No.

Time passes continuously. Time doesn't start passing once jbolden threshold of outdatedness is attained.

This is very arbitrary as some essential assumptions are not mentioned, but presumably this is not directly related to outdatedness but an effect of even more time passing after something getting outdated.

You haven't proven knowledge must decrease. Use of knowledge, as well as its decrease, are dependent on purpose which you refuse to discuss.

So no, these are not answers to my questions.

Society cannot be "equal". Males cannot get pregnant. Females cannot successfully mate with multiple partners per mating season. These essential limitations, and many more differences make it impossible for a society to be "equal".

So you are saying that feminism is not "the belief that women are just as capable and deserving of respect as men". But according to you, feminism is, instead, a belief that we live in a male-dominated society along with the belief that women are just as capable and deserving of respect as men. You intentionally hid this important fact to promote feminism as an equitable belief system, and not poisoned. But since I pointed out the contradiction in your definition, the lid is blown. How do you avoid to accept now that feminism, is indeed poisoned as claimed by the earlier post.

Secondly - "the realization that we live in a male-dominated society, not a female-dominated one". This is a highly childish statement with an implicit assumption that society is either male-dominated, or female dominated. This implicit assumption is false. Some people dominate others, of either sex.

I did not hypothesize any female-dominated society.

If you called it humanism, which is much less poisoned, the original poster wouldn't have claimed it poisoned and I wouldn't have needed to expose your facade.

Cost is a noun, I asked the implications.

I asked the implications of something being "outdated" , not those of time passing.

So it's not outdated for running DNS servers !

If outdated is defined without a purpose, what are the real life implications of something being outdated? You yourself admit that they are fit for some purposes.

Yes, now the definition moves from imprecise to useless. The other remaining deficiency is that it still doesn't define the purpose for which it is outdated - for developing latest software to sell to currently selling and upcoming versions of the operating systems - yes it is outdated. For running your DNS server, browsing slashdot after adequate safeguards? No, only an idiot would call it outdated for that purpose.

Why useless? Just because something is defined as outdated by jbolden without even taking into account the purpose , doesn't mean anything as to the usefulness of using it. Which was my original point - it is mental masturbation having no impact on real life.

I know. Not precise enough to disagree with someone, but precise enough if there is agreement. There isn't now so this definition is not enough.

You're refusing to define outdated for any meaningful discussion to take place. Then you are assigning the quality of outdatedness as per your whims.

Either you'll have to let everyone decide what is or is not outdated, or define it precisely. I have defined it precisely as far as a purpose goes.

A user keeps a machine for a purpose, and not for the sake of keeping the machine. Any definition of "outdated" that doesn't define "outdated for what purpose?" is useless mental masturbation.

So if the Windows XP machine does its job, it is not outdated for its purpose. If an application runs currently, it is "current application" for the purpose of running. So the Windows XP machine runs "current applications".

It does not run some software being produced today. The machine is outdated for running those software. But running them is not the purpose, so the machine is not outdated for its purpose.

No, it cannot possibly be. Because it implies men are just as capable and deserving of respect as women. So by that logic it can be renamed as masculism.

A thought experiment proves that no feminist would accept this renaming - even though it espouses the exact same idea. The ideas "women are just as capable and deserving of respect as men" and "men are just as capable and deserving of respect as women" ARE the exact same ideas.

It is mentioned clearly why they didn't include vim and emacs. One of the reasons is stupid (both of these have a steep learning curve), but the other and primary reason is sound. You don't need to switch however great the 5 tested editors turn out to be.

So Vim and emacs were declared winners before the race started. I see that you are not a fan of paralympics, but paralympics are somewhat entertaining and instructive.

Not sure what you mean. In case there is some confusion, in a lot of unofficial Oracle communication, "NT" means all Microsoft operating systems based on Windows NT. Some other old school software companies also use the word "NT" for this meaning even today.

So "NT" includes Microsoft server 2012 R2.

Or swords. Or online anonymity.

A is bullying B online. So A is already a criminal. Both A and B are anonymous. Anonymity gives A the advantage of being difficult to catch. Anonymity gives B the advantage that less details about B are available to A for bullying. In extreme situation, B can online regenerate i.e. remove the online identities that A is bullying and recreate other identities that A will not be able to find. Because of online anonymity, B has these extreme measures available.

Now outlaw online anonymity. A is a criminal, he will not think twice before using VPN / proxy / tor. Probably he is already physically abroad, making legislators of the victim B's country powerless in outlawing A's online anonymity. So A is still anonymous. B lost anonymity - so A now has more online information to bully B with.

Very similar to guns. Not sure why you don't see it.

There are a lot more books than books for entertainment. Idiots don't know this.

Doesn't matter whether it is good. Sometimes stopping something bad is worse - an example is alcohol and the worse effects of prohibition.

Alcohol gives nothing indispensible, and if alcoholic drinks were not invented, it arguably wouldn't have been an impediment to society. But once alcohol is invented, prohibition typically has an even worse effect.

Suppose alcoholic drinks were being invented today, one might ask whether it is a good invention, and arguably get a truthful answer in "no". But that answer doesn't matter. Similarly, information might not want to be free or want anything at all being inanimate, but technology is at such a stage where preventing copying entails unacceptable surveilance.