

Well, actually there are a couple lines to be drawn . In 2K and up to Windows XP SP1 the code was there AND there was NO actual memory limit (on selected hardware, with appropriate drivers). With XP SP2 some code was seemingly removed, making it impossible to have more than 4 Gb (actually less than that available, roughly 3.5 Gb). Vista reintroduced the "full" code and added the license checks. Vista SP1 (accidentally ) introduced a change in the way RAM is counted that may (please read as "will likely") trick a large number of people into thinking that more than 4 Gb is supported. Point is defining "legal". If the question is "are there around patches to MS files allowing to run 32 bit Vista or Windows 7 (or Windows 8/8.1) with more than 4 Gb of Ram available?" the answer is yes. If the question is "are those patches legal?" the answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind. Please note how in this page: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/taking-the-mystery-out-of-64-bit-windows the good MS guys, while still mantaining the (as seen inaccurate) equation 32 bit=4 Gb RAM max (actually 3.5 Gb) are strangely saying the truth about the *need* or *opportunity* of choosing a 64 bit OS. There are not (AFAIK and with the notable exception of a few very high end graphical/video oriented programs and possibly programs dealing with extremely large databases or very large numbers) any reliable report of 64 bit being in any way faster than 32 bit OS, actually available data hints that the performance of 64 bit and 32 bit programs is the same or very nearly the same, and in some case the 64 bit version is actually slower. JFYI: http://reboot.pro/topic/17568-what-advantage-hold-64-bit-programs-over-their-32-bit-version/ jaclaz

Just for the record, not really-really. Those are mainly ARTIFICIAL, license induced, limitations, see: http://www.geoffchappell.com/notes/windows/license/memory.htm (you may need to copy and paste the above address) The good MS guys have also upgraded the 512 Mb of XP "Starter Edition" to the Vista 1 Gb and Windows 7 2 Gb . Full data here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa366778(v=vs.85).aspx jaclaz

I think you need a special license to be allowed to post oximorons on MSFN : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxymoron jaclaz

Maybe instead of replacing the install.esd with the modified install.wim you should "convert" this latter back to install.esd. Something *like*: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh825258.aspx http://forums.mydigitalonline.com/threads/threads/47875-Windows-Integration-Guide-murphy78/threads/47875-Windows-Integration-Guide-murphy78/threads/47875-Windows-Integration-Guide-murphy78?s=fca72165774551c8154e7a339ffa4c33&p=801377&viewfull=1#post801377 dism /Export-Image /SourceImageFile:"D:\install.wim" /SourceIndex:1 /DestinationImageFile:"D:\install.esd" /Compress:recoveryjaclaz

I really don' t understand. You supposedly already have the IP's listed (the fact that you likely have two out of three or even three out of three wrong is a side note). Just §@c#ing run a few WHOIS queries, like here: http://whois.domaintools.com/ 23.79.108.98 ->Akamai <- let me doubt that the dll actually phones home to Akamai 74.125.225.46 ->Google <- let me doubt that the dll actually phones home to Google 43.30.212.136 : person: Akira Kato address: Keio University, Graduate School of Media Design address: 4-1-1 Hiyoshi, Kohoku, Yokoahama 223-8526 country: JP Since the Author of the Library is called George Mamaladze and is German: http://globalmousekeyhook.codeplex.com/releases http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/7294/Processing-Global-Mouse-and-Keyboard-Hooks-in-C allow me to also doubt that the .dll would connect to a domain of a professor at a Japan University: Then simply try replacing the .dll version shipped with Gamma Control with the one from the official site (that will be v3.0.1.9579 whilst the one in Gamma Control is 3.0.1.39244) and see if the behaviour is the same, then IF it is, review the Source code for version v3.0.1.9579 and re-build it. There is no need whatsoever to disassemble/decompile anything, and even if there was, it would be essentially your own homework. jaclaz

A. No, a firewall (PC or the like acting as firewall) is a device that has two NIC's , it goes between the LAN and the DSL modem/router (the router basically has a DSL connection to the land line and a NIC connection for the LAN). B.No, the sheer moment "they" get you on "their" radar, all your bases are belong to "them" . jaclaz

Good , here is another one (which has obviously very different data, but which graph can be used as example of a nice horizontal striped pattern): http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-monthly-201401-201402 jaclaz