I thought that the inclusion of (usually optional) parental control settings was part of parenting, deciding whether your kids are ready for whatever's behind the lock.
Covering up the parts of the world that make you uncomfortable is not parenting. Your kids will be exposed to that stuff whether you like it or not, so your job as a parent is to give them the knowledge and skills they need to understand it in context.
the history and current events are showing that the economy is benefiting in tandem with currency increasing in value, not losing.
Economic benefits in tandem with deflationary currency? Cite, please. I think quite a few Japanese people (not to mention the world's economists!) would be surprised to hear that.
Again, I would not (while in sane mind) loan money in currency that is losing value, it is a losing proposition.
Funny, because banks make money hand over fist by doing exactly that.
> Inflation also encourages lending and investing.
- no it does not. Not in people who understand economics and accounting for real. Inflation discourages any desire to deal in that currency. Why would I want to move my wealth into a depreciating currency?
That's the point! Inflation discourages keeping your wealth in the form of cash, and encourages converting it to something else: lending it to a bank, buying stocks, real estate, or consumer goods, etc. Economic growth depends on people being willing to exchange their cash.
septic = septic tank = yank = americans.
Obvious for whom?
obvious for whom = temple of doom = Indiana Jones
The Xoom fails in epic fashion on price - it has similar hardware specs as my $300 G Tablet for twice the price. I would never buy it because I'd feel like a huge sucker.
Maybe, but the Xoom is still comparable to the iPad in specs and price, so how do you explain the fact that people buy those?
You're still a fucking moron.
And that's still hilarious, coming from someone who thinks it takes "years of training" to learn to operate a desktop OS because his wife can't figure it out.
Microsoft-controlled API
You misspelled "ECMA-standardized API". HTH!
I can write a
So... the same thing that happens whenever you launch any other program with its required libraries missing? Try copying a native VC++ program to a system that doesn't have the VC++ runtime installed. It won't spoon-feed you information about what the VC++ runtime is, why you need it, where to get it, and how to install it; it'll just give you a cryptic error.
If you want to do deployment properly, you need an installer. With Visual Studio it's dead simple to make a setup program that'll check for prerequisites like
2 year olds can learn how to use Windows, too. Hell, 2 year olds learned how to use the TRS-80 back when that was relevant. Kids will figure out how to use anything you set in front of them.
I was quite a bit older than that when I started using Windows, but it still didn't take "years of training" to get used to it. It didn't even take weeks.
In any case, "is this easy enough for a 2 year old to use?" is a pretty dumb question to ask when choosing tools for an adult. By that logic, your wife would also have to wear Velcro shoes and drink from a sippy cup.
It may not deprive the source from selling another copy, but not paying for your copy is stealing.
For the sake of argument, let's accept that definition and see where it leads us.
Well, why is stealing a bad thing in the first place? Is it because you get something for free? Surely not, because we all get things for free all the time. I can turn on the radio and listen to free music, then change stations when a commercial comes on. I can look at public murals that were funded by taxpayers who died before I was born. I can enjoy the benefits of those and countless other things without giving a dime to the people who created them.
I get upset when something is stolen from me, but is that because the thief has gotten something for free? No. If someone could "steal" a copy of my car, leaving the original car unharmed in my driveway, that wouldn't bother me at all. In fact, if the technology to do that existed, I believe it'd be a great leap forward for mankind.
We can also compare stealing to vandalism. If someone destroys my car, he doesn't gain anything for free, he only deprives me of the use of that property. Is destroying my car therefore not as bad as stealing it? It sure doesn't feel that way. In fact, stealing it seems marginally better, since it preserves overall utility (and there's a chance I'll get the car back).
So, I have to conclude that what makes stealing wrong is that the rightful owner is deprived of the stolen property. The benefit gained by the thief is only relevant to the extent that it comes at the owner's expense.
Now, what have we done by declaring that getting a free copy of something is "stealing"? We've created two categories of stealing: the old-fashioned kind where the owner is deprived of the stolen property, and the shiny new kind where he isn't. The first kind is wrong, since it maintains the quality that made stealing wrong in the first place. The second kind, however, is not - it's a benign, almost metaphorical type of "stealing", kind of like stealing second base. All we've accomplished with this new definition is to devalue the word.
Nope, just a guy who has actually used both Windows and the iPad.
It's amusing to be called a moron by someone who apparently can't manage to operate Windows, though. Thanks for brightening my day!
Any Windows laptop will be as easy to use and as fast. Many netbooks have a battery life of 8-10 hours, such as the Eee 1000HE, which you can get for under $300 - half the price of the 32 GB iPad 2 that has one-fifth as much storage.
Glad to help!
On the eighth day, God created FORTRAN.
