If you're a photographer or at all into video editing (Photoshop, AE, Premier, FCPX, Davinci Resolve, etc)....you'd damned sure bet you'll still be using a PC for your real work.

I can bog down a core i7 with 16GB ram, with a SSD external drive for dedicated cache, etc.....in seconds with one decent render or Photoshop project with 4-8+ Smart Objects open.

And more and more...if you are even a decent hobbits photographer, you depend on post to do your magic and you can overload a computer pretty quickly even with decen cpu, gnu and ram.

That doesn't even get into having a nice monitor(s), wacom tablet...etc.

I'd put this group maybe in between the #2 and #3 you listed above.

I suspect that is marketing, to try to make a lot of potential customers believe that that well to do looking guy in the big house uses the service, so they don't have to feel so bad.

Absolutely. When I was in the market for a house, I waited until the market was right, then I bought a house for about 50 K less than what they would loan me. Which by the way, really pisses off real estate agents! Even then, I bought used cars, saved my money, and sleep well at night.

Although there are a lot of factors, like not stopping to figure out the nasty effects of "easy payments for the rest of your life", and trying to live a lifestyle that is beyond their capability, I'm pretty certain that at base, its a matter of some people being unable to delay any gratification.

In this case, it is people with wells on their properties.

People still do water that way...wells on their property??

If so...I'd guess it would have to be a very small minority these days, eh?

Because it's a really poor poe, as poe's go

A normal person would see it as sarcasm, lame or otherwise. Hard to imagine someone trying to make joke out of a student massacre.

Your attempted rebuttal by calling that a threat, is a bigger laugh than the poor poe id made, and it is noted that you didn't even care to answer the question, which simply shows you as an internet troll.

A stalker too.

I've been an Ice Hockey coach from the Squirt level to the Midget level. That's roughly 10 years old through 18 - 19 years old. I've been the president of a Youth Ice Hockey association, and probably surprisingly to you, associated with "Take our Daughters and Sons to Work" day for several years, and as part of that, attempted to steer young women toward Science and technical careers.

The young boys and girls on the hockey teams have a marked tendency to be well behaved at the squirt level - with only a few exceptions, then when puberty kicks in, can become quite erratic in behavior. By the time they reach 15 years old, most have adapted to the surging hormones. By the time they are at Midget age, they are pretty close to physical adulthood, and are in large part, pretty sensible, and are capable of making intelligent decisions. note: I was not around many young ladies at the midget level, because with a few exceptions, they had moved to women's Hockey from co-ed hockey due to differences in mass of the young men.

While my experience with the young ladies in the TOSADTW events was not as in-depth as the coaching, the same maturity level was true. Little kids that turned into giggly early teens, then by they time they were seniors, intelligent and articulate young ladies. If they were allowed.

And some folks want to extend that age of adulthood to 25 years old. But it really doesn't matter, because children will stay children as long as you allow/force them to be children.

http://www.medicaldaily.com/ad...

I'll bet that 30 years might be the next extension.

Not too many years ago, people were married at the young age of thirteen or so, and supported themselves and raised families.

I was 21 when I was married, and my wife had just turned 18. I was working full time, just having started my first retirement program - at her insistence, which turned out to be a rather mature move on her part, perhaps?

But if you are correct about their immaturity, it is because we don't allow them to be mature, not because they are inherently biologically or psychologially incapable of maturity. Millions of years of evolution mock your "Period". If 18 year old people were not capable of maturity, we wouldn't be here today. We'd be sleeping with the fossils.

And you know, some people never gain adult maturity either. Regardless, my notation of the biological versus artificially extended childhood still stands. You didn't see those 15 year olds a hundred years ago with a couple children getting into trouble.

Sure. But it's part of the extended childhood thing. And I'm not even arguing against extended childhood within reason

But people - all of them - have to realize that there is simply no possible way to protect their children from every possible threat or from bad people, or even other people who are just goofy. That's why colleges had so many problems with Helicopter Parents. The parents were still trying to make every decision for the pseudo adults they were refusing to let go. Ever have a adult child call mommy and daddy, because some professor is "mean" to them, then the outraged parents demanded the professor be fired? It's happened. Ever see a parent scheduling their childs classes - even at 21 when the child is a senior. Some want to come along to job interviews:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/th...

Universities are now trying to cope with the helicopters. On orientation day, they separate the mommies and daddies, and their babies,(hyperbole intended) and tell each of them that it's part of becoming an adult, both for the child to start to claim control of their own life, and the parent's to let go. It's hard for sure, but the benefits are great. At least in my case, I could hardly wait to get out from under parental control and make my own decisions. In my informed and experienced opinion, trying to keep your children as children as long as possible is cheating them out of many years of adulthood.

Learning to deal with jerks and other unpleasant people and situations is just a part of becoming a mature adult. Trying to protect them, trying to make certain that teenage boys do not say and do stupid things, and that you just might have to persevere at something, even if someone says you shouldn't, because it's a dead lock that all young people will run into adversity in school work, and life in general, is just part of growing up

And in the end, if young women are so turned off by a completely innocuous photo that they declare that as a reason to go into another field, and that a photo like that is ispo facto sexual harassment, we have a choice of three things.

1.Try these obnoxious males as adult sexual offenders, and give them the same punishments.

2. completely segregate the sexes in school. Send boys to one, and girls to another. At that point, there will be no male harassment to dissuade the young ladies, and the field should quickly even out in a gender equitable mode

Either solution which is pretty heinous. But we see many people thes presumably enlightend days that are lsowly heading us in that direction:

I was going to give a direct link, but if you google "Girls only STEM school", you will be treated to the future

Is that what you want? Because there is simply no way to protect any young lady from the offensive photo that might make her drop the idea of a STEM career because it is inexcusably sexist and demeaning.

By the way, those TOSADTW days were interesting. These were daughters and sons of engineers and scientists, both male and female. We always asked what careers they were interested in - especially daughters, since they were our actual target group and the original girls only day was rightfully percieved as sexist. The boys were sort of tokens. I think over the many young ladies polled, only one or maybe two out of hundreds over the years, were interested in and STE careers. Overwhelmingly, it was neck and neck lawyers and veterinarians, followed by MBA's. engineering, computers, science and technology were in the noise floor. Mor young ladies wanted to be singer/entertainers than STE.

To which I find a certain irony, in the lawyer and MBA preferences. I have a friend who's sister was an "escort" for her company. That's right, when an important visitor came to town, she would entertain them.

In summary, While it is the alarmingly sexist business and legal world, where some times you are told that sexual favors are the path to your promotion, it's those geeks in programming that are the real problem.

Or perhaps not.

I liked Evan Sayet's comment on the targeted exhibit: "My favorite drawings at the Muhammad cartoon festival in Texas were the two chalk outlines out front."

While I'm in basic agreement with you, I draw the line at an age where the woman takes her teeth out and puts them in a glass. Though, that could be interesting as well.

Because everyone knows you're selling a myth that it "happens constantly." That's why you can't point to a list of examples of it happening "constantly" and instead go right for the race card in order to distract.

Why? Over most of history spying has saved lives more than taken them. I find it so odd that people on Slashdot sing the praises of the "Codebreakers" of WWII but are shocked and freaked out that they are still around today.

Because they spied on the enemy, the foreign entities that were trying to harm them.

The problem today is, this tech is being aimed domestically as well as on foreign enemies....without due process or proper warrants showing probably cause.

The objection is the broad dragnet of information being captured and analyzed, of presumable innocent citizens.

If this were ONLY being aimed at the enemy, not only would most folks here not have a problem with it, they'd whole heartedly support it!!

How come the water plants aren't able to filter these fracking chemicals out of the water before sending it to the homes like they filter out everything else?

For those who've read the link, note that Bill complained that they'd only made the equivalent of $2/hr. Just for reference purposes, minimum wage back then was $2.00 an hour in 1974, $2.10 in 1975, and $2.30 in 1976. Should they have made more?...debatable. This was essentially a start up operation (many never become profitable), and initial product development costs are often written off. In that brave new world, before EULAs, nobody bought untried stuff like this.

A snake doesn't turn into a bunny just because time has past.

I see. You live inside a bad television episode? How many hacker apartment door breakdowns followed by "hailstorms of bullets" can you cite from this month, here in this country of over 300,000,000 people? Please be specific.

The only cure for this travesty is to immediately fill the FEMA death camps with the entire racist, sexist and homophobic members who consist the entirety of Programming at present - the whole lot of them, because while a good egg might have slipped through, the cancer that infects programming is pervasive, and we cannot take the chance.

Then, we must rebuild a new and proper programming community, and will adhere to strict guidelines according to gender, race, and sexual orientation.

The programming part - as the evidence plainly indicates, can be done by anyone, so that isn't a hiring criteria any more. Hire them for the correct social aspects, and they will be churning out better code in a day or two.