No - the current one tries to be "different". Mac OS is far more traditionally oriented than Gnome 3.

They didn't just shoot themselves in the foot with that release - they did so with almost the entire userbase screaming "Don't do it!!!!!".

Oh well. XFCE makes for a perfectly fine replacement.

Your link doesn't support that. It merely talks about life living near those vents without any energy from the sun. Indeed, the presence of shrimp, crabs, etc indicate that the life indeed did start elsewhere and then slowly migrate down into those areas and adapt to them.

While the life down there doesn't need the sun to survive, without the sun the life might have never made it down there.

Both my dad and my sister are running Xubuntu without issues. My sister is ok with basic tasks on a computer but far from a technophile and my dad knows almost nothing. His only use is really for fantasy football websites.

Neither really plays games - both just do web browsing and not much else. Honestly as long as there's a Chrome icon on the desktop many people wouldn't know they were using anything different.

Keeping that on their systems keeps me from the headache of supporting Windows and all the associated spyware.

Yes, but its easier for life to exist in more normal environments and very slowly evolve into something suited to those extreme environments. Life springing up from scratch and then sustaining itself in an extreme environment would be much harder.

Yeah I run into the same thing. There's a guy with my same (first and last) name and birthdate who was born a few rooms down from me (our mothers actually spoke that day and were amused that they both named their babies the same name). His middle name is different and his SSN is different.

Fast forward to adulthood he turned out to be quite the bad apple. Before I moved from my parents house I was getting his debt collection notices (of which there were many) constantly. They didn't hit my credit report so I didn't care too much. Then I found out my insurance had skyrocketed and upon investigating the insurance company had mixed up our records and raised MY insurance. About 4 years ago I was driving home, got pulled over for speeding. The cop mistakes me for him and I come damned close to being arrested because my doppleganger was supposed to be in prison on narcotics charges. The local hospital has also mixed up our identities as well.

Trust me, every time they'd call in for a NICS check I'd be nervous that they'd mix us up again (though I always put down my SSN, which is optional, to help narrow things down). Thankfully after I got my concealed weapons permit the background check is no longer necessary in my state so I don't have to worry about it anymore.

You do realize that guilt must be proven right? Innocence does not have to be proven and is assumed.

No - laws should punish things that are actually wrong. Theft, rape, murder, etc. Anything that it is claimed simply facilitates the breaking of another law without causing direct harm itself should not be illegal.

In the terms of this site - the DMCA is wrong, because (as is obvious) the pirates are gonna pirate stuff regardless. The law only prevents legitimate uses.
Banning guns or complicating the process is wrong, because murderers are going to get guns and kill people anyways.

Put simply, laws do not PREVENT crime. Never have, never will. All they do is define what crime is, so that we can identify those that have done society wrong and punish them accordingly.

"Their OS" implies an obvious subject else it would be ambiguous. Given that the topic at hand is desktop computers, referring to "their OS" would mean their desktop OS.

If we were arguing about stoves and you said "the GE unit doesn't work as well as Kenmoore", then I pointed out otherwise, it doesn't save your argument if you proclaim that you were talking about refrigerators.

So, at what point are people going to lose faith in Bitcoin? With all the recent "collapses" it seems like the actual value would be darned near zero by now.

A good bit less. 10 years ago I had just graduated college and was still living with my parents. I had a job but far less income. Gaming is actually a pretty cheap hobby overall (even back then they had $20 "classics" titles that you could play for dozens of hours), so I spent a lot of my time that way.

Now, I make more money, own my own home, and have more expensive and time consuming hobbies. I still play games (and probably always will), but I get through a lot less of them compared to 10 years ago. I mostly do only the big AAA titles and get through maybe 5 of them per year.

It maters less than you'd think. The people with fiber will just be streaming the "ultra super duper HD" version of the video.

Honestly though - I have "regular" cable internet. My speeds are 15Mbps - nowhere close to fiber speeds. I STILL stream full 1080p from Youtube just fine and instantly. Before I moved I was on 3Mbps DSL connection and I still was doing 720p just fine.

Don't get me wrong - I know that faster is always better, but I think we're truly getting to a point of diminishing returns for most things. A person with a 100Mbps connection might have a theoretical max speed 10x greater than someone at 10Mbps, but their actual internet experience is unlikely to be much different - PARTICULARLY for services that can auto-scale the bitrate of a video down as needed.

If anything educational uses will be the LEAST impacted by this type of thing.

Depends on what small gains you wish to prioritize. You claim that driving more conservatively you save money and get to the same destination with a negligible difference in time.

By the same token, there's a lot of people that are going to view your savings in gas as negligible. Its not likely to literally affect your quality of life.

You arrived within seconds of her. She arrived within pennies of you.

FWIW my car (a 2006 Hyundai Tiburon) is rated at 19 MPG city and 27 MPG highway, but not going out of my way I still get over 30MPG from it.

Yep - its weird that alcohol affects people in such difference ways. My brother tends to be an angry drunk. I can't count how many fights I've had to pull him out of when we're out. I know plenty of people who get funny and jokey when drunk.

I personally tend to be a very quiet drunk. My friends find that amazing (since most people you get them drunk to "see their wild side" - I get drunk and just get reclusive). Its weird but though I'm impaired, my reaction is to acknowledge that and get very self-conscious about *appearing* to be drunk, so I try not to say or do much.

Creationism is pretty common among most world religions. Its just the details and deities that change. In Hinduism Vishnu commanded Brahma to grow the world out of an ocean via a lotus flower. Still creationism, just a very different version.

That's why they cling to "Intelligent Design". By doing that and leaving out the details they can at least not have their children taught something that directly contradicts what they learn in Sunday school.

As someone who is non-religious that grew up in a religious family, the GGP's post does pretty much fall spot on. Most of these people are misinformed, but their 'heart is in the right place". You have to understand that to an atheist, its very easy to sit back and "respect everyone's beliefs". That's because they truly see all of them as simple stories and culture. To a Christian though, that actually do truly believe that if you don't live your life according to their beliefs, then you're going to Hell. They see all of their annoyances and pestering as trying to help you avoid a fate that they are terrified of, and they regard teaching their children anything that contradicts these beliefs with great disdain.

I'm not saying that I support removing evolution from the criteria (quite the contrary - I've argued with my religious mother many times in support of evolution) - I'm just saying that to truly understand their motives you have to understand where they're coming from.

Its hard to convince someone of something that they absolutely KNOW is not true - even when it is.

Don't know if its different in other parts of the world, but in the US as long as the machine is owned by your bank they have no fees. Go with a big enough bank and they have them pretty much everywhere. Some other banks (like Ally) that don't have their own ATM's actually refund you the fee that the machine charges so that it becomes effectively free to use any ATM.

About 2 years ago or so a few of the major banks actually announced plans to charge people for debit card usage (it seems to encourage pulling cash out of the ATM instead) but the public outcry was loud enough that they all backed away from the idea.