Don't know how this got moderated to 5.. As the original posted observed, admin access *is* required to install Java updates.

I run XP as a non-admin myself, but in order to run certain programs (DVD burning software is the primary one) I have to run the program as administrator.

Most here are probably familiar with his SF, but his fiction (like Wasp) is also quite good.

I found The Steep Approach To Garbadale to be sort of a non-SF version of Use of Weapons, with the inter-familial squabbles.

I've done this. Set your parent up in XP with a non-admin account. Ensure you can have her sign in as admin when necessary. Worst case, she signs in as admin and there's a big icon on the desktop (make the background color red or something to make ti really obvious) for running joinme session, and nothing else. On her default desktop, all the usual icons (as well as joinme). I also set up FIrefox w/ adblock, and the PC has been virtually problem free. Only had to walk through setting up a new printer.

Maybe I'm behind the times, but I was unimpressed to learn about Mozilla Firefox handing off geographic tracking to Google. Uninstall instructions here.

about:config
In the Filter box, type geo.enabled
Double click on the geo.enabled preference
Location-Aware Browsing is now disabled.

I use dark themes in Visual Studio and it was pretty easy to set up. Take a look here or here. This is what I use.

Google is your friend, too.

As a Certified Java Programmer I uninstalled Java from my personal machines a week or so ago. I haven't professionally used it in about 5 years. Truly a sad day when Oracle took it over.

There were at least two serious petitions that were blown off - legalization of marijuana and elimination of TSA.

Kudos to the White House for changing the URLs so that Google searches return bad links, and no search on the petition page.

Oddly, searching for "Neill Franklin" the author of a petition, returns no results. His petition is discussed here

Searching the White House petition page for "TSA" also returns zero results, despite it having been open for voting.

I find it astonishing that anyone with an IQ over 120 supports this administration.

FA says "Based on their analysis, the co-authors found that average U.S. scores in reading and math on the PISA are low partly because a disproportionately greater share of U.S. students comes from disadvantaged social class groups, whose performance is relatively low in every country."

Hmm, is the study arguing then that these students should be excluded? If so, what is the basis? Are they not really in the country?

Or are they sidestepping the issue of the massive difference in standards of living in the United States?

Granted, the source material may have handled this better than the summary article...

FA says: "As part of the study, Carnoy and Rothstein calculated how international rankings on the most recent PISA might change if the United States had a social class composition similar to that of top-ranking nations"

And the point is???

Also, a better link to the story is here: http://www.marklynas.org/2013/01/lecture-to-oxford-farming-conference-3-january-2013/ with some good reader comments.

Cross contamination & subsequent loss of organic certification isn't an issue then?
How about Monsanto dragging innocent farmers into court?

Can you provide an example or two? Looking at bread, beer, wine & smoked salmon I don't see metric-only. I certainly understand that crazy laws may permit metric-only but I haven't seen any (in the United States). Thanks!

I'm surprised we haven't seen a push since food manufacturers are already repacking in smaller units to hide inflation. Remember when salami, chocolate, ice cream and coffee were purchased by the pound?

If we switch to metric the confusion would probably so great as to mask even smaller package sizes.

Violence in suffrage movement actually happened, so I don't understand your post.

This post argues there was no violence on the part of the movement, but they certainly endured violence.

However, over in England violence on the part of the movement was a tactic. "Meanwhile, and in striking contrast, the woman suffrage movement in Great Britain under such leaders as Emmaline Pankhurst, escalated its militant tactics. By 1910, it had moved from mass meetings, marches, and heckling of cabinet ministers, to arson, violence, and hunger strikes. The radical tactics enacted by British suffragists captured the media's attention and helped gain their victory."

Unfortunately Amazon does not. I recently got in an argument with someone who (IMO) gave out 4/5 star reviews. The reviewer countered that no, she had given out 1 star reviews. She had reviewed hundreds of items, and Amazon's lame interface displays 10 reviews at a time, with no ability to sort by number of stars (or other useful filters). I finally found her 1-star review of a self-published e-book, but by that time didn't have the energy to pursue it further.

A histogram of reviews by star would be extremely useful. Obviously Amazon doesn't care about the consumer's ability to rate the reviews, though, given how little thought they've put into it.

Elsewhere I posted about bogus five-star reviews. I suspect publishers simply hand out money to shills to create bogus Amazon accounts and post 5-star reviews of their books that suck. I'm not why so many here think that limiting reviews to purchasers would solve things. Also, I always read books at libraries before I buy them. So, you'd cut down on the number of negative reviews from people like me.

Another problem is Amazon's unwillingness to address "fraudulent" reviews that attempt to grant 5-star reviews to books. A good example is Jean Auel's disaster. Lots of reviews from "Amazon Verified Purchased" for which this was their first-ever (and only) review with zero mention of plot points or characters, just glowing short reviews.

Hmm, it appears Amazon finally cleaned that up - a couple of months that book had an astonishing number of 5-star reviews, given it may qualify as the worst book ever published. Initial reviews were all five-star, with quite clear evidence the reviewer had not read the book. Here's an example.

I suspect Amazon purged all comments & forum posts relating to a pretty good analyis of their rating system - it appeared that Amazon was weighting 4 & 5 star votes more than 1 & 2 star votes. I can't find reference to that now, though.