Well stated. 'Overpopulation' is not a realistic threat to life on the planet; unnecessarily wasting our resources and producing massive amounts of pollution is. Even still, the larger the civilization, the more likely it is to eventually collapse. In the past century, we've found ruins of gigantic societies which completely collapsed with few outside records of their existence (unfortunately, I've been unable to locate a universal database of archaeological sites around the world using a simple Google search). The more resources we waste, without working out a practical means of recycling them, the more likely we will destroy ourselves, much like those ancient gigantic societies of the past.
Very interesting. I, too, am determined to be the last person on the planet to sign up for Facebook, and for the same reasons as you. Provided we can both maintain this attitude, Facebook will never gain 100% worldwide market share; that, in my opinion, would be a true travesty.
That said, I'm not sure there's any kind of feature they can provide me that is likely to lure me in. I don't know about everything they provide, but I doubt they have anything that I might need which is not available, and offered in better quality, somewhere else. Then again, I'm not a particularly social person, so I have no reason to want to be anywhere near Facebook, or any other social networking site, in the first place.
Even Free w/Activation phones get some kind of calendar app.
Exactly. Even my phone, which is about as basic as a cell phone can get, has a calendar. How can anyone excuse the lack of a calendar on a more powerful phone?
The general consensus there and in the computer mags was that the 68000 was the best of the lot.
My opinion as well. What I think made the 68000 the top of the line is Motorola designed a 16-bit CPU with a 32-bit ISA and register set, and no memory segmentation with a 24-bit address bus. Neither the Z8000 nor the 8086 had these advantages (the Z8000 did have a non-segmented model, but only had 16-bit addressing, and the 80386 shoehorned its 32-bit architecture onto an ISA only designed to be 16-bit). Oh, how I wish the 8086 had simply been left to die instead of becoming ubiquitous with modern computing.
Well stated. Raffaello provided these same arguments in a different manner, but you both provide a correct analysis of how DNA is the data, not the actual program. Biological cells operate nothing like a computer; there are only mild similarities which some people tend to focus on without considering all the other aspects there are to each system which are not present, via any equivalent, in the other.
GP is correct that the DNA chain does contain all of the information necessary to build an organism (which Raffaello labeled a 'parts' list), but, as you point out, it does not specify the environment, which is why any complex organism (any multi-celled body) requires an ancestor, usually a parent, to instigate growth. It also helps explain why two bodies with exact duplicate DNA (such as identical twins) do not remain identical as they age.
Wordperfect replaced Wordstar because WordPerfect is night and day, leaps and bounds better than Wordstar.
I completely agree with you; WordPerfect is also leaps and bounds better than Word (no 'thinking' for you, reveal codes, one line justification, etc). I still use WordPerfect 9 (now a decade old) for my personal projects (I'm writing a novel, among other things); I tried switching to Open Office, but it just acts too damn much like Word for my tastes, and it completely futzed my documents up. That, and WordPerfect, despite its age, is still far more powerful.
Nicky Flippers: We don't arrest people for being creepy.
Tommy: [into walkie-talkie] Yeah, Bruce, you know that guy we got in the tank?
Bruce: [over walkie-talkie] Ah, the creepy one?
Tommy: Yeah, better let him go.
Dell acts like a prostitute.
What do you mean acts like?
The solution is:
1) Find out what the problem is in the existing system that people are working around by sharing problems, and
2) Address that problem in a way that removes the incentive to share passwords.
I agree completely. I work for a tech support company, and we implemented an escalation system that requires a supervisor password from the tech's computer. However, when we expanded to a Filipino call center, we instituted a new system that allows us to send links to our escalations to the supervisor, and thus allows the escalation to take place on their system, where there's no need for the supervisor to use his password. It's helped solve a number of problems and now there is no reason for the supervisors to even consider sharing passwords at all (not that they ever did in the first place).