That is exactly what I think.

Yes Gnome 3 is different from the good old Windows 95 paradigm. But like tablets and phone, it's just more intuitive. I installed Linux for my parents because they are real computer noobs that have big problems at understanding anything related to computer. And yes gnome changed it all, it's REALLY simpler to use.

I use it too for myself, yes it's much more fun to use on a laptop because yes it's easier to use with a keyboard only that the old systems.

I won't say it's perfect, there is a lot of small details that I would change, but I really think that the real problem is that people are resistant to change and never gives a real try. I agree it's hard at first...

Ok, I see. I would up vote you but it's the response to my question so... just thanks !

You'r right, Google should just put a check box "don't ask for the next 30 min".

But my point is that in the android world, you can setup a user account that is not bound to your google account. You can select the applications that this account is able to use, and no in-app transaction is possible from there. You can still do in-app transactions from the main account and it will be available from the other account.

Still it's only possible on tablets, not on phones, because phones are considered single user device...

I have no child (for now) but, that's how I'd do it. That's how I did for my guest account.

It was more a suggestion, like a good practice, I don't want anyone to have access to my mails and everything anyway !!

Ok, probably a stupid question here !

What is the point of an exchange in the bitcoin world ?

Have seen a lot a virus enter "by itseft" without even browsing the internet on older windows versions with no service pack, just by plug-in the ethernet cable and voilà ! I'm pretty sure it will happen for XP too, sooner or later....

No, it whould be : create a different account for your child without access to your mails, facebook, [...] and credit card !

For Americans, democrats are considered Left. But if you take a look at what happen outside of U.S.A. they have politics that could be what the Extreme Right parties have out there.

I won't say "The guns are the problem", but the argument you use is against your thesis.

Without Guns, like the school attacks in China prove, there is far less victims. For something like 10 attacks, there is "only" 21 death.

Without Guns, the real problem, the lack of treatment of mentally ill, would cause far less victims.

I agree, guns are not the problem, but guns have a part to play in the problem... at least on the number of death. Guns are MADE to kill, and they do it better than a knife. You could argu : "But a bomb could kill as much.", but until america don't "promote" bombs as much as much as the guns are "promoted", mentally ill won't think about using a bomb and they won't already have one in there hands because "it's their right"

I think the equation is more something like : X=Y*Z Where : X is "probability of random violence" Y is "access to guns and/or any other tool to kill" Z is "mental illness" I think that the real problem is with Z, and that's where most efforts should be put. But, that doesn't mean that reducing Y won't have any impact on X. One thing for sure it will help at having less dead victims.