Sunday, August 10, 2008

ISTJ

based on Jungian Typology, i described as..

ISTJ
Introverted Sensing Thinking Judging

and the description is..

ISTJs thrive on organisation. They keep their lives and environments well-regulated. They bring painstaking attention to detail in their work and will not rest until satisfied with a job well done. ISTJs are faithful, logical, organized, sensible, and earnest traditionalists. They earn success by thoroughness and dependability. Shutting out distractions, they take a practical, logical approach to their endeavors. Realistic and responsible, they work steadily toward their goals. They enjoy creating order in both their professional and personal lives. ISTJs are persons of thoughts and (sometimes) emotions. They prefer dealing with the present and factual, using various options to make decisions.

and you know what.. it's a damn accurate.

Friday, May 02, 2008

whatever..

i.. will never be a perfect man
i just want to be myself.

don't blame me if i ignore you,
a perfect reason for you to leave me.

when it is the time, please end it beautifully
you must not regret every pieces of time and memories

when you in deep sadness,
i can't do anything to ease your pain
i choose to end everything..

Tuesday, April 08, 2008

Fitna: The Movie

while i'm in the middle of sumthin', one of my friends.. a doctor actually.. and she is startin' to open talk with me regarding the Fitna Film.

so here is our conversation log,

dr-someone: :D
dr-someone: controversial movie... really attract comments :D, but for some people they choose not to comment at all..
Victor: there's a trigger for everything
Victor: and not everything have the solution
Victor: some says.. it's the cause for allah... and it's true
Victor: some says.. it's the cause for allah... and not totally true *they have their own agenda for political movement*
Victor: you pick one
Victor: :)
dr-someone: political movement... yeah... agree..
dr-someone: for me... i rather choose to be open minded... and think what will come after this
dr-someone: but not all can be open minded
dr-someone: some will just 'eat what they served"
Victor: political can't be mixed with religion
Victor: because religion is pure
Victor: and politic were dirty
Victor: if you mixed them.. then there will be a left wing party
Victor: the extremist one
Victor: who will claim allah greatness but their true purpose is their position at the goverment chair
dr-someone: yup agree... can't mix politic and belief
dr-someone: but somehow its influence each other
dr-someone: thats what happen
Victor: some were true to claim allah greatness but they use the letter which created for the war time..

and supposed not to be used when on peace time
Victor: yes ?
Victor: :)
dr-someone: exactly
Victor: it influence each other because.. both side.. if you win.. you get masses support :)
Victor: yes ?
dr-someone: its not make sense anymore to think about war
dr-someone: yesss
dr-someone: to attract people
Victor: and the voice of the masses is the true voice.. althou it's sometimes false
dr-someone: narrow minded group
Victor: hell yeah
Victor: :D
Victor: but what a minor voices can compare to majority voices.. they try to defeat democracy by democracy

own advantage.. the majority will win :)
dr-someone: do you think its majority?
Victor: so whatever majority says.. it will be justified to be true
Victor: :)
dr-someone: i think its only minority group with loud voices
Victor: the left wing trying so hard to be the majority so they can perform what i already told you
Victor: :)
Victor: that's their true agenda
Victor: and not for the allah cause
dr-someone: yeah, i agree its not for allah
dr-someone: but do you think they can be majority?
dr-someone: i don't think so
Victor: each day they getting stronger
dr-someone: but other may think they are majority
Victor: anyway
Victor: have you watch on youtube..
dr-someone: yupp
Victor: achmed the dead terrorist ?
dr-someone: ah
Victor: it's a stand-up comedy
dr-someone: nooo
dr-someone: not yet
dr-someone: whats the keyword
Victor: you should watch it
dr-someone: ok
dr-someone: let me watch now
Victor: achmed the dead terrorist
Victor: there a 1 answer given by achmed
Victor: we are looking for fool/stupid people without future
Victor: :)
dr-someone: on site
Victor: to do the suicide bombing
Victor: :)
dr-someone: yes
dr-someone: exactly
dr-someone: stupid idea
dr-someone: =))
Victor: anyway... smokin' time
Victor: and please do enjoy watching achmed 'on action' ;)
dr-someone: smoking = hidden terrorist =))
Victor: :D
dr-someone: :)>-
Victor: i'll kill you....... < achmed style :))
dr-someone: =))
dr-someone: totally hillariously FUNNY
dr-someone: nice movie to start a day

Thursday, January 24, 2008

Man Vs. Woman [Explanation]

"Can't We Talk?" (condensed from: You Just Don't Understand)

by Deborah Tannen

A married couple was in a car when the wife turned to her husband and asked, "Would you like to stop for a coffee?"

"No, thanks," he answered truthfully. So they didn't stop.

The result? The wife, who had indeed wanted to stop, became annoyed because she felt her preference had not been considered. The husband, seeing his wife was angry, became frustrated. Why didn't she just say what she wanted?

Unfortunately, he failed to see that his wife was asking the question not to get an instant decision, but to begin a negotiation. And the woman didn't realize that when her husband said no, he was just expressing his preference, not making a ruling. When a man and woman interpret the same interchange in such conflicting ways, it's no wonder they can find themselves leveling angry charges of selfishness and obstinacy at each other.

As a specialist in linguistics, I have studied how the conversational styles of men and women differ. We cannot lump all men or all women into fixed categories. But the seemingly senseless misunderstandings that haunt our relationships can in part be explained by the different conversational rules by which men and women play.

Whenever I write or speak about this subject, people tell me they are relieved to learn that what has caused them trouble - and what they had previously ascribed to personal failings - is, in fact, very common.

Learning about the different though equally valid conversational frequencies men and women are tuned to can help banish the blame and help us truly talk to one another. Here are some of the most common areas of conflict:

Status vs. Support.

Men grow up in a world in which a conversation is often a contest, either to achieve the upper hand or to prevent other people from pushing them around. For women, however, talking is often a way to exchange confirmation and support.

I saw this when my husband and I had jobs in different cities. People frequently made comments like, "That must be rough," and "How do you stand it?" I accepted their sympathy and sometimes even reinforced it, saying, "The worst part is having to pack and unpack al the time."

But my husband often reacted with irritation. Our situation had advantages, he would explain. As academics, we had four-day weekends together, as well as long vacations throughout the year and four months in the summer.

Everything he said was true, but I didn't understand why he chose to say it. He told me that some of the comments implied: "Yours is not a real marriage. I am superior to you because my wife and I have avoided your misfortune." Until then it had not occurred to me there might be an element of one- upmanship.

I now see that my husband was simply approaching the world as many men do: as a place where people try to achieve and maintain status. I, on the other hand, was approaching the world as many women do: as a network of connections seeking support and consensus.

Independence vs. Intimacy.

Since women often think in terms of closeness and support, they struggle to preserve intimacy. Men, concerned with status, tend to focus more on independence. These traits can lead women and men to starkly different views of the same situation.

When Josh's old high-school friend called him at work to say he'd be in town, Josh invited him to stay for the weekend. That evening he told Linda they were having a house guest.

Linda was upset. How could Josh make these plans without discussing them with her beforehand? She would never do that to him. "Why don't you tell your friend you have to check with your wife?" she asked.

Josh replied, "I can't tell my friend, 'I have to ask my wife for permission'!"

To Josh, checking with his wife would mean he was not free to act on his own. It would make him feel like a child or an underling. But Linda actually enjoys telling someone, "I have to check with Josh." It makes her feel good to show that her life is intertwined with her husband's.

Advice vs. Understanding.

Eve had a benign lump removed from her breast. When she confided to her husband, Mark, that she was distressed because the stitches changed the contour of her breast, he answered, "You can always have plastic surgery."

This comment bothered her. "I'm sorry you don't like the way it looks," she protested. "But I'm not having any more surgery!"

Mark was hurt and puzzled. "I don't care about a scar," he replied. "It doesn't bother me at all."

"Then why are you telling me to have plastic surgery?" she asked.

"Because you were upset about the way it looks."

Eve felt like a heel. Mark had been wonderfully supportive throughout her surgery. How could she snap at him now?

The problem stemmed from a difference in approach. To many men a complaint is a challenge to come up with a solution. Mark thought he was reassuring Eve by telling her there was something she could do about her scar. But often women are looking for emotional support, not solutions.

When my mother tells my father she doesn't feel well, he invariably offers to take her to the doctor. Invariably, she is disappointed with his reaction. Like many men, he is focused on what he can do, whereas she wants sympathy.

Information vs. Feelings.

A cartoon shows a husband opening a newspaper and asking his wife, "Is there anything you'd like to say to me before I start reading the paper?" We know there isn't - but that as soon as the man begins reading, his wife will think of something.

The cartoon is funny because people recognize their own experience in it. What's not funny is that many women are hurt when men don't talk to them at home, and many men are frustrated when they disappoint their partners without knowing why.

Rebecca, who is happily married, told me this is a source of dissatisfaction with her husband, Stuart. When she tells him what she is thinking, he listens silently. When she asks him what is on his mind, he says, "Nothing."

All Rebecca's life she has had practice in verbalizing her feelings with friends and relatives. But Stuart has had practice in keeping his innermost thoughts to himself. To him, like most men, talk is information. He doesn't feel that talk is required at home.

Yet many such men hold center stage in a social setting, telling jokes and stories. They use conversation to claim attention and to entertain. Women can wind up hurt that their husbands tell relative strangers things they have not told them.

To avoid this kind of misunderstanding, both men and women can make adjustments. A woman may observe a man's desire to read the paper without seeing it is a rejection. And a man can understand a woman's desire to talk without feeling it is a manipulative intrusion.

Orders vs. Proposals.

Diana often begins statements with "Let's." She might say "Let's park over there" or "Let's clean up now, before lunch."

This makes Nathan angry. He has deciphered Diana's "Let's" as a command. Like most men, he resists being told what to do. But to Diana, she is making suggestions, not demands. Like most women, she formulates her requests as proposals rather than orders. Her style of talking is a way of getting others to do what she wants - but by winning agreement first.

With certain men, like Nathan, this tactic backfires. If they perceive someone is trying to get them to do something indirectly, they feel manipulated and respond more resentfully than they would to a straightforward request.

Conflict vs. Compromise.

In trying to prevent fights, some women refuse to oppose the will of others openly. But sometimes it's far more effective for a woman to assert herself, even at the risk of conflict.

Dora was frustrated by a series of used cars she drove. It was she who commuted to work, but her husband, Hank, who chose the cars. Hank always went for cars that were "interesting" but in continual need of repair.

After Dora was nearly killed when her brakes failed, they were in the market for yet another used car. Dora wanted to buy a late-model sedan from a friend. Hank fixed his sights on a 15-year-old sports car. She tried to persuade Hank that it made more sense to buy the boring but dependable car, but he would not be swayed.

Previously she would have acceded to his wishes. This time Dora bought the boring but dependable car and steeled herself for Hanks' anger. To her amazement, he spoke not a word of remonstrance. When she later told him what she had expected, he scoffed at her fears and said she should have done what she wanted from the start if she felt that strongly about it.

As Dora discovered, a little conflict won't kill you. At the same time, men who habitually oppose others can adjust their style to opt for less confrontation.

When we don't see style differences for what they are, we sometimes draw unfair conclusions: "You're illogical," "You're self- centered," "You don't care about me." But once we grasp the two characteristic approaches, we stand a better chance of preventing disagreements from spiraling out of control.

Learning the other's ways of talking is a leap across the communication gap between men and women, and a giant step towards genuine understanding.

Sunday, December 23, 2007

what have you done?

tonight i lack the strengthen to even move
and you walked and watched me die

but i know this is harder for you
because love has beat you down

i can't believe i didn't see
what was going on with you

how could you do what you did....
you thought you could balance the equation?

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

new article (in progress)

pwn3d: gone in 3 seconds

it's basically an experience during pen-test on one of our client, it's a tool that we use to do the social engineering part and the best time we record is 3 seconds.

and when i'm thinking.. "why not publish the poc" then i'm start writing it.. though it's pretty lame but quite useful and most of times always work.

just wait ;)
i'll post it here once it already finished.

busy busy busy

damn...


all the sudden i've become busier than yesterday..

Saturday, October 13, 2007

[mwi] WiFi Warrior

bit busy these lately

experiment with wireless stuff.
AirCrack-NG Suite, Kismac, WireShark, Ettercap, Kismet, KisMAC, et cetera

hopefully the testing lab for MWI Jakarta can be done before october finish..