I think you mean "fewer" vulnerabilities.

Chrome uses 100M *per tab*. I just checked about:memory, and I saw my Chrome at 2.5G with about 20 tabs open. My Gmail tab uses 210M. I don't see how your entire Chrome can use the same amount of memory as just one of my Chrome tabs.

That sounds great, except does that cause all other applications to restart? Currently, if I can't guess which application is causing Cinnamon to freeze, I restart Cinnamon, but that forces all of my applications to abruptly restart.

I've been using Mint at home for a few months. While I like the design better than any other desktop, I have one major problem with it:

If any program freezes, the WHOLE DESKTOP freezes. I get this about once a day where Firefox stops to think for 10 or so seconds. During those 10 seconds, cinnamon refuses to do ANYTHING except draw the mouse cursor.

You can't switch applications, you can't switch desktops, you can't run shell commands to try to kill the misbehaving program.

The only thing you can do is hit Ctrl+Alt+F6, and kill programs from that console. But it's not even obvious what program is causing the trouble, as it's has nothing to do with CPU utilization. It's as if cinnamon only has one thread for rendering the screen and since Firefox is (very slowly) updating the screen, then nothing else can happen in the entire system.

As part of my day job, I interview both junior and senior designers for jobs in C++. I get excited when people know about references. You might be amazed at how often someone applies for a SENIOR position and can't answer this question: Can you explain what a [C++] reference is, when you should use them, and describe their memory/time complexity. For a entry level position, if you SAY that you know C++, you better be able to answer that question. If you SAY that you are an expert, you better be able to explain virtual inheritance, vtables, templates, partial template specilization, etc...

If you say that you don't know C++, but you know SOME language which you can discuss in a meaningful manner, that's fine too.

Regardless of the job you are applying for, I expect you to be a quick thinker and demonstrate good problem solving skills. Beyond that, if you are applying for a senior position, you better know SOME language very well.

And anyone who says that C#, Java, Python or some other toy language is "better" must never have written software where performance actually mattered. If you are writing GUIs for a phone, then use whatever language gets the job done best, but when you are writing software that has to get massive amounts of work done, on limited resources, and needs uptimes that are measured in years, then you use a language with less run-time overhead and more predictable results.

Extra insurance *is* a higher standard. Now, maybe it's not meaningfully higher, but it's not the only difference. In my city, all licenced taxis must have a specific meter which charges at a predictable rate. You can find out ahead of time (from a web-site) what your ride is going to cost. Now, I get what you are saying. We probably don't require that they are better drivers. That seems like an oversight.

You are half right here. Driving a taxi is mostly the same as driving a normal car. I think that a surprisingly large percentage of regular drivers are terrible drivers; they should have their licences revoked. But any politician that changed the laws such that the bottom 20% of drivers lost their licence would at least be quickly voted out of office, and possibly assassinated for causing our economy to collapse [think of all the people that couldn't drive to work anymore]. We hold taxi drivers to a higher standard because we are not willing to hold everyone to that standard.

Distillation only works with liquids. Comet ice is not a liquid. Even if light water [on the surface] evaporates more quickly, since there is no process to replenish the light water on the surface, all you're going to end up with is a tiny crust of heavy water (a few molecules thick) and then the rest of the ice is going to be the original mixture.

The human eye is limited to about 2k x 2k so going beyond that is not valuable unless you start sitting close and twisting your neck.

What makes you think that "hard limit" enforcing code can't have a bug in it? I assume your answer is that it's such a small program that you can do a formal proof that it has no bugs. Fine, but what about the OS it runs under? Or the memory controller? Or the actual memory? Any of those can be wrong in a way that could, in theory, cause a patient to be given an overdose. If we can make a robot that is more accurate than a human (at practically any task), we probably should (ignoring issues of liability and macroeconomics), but we have yet to make *anything* that is 100%, let alone a computer controlled robot.

By these criteria, mules are not alive and fire is.

I don't know what you mean by "analog", but unless you are talking about a single, physical wire connecting you with the 911 operator, then calls have been routed and core lines have been oversubscribed for decades (several). Even before rotary dial, you had to ask an operator to connect you. They probably had more outages than any modern system.

Obviously, you meant "compared to 3rd world countries", because when you compare the US to other 1st world countries, it does pretty poorly. Canada, most of Europe, even the Czech Republic has fewer road fatalities (per car) than the US.

Ever heard of ring species? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R... You can have groups A, B, and C. A and B can interbreed. B and C can interbreed. A and C cannot interbreed. Those groups do not fit into any traditional species categories.

I think you mean, "fewer people".