Just to be clear, by more or less "secure" I mean that an OS has more or less vulnerabilities, not more or less viruses. It may seem like I am splitting hairs here, but there is a world of difference in the meanings when you get into Computer Science.

It seems to me, though, that your meaning of "secure" is that Linux/OSX is safer for the user. Which I would agree with. But it's also a much more limited software eco-system (which is a whole other discussion).

As a follow-up, I'm not saying that Linux isn't more secure than Windows. It probably is. All I'm saying is that the argument that it's more secure because there are less viruses is a poor one. All this means is that it is attacked less.

Wrong...

The argument that "Linux is more secure because it gets less viruses when there are as many Linux boxes (or more) in the wild vs Windows when you consider servers and clients" simply falls flat on its face when you consider the attack vector, infection rate, and profitability.

The part that you are assuming in your argument is that it would be just as profitable to target servers (Linux, Windows, etc.) as it is to target clients. This is simply an incorrect assumption. The difference is that very few server Admins use their servers to browse the web, download files, bank, etc. This lowers the possible infection vectors by a lot. The vast majority of virus, trojan, botnet, and other infections today happen due to user activity. Also, the majority of the profits come from either getting credit card information and/or banking information. This is the low hanging fruit of the virus writers. They have found that the best attack vector is the user through spam and malicious web pages. There just are not enough everyday users on Linux for it to be worthwhile writing for.

If you were talking about hacking, that's a different story. It does seem like hackers are targeting online credit card databases more often. The problem here is that most companies tend to not report such breaches and, when they do, they tend to provide little detail. As such, we have little idea if the majority of breaches are caused by Windows systems, Linux systems, buggy server Apps, poor network security design (i.e. there is no firewall between client and server networks), or social engineering (i.e. having someone inside).

Finally, there are iOS and Andriod users. Most people use Apps from the App Store. Presumably the App Store for both Google and Apple review the Apps before they are placed online for malicious code. You could argue that the lack of virus for these systems prove that Linux/Unix is more secure. But one could also argue that they are more secure simply because the user doesn't have root access and tend to stay within the walled garden (i.e. strictly use Apps instead of generally surfing the web and loading java apps).

Perhaps you're right. It could be that most people do not have more than 2.1. That being said, most of my friends and family have 5.1 surround. That's largely because we either enjoy watching movies or, in the case of my brother-in-law, enjoys playing video games on his PS3. That being said, I agree that more than 5.1 would be overkill for the average family and would appeal only to those who either have a large amount of discretionary spending or to movie buffs who feel that they have to get the full immersive experience.

I can't believe that Cribbage isn't on the list. Then again, maybe it doesn't meet the Slashdot demographic. My parents, who are in the 70s+ now, and their friends all play Crib. Maybe it just isn't as popular in the US as it is in Canada.

I've always been interested in learning how to play Go, ever since I read about the game in an old DIY woodworking book. My plan was to build a Go board and then learn the game. It's one of those projects on my To-Do list...

Personally, I like Hearts. I find it has the right mix of strategy and luck.

Poker, which I also like but not as much, has much more to do with luck. Some believe that there is an art to bluffing and tells, but modern day poker has more to do with the percentages than anything else. Hollywood, as usual, has glorified poker way beyond what it actually is...

You'd, obviously, be extremely surprised.... FPS games are some of the few that you can play for a short period of time and then go do other things. Most adults have very busy lives and use video games for a 30 to 60 minute break from reality. FPS games are not excluded.

If you are referring to online play, you are right. The vast majority are kids or teens. Most adults who play FPS tend to play offline (i.e. Bioshock).

The point is that as the people who play video games age, they don't just stop playing when they become an adult. They just play a lot less due to work, family, friends, other interests, etc.

I agree with your comment about the Dad. I agree that it's important to expose kids to various experiences, both character building and just plain fun.

However, I disagree with your view about video games and FPS video games in particular. FPS is no more BS than watching the latest Expendables 3 movie. Yes, both are pure fantasy and both have violent plots. But they have as much to do with real war as a teaspoon does. Do some parents let kids play games beyond their age? Yes. Do some parents let kids play video games more than they should? Yes. But you might be noting a theme here... It's the parent's responsibility (which this Dad gets..).

The kids may stop their request for popular FPS games for a while. But once they reach their teen years, if not sooner, they will stay playing them again. Plus, there is nothing to stop them from playing the games at a friends house.

In my opinion the Dad missed a valuable teaching moment. His point was to give them a does of reality and scare them into not wanting FPS games. What he should have done is taken them to the war zone and then bought the game for them and played it with them. He could have then pointed out the difference between real life and fantasy. That would be more valuable to them as they grown into their teen years and beyond.

Personally, I'm more interested in Australia and New Zealand. Then again, I'm a Canadian who moved to the US for work. So, perhaps its something that is picked up when you grow up in the US.

Beaches definitely should have been an option.

One beach is fine, but I would prefer to explore all of the beaches in the world. After all, it would be nice to have some variety in both beaches and women... All I would need is a yacht to carry toys such as jetskis, a motor launch, kayaks, etc.

The Jungle would be fun as I don't mind snakes, spiders, etc. However, I do hate mosquitoes and flies. The amount of OFF bug spray I would have to bring just wouldn't make it worth it. The Desserts are too dry, Caves are too damp, the Ocean floor is un-explorable by humans beyond a certain depth (you need robots), I've already explored my town, and I don't have a basement (live in an apartment).

The Tea Party was originally formed by a combination of Republicans and Democrats who were fed up with both parties. The point was to build a party that was all about less spending, smaller government, balanced budgets, debt reduction, etc. It then became co-opted by Republicans and enough right-wing extremists to drive away most moderates and all right-leaning Democrats.

LOL.... What? Have you had your coffee or energy drink today?

1. Having stuff that you can download and keep on SD cards uses a TON less energy than having to stream it every time. You are missing the energy required to transmit packets, to run routers and switches, etc...

2. Obviously you "know nothing, John Snow...." I've never had a SD card break, let alone stop working. My biggest fear with the MicroSD cards is that I will lose them, they are so tiny... So far so good...

3. Maybe this was meant as sarcasm and I missed it entirely.... doubtful though....

I'm 45 too, am near-sighted, and have the same concerns (reminds me that I also need to get my annual checkup). I make my living off of my eye sight (network engineer), drive a lot for both work and play in all kinds of conditions, am a bit of a armature photographer, like downhill skiing, and one of my passions is movies. All of which could be screwed up if things went badly. When I am at work I wear glasses and when I play I wear contacts. Both of these are easy and cheap to fix and replace, unlike my eyes.

Hamas is more likely to think like the Chihuahua in the Taco Bell commercial: "I think I need a bigger box..."

It seems that Ted Postol defines a successful intercept as one where the opposing warhead is completely destroyed in mid-air and doesn't count a rocket being damaged enough to be knocked down over an area where it can detonate harmlessly. He also relies on personal and public photos and reports to draw his conclusions. This would miss a good portion of the rockets fired as most are fired at night, when photographing rockets and interceptions are much more difficult.

I'm not going to argue that he is right or wrong. It just seems to me that his extrapolations are not based on enough factual evidence to draw a conclusion with any amount of confidence.

It would be cool to find out just what the real statistics are. I'm pretty sure, though, that Israel classifies this information as a state secret and we may never know in our lifetimes.

This reminds me of the 80's when a lot of Elementary and Middle schools bought Apple II and III computers and the obligatory 2 to 3 Macs. Apple had a big push to capture the educational market. After about 3 years, most of the Apple computers ended up in closets collecting dust. Universities and High Schools went with PCs and the education software market followed. In my opinion, history is about to repeat itself....