Comment Re:Yes... (Score 1) 802
No evidence? How about the sworn testimonies of people who said Koresh took the wives and daughters of other people and had sex with them. The husbands were told not to have sex with their wives.
No evidence? How about the sworn testimonies of people who said Koresh took the wives and daughters of other people and had sex with them. The husbands were told not to have sex with their wives.
You make a very good point regarding the cheap upgrade cost
Seeing as students can get Win 7 Home Premium $30, of course you're going to have all sorts of young people make the transition - and those people are going to influence other people.
Further, the main reason people avoided Vista is that when it first came out, it sincerely sucked in terms of support. Modern Vista is actually pretty darn good, but it has yet to overcome a lot of the initial bad press.
Windows 7 is exactly what those people that have been waiting since XP have been looking for - it's stable and has large support (because it is Vista 1.1 - i.e. it has already been through the grinder), it has several minor but easily visible improvements (such as a UI that doesn't look nearly as cheap - several common tasks are easier to access), and it uses less memory (... which tickles people who are into numbers in a way they like while additionally better catering to older desktops). And most importantly, it isn't Vista.
I understand your point, but the other two examples at least have "cam" somewhere in there. That way you can go "oh, they mean a camera". iSight? I thought at first it was some sort of special addon for blind people. That's the only reason I griped, and my bad for coming off as a Troll.
The name still sucks though. (iCam would of made more sense)
... Really? iSight? They really came up with a special Apple-only name for a camera?
Okay, I give up, excuse me while I find a truck to stand in front of (... knowing my luck it will be an iTruck).
Sincerely,
iSuck.
Oh, everyone is free to teach whatever traits they want to their kids - that's the nature of living in a free society. What I refer to is killing off the versions of our kids that are not liked because they have a genetic behavioral disposition. Not a severe disability, just a trait that makes them different or more sensitive. I'm pro-choice on the grounds that people should be aloud to control their own lives and make decisions about what they want to put their bodies through - what this represents though is termination of lives NOT on the basis of ones own body or ability to raise a child, but based upon non-life threatening genetic predispositions in our children. This line of thinking is dangerous, just as dangerous as going the other direction and banning choice.
http://www.explosm.net/comics/1681/ - This is our future.
What terrifies me is that I could easily see this form of child selection occurring. Remember how vain and cruel those girls from high school were? Well, guess what, those girls become the vain and cruel wives of rich men, placing them squarely in the realm of people who can afford to perform genetic screening on their kids and "weed out" "negative" traits.
"Ninety percent of baseball is half mental." -- Yogi Berra