CCleaner, clean or not ?

I fully agree. Closing the eyes to not see the obvious is much more comforting. What you do not see is not there.

So, we have the proven record that my postings are not for you. ;-)

 

Excuse me but who is seeing what?

In my point of view it is you who is seeing things that really aren't there. Based on the available information I have gathered over the years and what's available online, I find nothing to suggest anything suspicious is going on.


Edit: if anything it is you who appear suspect, suddenly appearing here and taking massive interest in this topic which seems to appear out of nowhere this observation is based on my experiences gathered over the years.

 

So we are to accept that vital processes on our computers are happening without us even knowing the answers to the basic questions?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Ws

I don't think so. Companies like Microsoft have done enough damage by intentionally and systematically obfuscating what is happening on people's computers, by whom and why. They have arguably paved the way for such oblivious acceptance but even they are no longer getting away with it.

The open source movement (not just in the realm of software, but, for example, also in open publishing) is all about transparency, and for good reasons. I don't see why a company like Piriform shouldn't step forward and take full credit for their excellent software.

 

I have not reviewed the papers and have no motivation to dig this deep into the issue. But you probably know that it is part of the virtual office business to provide fake director as a service.

Wrong, I only say that they make serious efforts to be anonymous and I have provided the evidences for that.

Everything else is a conclusion you have to make on your own.

Just ask yourself with common sense if you would let a stranger in your house who refuse to provide his identity. And not only that. Would you let a stranger in your house where you know that they he even makes strong and expensive efforts to obfuscate his identity.

That is all. You can ignore that and enjoy the - technically superb - freeware or you could use common sense and think about why this all is as it is.

Whatever you do is fine for me. I just wanted to give conscious users information to think about. I am no competitor and actually have anything against the makers. The software is designed excellent measured by craftmenship and the "appearance" of the company is well-made and professional.

However, I have difficulties to understand their strange anonymity policy. Again, cui bono? What is it good for?

And you gave me any valuable explanation for that.

 

Try this: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1558223&postcount=21

 

That anonymity is far outweighted by the fact they produce solid software which works as intended.

Perhaps their motivation is to perfect coding etc. for business-oriented commercial products? This speculation is just as credible as your allegations about shadowy motives.

I see nothing to suggest foul play in their part. I don't allow pure logic to cloud my thinking, I see what you have posted, and I see their history so far, the part that makes me truly intelligent, my intuition, tells me nothing is wrong.

You have to weight different factors and see whether the outcome is positive or not.

 

Again, more pointless wild speculation. Enrico, I think the only one that is looking suspect right now is you. You are anonymous, we have no idea who you are, your background, we cannot verify the information even if we had it, and you appear on here in an attempt to start whisperings against a software company that chooses to have some level of anonymity (their reports and accounts are not anonymous) and that uses serviced offices. There is a saying where I come from and it is "put up or shut up".

 

Indeed you have to ask your inner voice and experiences made in practical life to judge about such issues.

I never made the experience that somebody gave something precious (as CCleaner is) to me without any intention.

Anyway, we both do not have more information to make a clearer decision.

It is just too sad, that Piriform has not shown the interest to explain it. All they said was that they have no interest to show their identity and deleted the forum thread.

 

"Scoobs", who are you? What is your real name? Where are you coming from? Full address, please. What is your background? Your public profile in this forum is completely empty. Why do you ask me for my identity while being anonymous yourself.

Anyway, I do not care about your identity because I do not install any of your software. This makes a difference.

What is making me suspicious? Just because I bring up a topic that may interest some, including evidences? What is your motivation to name me being suspicious? i have explained my motivation but what drives you?

Would you please read https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1558223&postcount=21

I am certain that you can open a web browser and make use of the provided information. How can you tell that you cannot verify the information?

 

Irrelevant. If you are going to start an unsubstantiated whispering campaign against a company that provides what most users feel is very good free software then your motives and background also need examining. For example how do we not know that you are a competitor to Piriform, trying to tap into a successful business model that they have established. Like I said, put up or shut up.

 

enrico, maybe you should try to trust yourself more, rather than trusting the internet sources. If you find something that seems to work for you, try it, test it, and so on, and if you get to the conclusion that it's ok, use it. It has absolutely no relevance if that software comes from a hacker or from an anonymous developer. If it does what it says, use it.
It seems to me (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that either you don't want to make such test, or you aren't able (or skilled enough) to to them. If this is the case, my suggestion is to try and learn more so that you will be able to make a decision on your own.

 

No, if you ask for my name it is not irrelevant to me. I want to know to who I give my name.

False assumption.

1. The information provided is not unsubstantiated and I point you a very last time to the array of evidences here: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1558223&postcount=21

2. I just make public that this company is hiding its identity. Period. Again, period. Whatever you make up out of it in your brain is up to you only.

I can tell you that there is a very good indicator for that assumption: If I would be a competitor, wouldnt it be smart if I actually would advertise my product (if I would have any)?

So, if there is an example for an unsubstantiated wild speculation out of the blue you have showed an impressive one.

Now, what? *sigh*

 

Now, that is a responsible, relaxed and cool attitude. You should become an IT administrator.

 

Pure trolling. Bye.

 

Scoob, thank you anyway for your top quality contributions here. Especially your final one. Good bye. But please keep your promise.

 

and then you weave a cloak of innuendo around that after positing a number of questionable "facts". Sorry, we don't play that game here. If you want to come with facts, then do so, but make sure you understand the difference between facts and unsupported extrapolations.

Thread closed.

Blue