This is exactly why I always end up with crappy old outdated stuff.
I keep waiting for the price to drop, since I can't afford to be an early adopter. Then just as the price drops, the Next Big Thing is announced. And oh my God! It's so much better than the current thing! I want that instead... but I have to wait for the price to drop.
If you can tell pirated music by the sound quality alone, I guess I should delete all the garage band stuff I got from MP3.com.
"You get what you pay for" "Watch for compilation CDs that could only exist in the dreams of a music fan"
So... um... a wicked compilation that's cheap... or a sucky CD that's expensive... You know, I thought "You get what you pay for" meant something different, but I'm glad to know I can stop overpaying for stuff now.
First of all, there's the purchase price. Depending on local availability, that could be anywhere from $50 to several hundred dollars. For the sake of argument let's say the United States. So, let's just guess $500 for the purchase. This of course may or may not include training, the costs of which I will ignore.
Of course, they need to be fed. They will be working hard, so they'll need about 3000 Calories a day. On a diet of beans, lard, and potatoes -- or better yet, vitamin-enriched Slave Chow -- that could be accomplished for about $5/day, or $1825 a year.
Next, there's slave insurance. You may not think you need it, but if they run away, die unexpectedly, damage someone else's property, etc., do you really want to be stuck with the costs? Insurance rates can vary wildly, but with a reasonably high deductible and a good history, you might get away with $1500/year. Medical and dental care may not seem like a high priority if your slaves are young and healthy, but in the long term it is a good investment to spend at least $500 a year on it.
Next, clothing. You could just let them run around naked, but what would the neighbours think? Better to clothe your slaves in smart uniforms. Two uniforms a year, plus sundries, will cost at least $500.
Next, if you really want to use human power for transportation, a rickshaw is preferable to an SUV. A comfortable bicycle rickshaw costs about $4000, plus occasional maintenance, and will last about 5 years.
In the long term, once your slaves outlive their usefulness, you have the option of freeing them or maintaining them. However, freeing a slave to die on the streets is generally frowned upon, especially if they die begging at your door. It is best to set aside some money for their retirement. Saving about $400/year for 40 years at a modest 5% interest rate will allow you to feed and clothe your ex slaves for over 20 years. They will probably die before that, so you can spend the remainder as you like. (Probably best to maintain them in your own house. Even an older slave can do some light chores.)
Essentially, that's a minimum lifetime cost of $221,500 for a single slave over 40 years, not including inflation, incidental costs, or anything like that. Compare that to buying four $30000 cars that last 10 years each, plus operating costs of $1500/year for gas and $1500/year for insurance plus $1000/year for maintenance... for a total of $280,000. A single slave may be a modest savings and can do many useful things besides transport you, but two slaves would be significantly more expensive.
It turned out that the kids in question didn't even watch the show. Fuss was made by that point, however, and it was pulled off the air in various places.
It's still going on though. I actually watched it for way longer than was age-appropriate. I don't care, I love low-budget martial arts crap and the guys are always hot.
They use horses in situations where motor vehicles would be impractical, such as special events like Canada Day on Parliament Hill, or patrolling parks. A mountie in dress uniform on horseback is partly for the tourists, but it also gives them a good vantage point and mobility.
My uncle, on bicycle, was once chased down by a police officer (though I think Halifax municipal) on horseback. She stopped him for supposedly stealing squirrels from a park, though it was actually just our little dog sticking his head out of the bike basket. That was about 30 years ago, though this article implies they're still used.
I used to be on a monthly Bell plan. It was their cheapest plan, advertised as $25/month with internet access and a certain number of free text messages. Great! Except that for call display, it was an extra $5 a month. I opted out of voice mail because that would have been another $5 a month. $35 a month was pushing my budget. Unfortunately, I didn't know about the system access fees (I did realize there would be tax, of course). My final monthly bill was $46/month. I also didn't know that the rebate claim form that I got because I signed on to a contract was going to expire, so I missed the deadline to send it in. I was locked into a contract that the other side tricked their way out of honouring for two years.
Adding injury to injury, while "internet access" was included, bandwidth was not. It was $50/month. I was rather excited about having a phone that could download things, so I downloaded two ringtones and a game. They cost me about $7, which I expected... plus over $30 for the bandwidth. I had never been told about the bandwidth charges and none of the paperwork I had been given when I signed up had mentioned it.
Within hours of my contract expiring, I switched to prepaid. I would have dropped Bell completely, but at the time it wasn't possible to keep your number when changing carriers. Now I pay $25 for two months of access... taxes, access fee, and call display included. I once used the full $25 during a month in which I took a 10-day vacation out of province and made long-distance calls while roaming, but other than that I've never used it up.
Even if I had sent in the rebate form (that was partly my own fault for procrastinating and not reading it carefully), I lost more money on that than I like to think about. If I hadn't gone on a plan in the first place, I would have saved about $800 over the course of two years, or about $650 if I'd gotten my rebate.
Prepaid is more per minute, so if I were a bigger talker it might equalize. Going on that plan is a pretty big regret though. If I got a new phone, even a super swanky one, I'd pay for it outright and get prepaid again.
When I was young I had a lot of interest in non-fiction books and youth-oriented encyclopedias and reference books. Try to have one or two on hand for a variety of subjects.
I was also a big fan of Diane Duane and Monica Hughes. Duane's "So You Want to be a Wizard?" and sequels might interest Harry Potter fans, without neglecting the scientific repercussions of magic. My favourite Hughes novel was "Invitation to the Game," which had themes revolving around the environment, technology, overpopulation, social engineering, and returning to a primitive technological state. I don't think these really sparked an interest in science per se nearly as much as they did in science fiction. Non-fiction did much more for me there.
Science classes have a curriculum to get through, so the books tend to be dry and practical and don't let kids find their own interests. Teaching some of this in English class would give kids a chance to explain the subjects in their own words and share what they learn with their classmates.
"Exploring the Night Sky" by Terence Dickinson was one of my favourite books as a kid. It's a nicely illustrated introduction to astronomy. Unfortunately, somewhat out-of-date. I'd suggest at least one good text on astronomy anyway, especially one that discusses gravity and orbits, the composition of planets, the births and deaths of stars (and nuclear fusion), telescopes, and wavelengths of light.
A book on the human body, like the one by DK or Eyewitness, is a must. A friend who works with kids recommended a "Ripley's Believe It or Not!" book. Books on everyday technology in the "How Stuff Works" vein are a good idea. I was always very interested in archaeology and mythology -- your students can probably give you ideas of their interests. Lots of kids like animals and are interested in volcanos, earthquakes, storms, and other such natural drama.
I used to like Discover Magazine quite a bit because it was broad -- touching on everything from astrophysics to medicine to archaeology. I didn't usually understand every article, but it was always interesting. At the beginning of each issue are a bunch of short articles on recent discoveries that would make excellent fodder for minor assignments.
To try and spark interest in general subjects, try to find books about specific people related to the field. Case studies, brief biographies (historical figures, great scientists, etc.), anecdotes, and how-tos (easy science experiments?) bring life to the subjects and make them more real than broad strokes.
"The World of Myth" by David Adams Leeming compares many of the myths of the world, shockingly. Consider having the original, nasty Grimm's Fairy Tales around.
Consider also: "The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat: And Other Clinical Tales" (Oliver Sacks) "The Origin of Species" (Charles Darwin) "A Briefer History of Time" (Stephen Hawking) "Frankenstein" (Mary Shelley)
Finally, since arts don't get much love these days, I also recommend "Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art" by Scott McCloud, absolutely the best book on mixed visual-written forms like plays, film, and of course comics I've ever read. If your students have trouble getting into Shakespeare due to the language or can't visualizing who's speaking, consider a graphic novel edition (just make sure it's unabridged and well illustrated). "Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain" is an excellent book on perception, and will help those kids with an interest in art. Drawing is a seriously underappreciated skill that can be used in all kinds of fields, including engineering and teaching. (How many times have you heard a teacher apologize for their bad art as they drew something on the board?) Teaching them to draw isn't the goal -- the goal is to make them think about how they see things.
Anyway, the of this is really to further education and improve local economies over the long term. There are other projects to help kids who are starving... this one is focused on the far greater number of families who are surviving, but can't afford decent education. In many countries, kids have to pay to go to school, and many families can't afford it. The kids end up helping the family farm or taking menial jobs, maybe, but with a better education they could have started businesses or gotten better jobs. Doctors (you know, the people who help when kids are dying of diarrhea) are in short supply almost everywhere, and where are they supposed to come from? Better education = economic growth.
OLPC is supposed to replace textbooks and notebooks and make education cheaper and more accessible. Personally, I don't know... in those countries where basic education isn't free, the governments paying for it might do better by paying tuitions.
Heheh... I just installed Ubuntu for the first time 2 days ago. Never used Linux before in my life. All I've been doing since is messing with advanced settings. *_* Now it's working almost perfectly, except for the Finepoint pen tablet (most people don't have one and the drivers for it are iffy).
I'd say the first thing a new user needs to do is read (and maybe print off) http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Ubuntu:Feisty and then spend a couple of days getting everything up to scratch and learning how to do things -- before getting too attached to their configuration. Do a web search any time you do anything drastic and figure out the best way to do it.
Feisty is dead easy to reinstall if you screw up. Less easy is backing up all your stuff on a crippled machine. Play now, work later. You don't want to need to learn how to log in as root on the command line when you have something due in an hour and your GUI won't start.
I just installed Ubuntu after using Windows for years, and I have a lot of experience with Photoshop. I've tried GIMP numerous times on Windows and I'm starting to find my way around it under GNOME. The experience is much, much better in GNOME.
I have two major problems with GIMP. One, of course, is the interface (skip this paragraph if you've read everyone else's comments). Why is the "file" menu -- or any menu other than toolbar options -- on the toolbar? There are too many windows. Windows get covered by others. Switching windows is a pain. Editing multiple images is just obnoxious. Each menu, image, submenu, and dialogue is treated as a separate window and it's horribly messy. This is a HUGE problem in Windows because there is only one desktop, and so GIMP interferes with every other program. In Ubuntu with Beryl it's not so bad because it's easier to switch desktops, so GIMP can have its own side on the cube. There's also more window control. But most computers still run Windows, and until it works better in Windows it's not going to be the next Firefox.
Second is that it crashes under Windows. It doesn't work. It's unstable. At least it was for me, on three different computers over four years, running Windows ME, XP Home, and XP Pro. Maybe it's just me, maybe it needs tweaking before it works properly, but I'm damn good at following instructions, I followed the instructions, and it didn't work. If it crashes on Windows, the 85-90% of people who use Windows probably won't adopt it.
For now, Paint.NET is a better free option for non-professional users using Windows, simply because it's more stable.
One last thought before I leave this thread and never, ever return.
Willpower being replaced with a "mechanistic" system may seem menacing, but in fact it's useful knowledge for someone with an addiction or bad habit that they want to kick. If you've had failures kicking habits in the past, you may think you have a weak will and therefore little chance of kicking it in the future. In fact, by removing environmental triggers (selling your console, avoiding places where you normally smoke, hanging out with different people) you can actually improve your chances. Keeping in mind your reasons for doing so, and regularly reminding yourself of them, can help you even more.
There are real strategies for losing addictions, far more useful than relying on "strength of character" to pull you through.
"It sounds like you're saying some part of our brain gets to make decisions, but has no power to "enforce" them;
Decisions are made by several parts of the brain working together. One part handles "immediate danger or safety," another handles "is this pleasurable or painful," another handles, "is this good for my long-term well-being," and so on. Each is activated by environment, but moderated by past experience, genetics, and individual differences. Decision-making is a continuous process, too. If you decide, "I'm on a diet," you still have to decide whether or not to eat a cookie every time you see it. Each time the relative strength of each motivation is weighed.
the question of whether we stick with our decision is determined solely by environmental factors and how (in ways beyond our conscious control) we respond to them."
Just the opposite. We do have the power to change the way we respond to them. See the original example of the children and the candy. Those who chose not to think about eating the candy were able to resist very well (they may not have realized what they were doing, but they knew that doing something else would help them ignore it). Merely saying "I won't eat the candy," though, wasn't enough. It might be for an adult, though, because they would have other motivating factors (like pride) that would distract them from eating it. Thinking, "if I eat this I'm weak," is much like singing or playing for the kids.
What I'm saying is that "willpower" is not some nebulous, independent thing. It's specifically the capacity to consider the consequences and make the right decision. Or, considering the extreme effort some people go to to satisfy their destructive habits, the wrong one. Certain drugs actually damage the parts of the brain that handle long-term thinking and pleasure, making it much more difficult to make the right choice. Gaming probably doesn't do that, so gaming addiction is easier to kick than, say, cocaine.
I'm not rejecting free will, or capacity to make choices based on motivation. I'm rejecting willpower, or capacity to follow through on arbitrary decisions with insufficient motivation.
Everyone who follows through on a decision must have a reason to do so. Maybe they fear getting fat, losing their jobs, being rejected by their peers, going to hell -- or maybe they like the action for its own sake. Conversely, maybe they don't care about their health, hate their jobs, don't care about what people think of them, or think God favours them -- in that case, the motivation isn't strong enough, and they decide not to follow through. Or they simply forget the consequences, and do what they want.
Throwing gamers in jail wouldn't "solve" the "problem" because the problem is people failing to live productive lives, not people going out and robbing banks. I don't feel particularly motivated to make a choice like that, do you?
We don't need it to breathe, no. But we need fixed nitrogen in soil for the plants we depend on to grow. The atmospheric nitrogen (inert N2) is fixed by microorganisms into usable forms. Without fixed nitrogen, you can't have DNA or proteins.
Someday, hopefully we'll have the resources to get nitrogen compounds like ammonia from the outer solar system to Mars.
Hardly. Those with "strong willpower" are simply able to distract themselves from present temptations by thinking about the rewards for not pleasing themselves now. It's not a matter of strength of will -- it's a matter of attention and memory, or stronger motivating factors, like need to feed yourself, love of children, fear of consequences, and so on. Some people consider their jobs more rewarding than playing games -- either because they like the challenge, they like the money, or they find it meaningful. I go to school, even though I hate it, because I want my degree and a decent job... not this minute, but several years from now.
It's a subtle distinction, and the concept of will is deeply ingrained in our culture. It evolved from philosophy, not science. Once people actually started testing will and trying to explain it, it became obvious it was just a word for a whole system of motivation.
Slashdot Mirror
First thing I thought was headphones, or some sort of headband. Goggles aren't a bad idea but wouldn't work if you wore glasses.
This is exactly why I always end up with crappy old outdated stuff.
I keep waiting for the price to drop, since I can't afford to be an early adopter. Then just as the price drops, the Next Big Thing is announced. And oh my God! It's so much better than the current thing! I want that instead... but I have to wait for the price to drop.
Repeat ad obsolescence.
If you can tell pirated music by the sound quality alone, I guess I should delete all the garage band stuff I got from MP3.com.
"You get what you pay for"
"Watch for compilation CDs that could only exist in the dreams of a music fan"
So... um... a wicked compilation that's cheap... or a sucky CD that's expensive... You know, I thought "You get what you pay for" meant something different, but I'm glad to know I can stop overpaying for stuff now.
In Soviet Russia, Linux runs Firefox!
No, wait...
Slaves are free? That's a common misconception.
First of all, there's the purchase price. Depending on local availability, that could be anywhere from $50 to several hundred dollars. For the sake of argument let's say the United States. So, let's just guess $500 for the purchase. This of course may or may not include training, the costs of which I will ignore.
Of course, they need to be fed. They will be working hard, so they'll need about 3000 Calories a day. On a diet of beans, lard, and potatoes -- or better yet, vitamin-enriched Slave Chow -- that could be accomplished for about $5/day, or $1825 a year.
Next, there's slave insurance. You may not think you need it, but if they run away, die unexpectedly, damage someone else's property, etc., do you really want to be stuck with the costs? Insurance rates can vary wildly, but with a reasonably high deductible and a good history, you might get away with $1500/year. Medical and dental care may not seem like a high priority if your slaves are young and healthy, but in the long term it is a good investment to spend at least $500 a year on it.
Next, clothing. You could just let them run around naked, but what would the neighbours think? Better to clothe your slaves in smart uniforms. Two uniforms a year, plus sundries, will cost at least $500.
Next, if you really want to use human power for transportation, a rickshaw is preferable to an SUV. A comfortable bicycle rickshaw costs about $4000, plus occasional maintenance, and will last about 5 years.
In the long term, once your slaves outlive their usefulness, you have the option of freeing them or maintaining them. However, freeing a slave to die on the streets is generally frowned upon, especially if they die begging at your door. It is best to set aside some money for their retirement. Saving about $400/year for 40 years at a modest 5% interest rate will allow you to feed and clothe your ex slaves for over 20 years. They will probably die before that, so you can spend the remainder as you like. (Probably best to maintain them in your own house. Even an older slave can do some light chores.)
Essentially, that's a minimum lifetime cost of $221,500 for a single slave over 40 years, not including inflation, incidental costs, or anything like that. Compare that to buying four $30000 cars that last 10 years each, plus operating costs of $1500/year for gas and $1500/year for insurance plus $1000/year for maintenance... for a total of $280,000. A single slave may be a modest savings and can do many useful things besides transport you, but two slaves would be significantly more expensive.
There's a keyboard on it to order books and take notes.
It plays MP3s so you can listen to podcasts and audiobooks.
I don't understand why that's an issue.
I hate that it can't handle more formats, though. The $.10-per-attachment email conversion "service" is BS. The Bookeen looks more promising.
It turned out that the kids in question didn't even watch the show. Fuss was made by that point, however, and it was pulled off the air in various places.
It's still going on though. I actually watched it for way longer than was age-appropriate. I don't care, I love low-budget martial arts crap and the guys are always hot.
Equally so.
I hope the jock nephews are suitably disappointed with their microscope cameras.
Or just be the coolest kid in school like in Mail Order Ninja, I suppose.
Sincerely,
HKMARKS, Master of Obscure OEL Manga
I just heard the other day from a dubious source that adding vinegar to water was a good way to ward off fleas and mange. So he might do it anyway.
When I was sixteen, ten years ago, I was mistaken for a 20-something college student by a guy who'd known me for a year.
A few hours ago, a telemarketer asked me if my mommy was home.
I can see this thing working out real good.
I think it's covered by "poaching" or "removing wildlife" or something.
Still, yeah, odd leap.
They use horses in situations where motor vehicles would be impractical, such as special events like Canada Day on Parliament Hill, or patrolling parks. A mountie in dress uniform on horseback is partly for the tourists, but it also gives them a good vantage point and mobility.
My uncle, on bicycle, was once chased down by a police officer (though I think Halifax municipal) on horseback. She stopped him for supposedly stealing squirrels from a park, though it was actually just our little dog sticking his head out of the bike basket. That was about 30 years ago, though this article implies they're still used.
He was clearly talking about Alex Summers.
I used to be on a monthly Bell plan. It was their cheapest plan, advertised as $25/month with internet access and a certain number of free text messages. Great! Except that for call display, it was an extra $5 a month. I opted out of voice mail because that would have been another $5 a month. $35 a month was pushing my budget. Unfortunately, I didn't know about the system access fees (I did realize there would be tax, of course). My final monthly bill was $46/month. I also didn't know that the rebate claim form that I got because I signed on to a contract was going to expire, so I missed the deadline to send it in. I was locked into a contract that the other side tricked their way out of honouring for two years.
Adding injury to injury, while "internet access" was included, bandwidth was not. It was $50/month. I was rather excited about having a phone that could download things, so I downloaded two ringtones and a game. They cost me about $7, which I expected... plus over $30 for the bandwidth. I had never been told about the bandwidth charges and none of the paperwork I had been given when I signed up had mentioned it.
Within hours of my contract expiring, I switched to prepaid. I would have dropped Bell completely, but at the time it wasn't possible to keep your number when changing carriers. Now I pay $25 for two months of access... taxes, access fee, and call display included. I once used the full $25 during a month in which I took a 10-day vacation out of province and made long-distance calls while roaming, but other than that I've never used it up.
Even if I had sent in the rebate form (that was partly my own fault for procrastinating and not reading it carefully), I lost more money on that than I like to think about. If I hadn't gone on a plan in the first place, I would have saved about $800 over the course of two years, or about $650 if I'd gotten my rebate.
Prepaid is more per minute, so if I were a bigger talker it might equalize. Going on that plan is a pretty big regret though. If I got a new phone, even a super swanky one, I'd pay for it outright and get prepaid again.
When I was young I had a lot of interest in non-fiction books and youth-oriented encyclopedias and reference books. Try to have one or two on hand for a variety of subjects.
I was also a big fan of Diane Duane and Monica Hughes. Duane's "So You Want to be a Wizard?" and sequels might interest Harry Potter fans, without neglecting the scientific repercussions of magic. My favourite Hughes novel was "Invitation to the Game," which had themes revolving around the environment, technology, overpopulation, social engineering, and returning to a primitive technological state. I don't think these really sparked an interest in science per se nearly as much as they did in science fiction. Non-fiction did much more for me there.
Science classes have a curriculum to get through, so the books tend to be dry and practical and don't let kids find their own interests. Teaching some of this in English class would give kids a chance to explain the subjects in their own words and share what they learn with their classmates.
"Exploring the Night Sky" by Terence Dickinson was one of my favourite books as a kid. It's a nicely illustrated introduction to astronomy. Unfortunately, somewhat out-of-date. I'd suggest at least one good text on astronomy anyway, especially one that discusses gravity and orbits, the composition of planets, the births and deaths of stars (and nuclear fusion), telescopes, and wavelengths of light.
A book on the human body, like the one by DK or Eyewitness, is a must. A friend who works with kids recommended a "Ripley's Believe It or Not!" book. Books on everyday technology in the "How Stuff Works" vein are a good idea. I was always very interested in archaeology and mythology -- your students can probably give you ideas of their interests. Lots of kids like animals and are interested in volcanos, earthquakes, storms, and other such natural drama.
I used to like Discover Magazine quite a bit because it was broad -- touching on everything from astrophysics to medicine to archaeology. I didn't usually understand every article, but it was always interesting. At the beginning of each issue are a bunch of short articles on recent discoveries that would make excellent fodder for minor assignments.
To try and spark interest in general subjects, try to find books about specific people related to the field. Case studies, brief biographies (historical figures, great scientists, etc.), anecdotes, and how-tos (easy science experiments?) bring life to the subjects and make them more real than broad strokes.
"The World of Myth" by David Adams Leeming compares many of the myths of the world, shockingly. Consider having the original, nasty Grimm's Fairy Tales around.
Consider also:
"The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat: And Other Clinical Tales" (Oliver Sacks)
"The Origin of Species" (Charles Darwin)
"A Briefer History of Time" (Stephen Hawking)
"Frankenstein" (Mary Shelley)
Finally, since arts don't get much love these days, I also recommend "Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art" by Scott McCloud, absolutely the best book on mixed visual-written forms like plays, film, and of course comics I've ever read. If your students have trouble getting into Shakespeare due to the language or can't visualizing who's speaking, consider a graphic novel edition (just make sure it's unabridged and well illustrated). "Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain" is an excellent book on perception, and will help those kids with an interest in art. Drawing is a seriously underappreciated skill that can be used in all kinds of fields, including engineering and teaching. (How many times have you heard a teacher apologize for their bad art as they drew something on the board?) Teaching them to draw isn't the goal -- the goal is to make them think about how they see things.
Pull-cord, I believe.
Anyway, the of this is really to further education and improve local economies over the long term. There are other projects to help kids who are starving... this one is focused on the far greater number of families who are surviving, but can't afford decent education. In many countries, kids have to pay to go to school, and many families can't afford it. The kids end up helping the family farm or taking menial jobs, maybe, but with a better education they could have started businesses or gotten better jobs. Doctors (you know, the people who help when kids are dying of diarrhea) are in short supply almost everywhere, and where are they supposed to come from? Better education = economic growth.
OLPC is supposed to replace textbooks and notebooks and make education cheaper and more accessible. Personally, I don't know... in those countries where basic education isn't free, the governments paying for it might do better by paying tuitions.
Heheh... I just installed Ubuntu for the first time 2 days ago. Never used Linux before in my life. All I've been doing since is messing with advanced settings. *_* Now it's working almost perfectly, except for the Finepoint pen tablet (most people don't have one and the drivers for it are iffy).
I'd say the first thing a new user needs to do is read (and maybe print off) http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Ubuntu:Feisty and then spend a couple of days getting everything up to scratch and learning how to do things -- before getting too attached to their configuration. Do a web search any time you do anything drastic and figure out the best way to do it.
Feisty is dead easy to reinstall if you screw up. Less easy is backing up all your stuff on a crippled machine. Play now, work later. You don't want to need to learn how to log in as root on the command line when you have something due in an hour and your GUI won't start.
Natural selection only works if you kill them before they're able to reproduce. Maybe if they give their kids cancer..?
I just installed Ubuntu after using Windows for years, and I have a lot of experience with Photoshop. I've tried GIMP numerous times on Windows and I'm starting to find my way around it under GNOME. The experience is much, much better in GNOME.
I have two major problems with GIMP. One, of course, is the interface (skip this paragraph if you've read everyone else's comments). Why is the "file" menu -- or any menu other than toolbar options -- on the toolbar? There are too many windows. Windows get covered by others. Switching windows is a pain. Editing multiple images is just obnoxious. Each menu, image, submenu, and dialogue is treated as a separate window and it's horribly messy. This is a HUGE problem in Windows because there is only one desktop, and so GIMP interferes with every other program. In Ubuntu with Beryl it's not so bad because it's easier to switch desktops, so GIMP can have its own side on the cube. There's also more window control. But most computers still run Windows, and until it works better in Windows it's not going to be the next Firefox.
Second is that it crashes under Windows. It doesn't work. It's unstable. At least it was for me, on three different computers over four years, running Windows ME, XP Home, and XP Pro. Maybe it's just me, maybe it needs tweaking before it works properly, but I'm damn good at following instructions, I followed the instructions, and it didn't work. If it crashes on Windows, the 85-90% of people who use Windows probably won't adopt it.
For now, Paint.NET is a better free option for non-professional users using Windows, simply because it's more stable.
One last thought before I leave this thread and never, ever return.
Willpower being replaced with a "mechanistic" system may seem menacing, but in fact it's useful knowledge for someone with an addiction or bad habit that they want to kick. If you've had failures kicking habits in the past, you may think you have a weak will and therefore little chance of kicking it in the future. In fact, by removing environmental triggers (selling your console, avoiding places where you normally smoke, hanging out with different people) you can actually improve your chances. Keeping in mind your reasons for doing so, and regularly reminding yourself of them, can help you even more.
There are real strategies for losing addictions, far more useful than relying on "strength of character" to pull you through.
"It sounds like you're saying some part of our brain gets to make decisions, but has no power to "enforce" them;
;_;
Decisions are made by several parts of the brain working together. One part handles "immediate danger or safety," another handles "is this pleasurable or painful," another handles, "is this good for my long-term well-being," and so on. Each is activated by environment, but moderated by past experience, genetics, and individual differences. Decision-making is a continuous process, too. If you decide, "I'm on a diet," you still have to decide whether or not to eat a cookie every time you see it. Each time the relative strength of each motivation is weighed.
the question of whether we stick with our decision is determined solely by environmental factors and how (in ways beyond our conscious control) we respond to them."
Just the opposite. We do have the power to change the way we respond to them. See the original example of the children and the candy. Those who chose not to think about eating the candy were able to resist very well (they may not have realized what they were doing, but they knew that doing something else would help them ignore it). Merely saying "I won't eat the candy," though, wasn't enough. It might be for an adult, though, because they would have other motivating factors (like pride) that would distract them from eating it. Thinking, "if I eat this I'm weak," is much like singing or playing for the kids.
What I'm saying is that "willpower" is not some nebulous, independent thing. It's specifically the capacity to consider the consequences and make the right decision. Or, considering the extreme effort some people go to to satisfy their destructive habits, the wrong one. Certain drugs actually damage the parts of the brain that handle long-term thinking and pleasure, making it much more difficult to make the right choice. Gaming probably doesn't do that, so gaming addiction is easier to kick than, say, cocaine.
But just don't ask me where the soul comes in.
I'm not rejecting free will, or capacity to make choices based on motivation. I'm rejecting willpower, or capacity to follow through on arbitrary decisions with insufficient motivation.
Everyone who follows through on a decision must have a reason to do so. Maybe they fear getting fat, losing their jobs, being rejected by their peers, going to hell -- or maybe they like the action for its own sake. Conversely, maybe they don't care about their health, hate their jobs, don't care about what people think of them, or think God favours them -- in that case, the motivation isn't strong enough, and they decide not to follow through. Or they simply forget the consequences, and do what they want.
Throwing gamers in jail wouldn't "solve" the "problem" because the problem is people failing to live productive lives, not people going out and robbing banks. I don't feel particularly motivated to make a choice like that, do you?
We don't need it to breathe, no. But we need fixed nitrogen in soil for the plants we depend on to grow. The atmospheric nitrogen (inert N2) is fixed by microorganisms into usable forms. Without fixed nitrogen, you can't have DNA or proteins.
Someday, hopefully we'll have the resources to get nitrogen compounds like ammonia from the outer solar system to Mars.
Hardly. Those with "strong willpower" are simply able to distract themselves from present temptations by thinking about the rewards for not pleasing themselves now. It's not a matter of strength of will -- it's a matter of attention and memory, or stronger motivating factors, like need to feed yourself, love of children, fear of consequences, and so on. Some people consider their jobs more rewarding than playing games -- either because they like the challenge, they like the money, or they find it meaningful. I go to school, even though I hate it, because I want my degree and a decent job... not this minute, but several years from now.
It's a subtle distinction, and the concept of will is deeply ingrained in our culture. It evolved from philosophy, not science. Once people actually started testing will and trying to explain it, it became obvious it was just a word for a whole system of motivation.