I'll cop to berating the obvious, though I felt that the obvious being short changed. No matter the extent of anyone's Napolian Complex, an Army or a Battle Ship is not something that can be operated by one man, a nuke is. Politically a nuke and the British Grand Fleet are similar, the thing in itself is very different. The difference in power between WWII nukes and modern ones is irrelavent. The difference in sizes is not.

Nukes as a threat *might* promote peace, but that ignores the fact that they are also huge vey expensive displays of status. If someone tries to join the big boys club who doesn't belong there that can cause instability. It is just as easy to argue against Waltz's conclusions using the same data.

Waltz fails to show that it was the nukes that caused the stability between the US and the USSR, not the stability causing the nukes to be not used. Until that can be shown, not assumed, speculating on India and Pakistan is dangerous.

I have to admit, after years of being an Apple fanboy the last few years have worn me down. I really don't like mountain lion. There is huge vender lock in. The prices!!

Mobile Me was the beginning of the end. What a crappy service. I used Yahoo! mail. It was, and still is, insanely better then Mobile Me. It's better then iCloud too. The hardware is nice, but it isn't nicer then any other quality hardware.

As for the best desktop OS, Mac hasn't been that since Windows '95. They're different. Neither has had a real advantage in years.

Sigh. Everyone disappoints.

I am horrified that the smart people of slashdot are simply accepting the premise that nukes have exclusively created peace in the world. Misunderstanding this point can cause that it is trying to avoid. Mr Waltz's thesis is that since the end of WWII there hasn't been a major war between Nuclear powers. He asserts that the major change has been the existence of nukes, therefore nukes are what are keeping the peace. That logic is flawed horribly. This is confusing correlation with causation. Other things have changed also. For example:

I can assert that since 1945 the United Nations has existed. Therefor the UN has prevented a major war;

World War II is the most heavily documented event in human history. Since we cannot ignore the mountains of history we are able to avoid repeating it. Santayana is proved, not Waltz;

After WWII education and communications have boomed. Since smart people anywhere on Earth who can commentate in written English can exchange ideas freely on Slashdot the conditions for war are ameliorated. Therefor Slashdot and the internet and mass communication have prevented war.

As a corollary: To be correct Waltz would have to rephrase his comments to: Nukes can't keep the peace, they are objects. It is knowledge of what will happen if the Nukes are used that keeps the peace. The confounding of Nukes and knowledge is troubling.

This also ignores two facts: First, that except for a tiny part all of the damage of WWII was done with conventional weapons. When we look at image after image of different blasted cities, only two were nuked. If we hid the few important landmarks could anyone here tell the difference. Horror and death are horror and death -- how they are achieved may not be important. Second, India and Pakistan are still well within the average, 17.3 years, between wars. We have no proof that Nukes have done anything to maintain peace between them.

It is most important to realize that none of these are exclusive. It can easily be argued that it is some combination of the factors I have laid out that keeps the peace.

I use Little Snitch to watch for such things. Unfortunately, with modern software bits and pieces are always calling home. I spend a few hours a week looking up stuff to find out who is doing what.

I have to agree, three pages of Google and not one definition.

No, I don't think you're the only one. In fact yours in one of the few reasonable and sane posts. I think the worry is that the Linux Desktop will fade away unless it keeps up.

What is sad is that I really don't care anymore. I used to keep up with Linux and FOSS using Fink on OSX. And, sitting there, with them side by side, made is so clear how I didn't want to keep using FOSS. I could go on about how this or that sucked. Maybe they did or maybe they didn't. The point is, when I wanted to do something, I didn't choose FOSS.

Yes, but, what did you upgrade too??

Okay, my mind is blown. You've totally explained why I ditched Linux on the desktop years ago. Thank you. No sarcasm at all.

To misquote Shaw "If you put an American worker on a spit you can always find another who will turn him"

Now I know why Apple and others pay what they do. The bright souls on Slashdot are engaged in a race to the bottom instead of helping each other.

Are we legitimizing criminal activity here? A lot of working off the books is done so people can keep their Medicaid while trying to approach a living wage.

BK in the 80's was staffed by kids and retires. The Apple store isn't. This has been one of the big stories on the collapse of the American job market. People who used to make a living wage are now competing for former kids jobs.

And this being called called okay!?

Looking at the video and some of the responses I just keep thinking that if they just wanted to start a buzz they succeeded. If you want someone to notice something they have to notice it. It is now noticed. Exactly what it says is nowhere near as important as imbedding the idea in the mind. Time and again it has been shown that annoying ads work as well as pleasant ones.

They have linked the two ideas: Girls, and sexy girls at that, and Science, and cut through and differentiated the issue. We are arguing a very different issue then we were yesterday. That is a good thing.