Just because you handle "certifications" doesn't mean you engage in best practices. In fact as an old school Linux/Unix nerd who remembers the command line days I often find there is an inverse relationship between qualifications on paper and competence. The best hackers in the old school sense of hacking as creative coding were not the people who went though cubicle drone tech certs., but those who had a passion for computers starting with a TRS-80 with a tape drive when they were 12. Most of these people later became bearded "hippies" with no certs whatsoever and those people now run entire networks at the world wide level despite never having had a cert. Ignore the advice of these people at your own peril.
I hope you don't also consider yourself to be some kind of capitalist or something. Excessive security that reduces your efficiency is not going to help your business compared to another company that has more flexible security policies that lock up actual sensitive data while letting those with non sensitive data work at maximum computational efficiency. Your attitude is that of a Soviet bureaucrat that policy consistency trumps actual on the ground working conditions, and it will only be to your loss when your competitor gets their computational work involving non security hazard done more quickly.
As a lefty I sincerely want to thank you for being thoughtful and crossing party lines and voting for the more stable and sane of two mainstream choices we are given. Know that I have voted for Greens since 1992 and I'd rather vote for McKinney but I myself am crossing over from the left to vote for Obama because I think the aggressive rhetoric calling for ever more war and divisiveness of McCain Palin ticket is the wrong choice for the country at this time. Know also that I am very disappointed by Obama caving on FISA and taking a lot of money from Wall St. He is far from perfect but I fear the alternative is far worse.
There I've done it, I've become a "lesser of two evililest" something I never thought I would do, sigh.
Once again for the dumbasses with reading comprehension problems American's are paying MORE per capita and we are receiving fewer visits to the doctor and we have less of a life expectancy for the DOUBLE we are paying:
"Facts on the Cost of Health Insurance and Health Care
Introduction
By several measures, health care spending continues to rise at the fastest rate in our history.
In 2007, total national health expenditures were expected to rise 6.9 percent â" two times the rate of inflation.1 Total spending was $2.3 TRILLION in 2007, or $7600 per person.1 Total health care spending represented 16 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP).
U.S. health care spending is expected to increase at similar levels for the next decade reaching $4.2 TRILLION in 2016, or 20 percent of GDP.1
In 2007, employer health insurance premiums increased by 6.1 percent - two times the rate of inflation. The annual premium for an employer health plan covering a family of four averaged nearly $12,100. The annual premium for single coverage averaged over $4,400.2
Experts agree that our health care system is riddled with inefficiencies, excessive administrative expenses, inflated prices, poor management, and inappropriate care, waste and fraud. These problems significantly increase the cost of medical care and health insurance for employers and workers and affect the security of families."
OK now you are starting to make me mad you lying bullshit artist:
"Canadian health care in comparison
The Canadian health care system is often compared to the US system. The US system spends the most in the world per capita, and was ranked 37th in the world by the World Health Organization in 2000, while Canada's health system was ranked 30th. The WHO ranking has been criticized by some for its choice of ranking criteria and statistical methods, and the WHO is currently revising its methodology and withholding new rankings until the issues are addressed.[49][50]
Canada spent approximately 9.8% of GDP on health care in 2005, almost one percentage point higher than the average of 9.0% in OECD countries.[29] According to the Canadian Institute for Health Information, spending is expected to reach $160 billion, or 10.6% of GDP, in 2007.[51] This translates to $4,867 per person.
Most health statistics in Canada are at or above the G8 average.
"As the chart below reveals, the cost gap between the United States and Canada has only widened since 1993, and per capita health care expenditures in the United States are now almost double those in Canada ($6,401 vs. $3,359). Canada's per capita health expenditures rose about 65% from 1993 to 2005, while costs in the United States rose by over 90%. Yet infant mortality in the United States is higher and life expectancy at birth is less than in Canada. It is also noteworthy that despite Canada's much lower expenditures on health care, Canadians consult with physicians far more often than do Americans. The average number of physician consultations per capita was 6.0 in Canada, versus 3.8 in the United States.1"
The single-payer system seems to have many significant advantages: Per capita spending on health care, for example, is much lower than it is in the United States, and the coverage is universal, whereas in the US health care is not guaranteed, except to those under the federal poverty level or to those over 65. Life expectancy is also much higher in Canada than in the United States; the Canadian average of 79 years comes in just below 80 years in the top-rated nation, Japan (life expectancy in the US is among the lowest in industrialized nations, only 76.7 years). Disadvantages of the Canadian system include fewer physicians per 1,000 population than the G7 average (though not substantially fewer than in the US), fewer scanners and MRI machines, slightly longer wait times for some procedures, and a comparable infant mortality and cancer mortality rate to the low-rated United States (although Canadaâ(TM)s heart disease mortality rate is significantly better)."
I'll trade a few MRI machines for cheaper health care that is available to ALL people with longer life expectancy.
The dirty secret of neo-cons is though you may call poor people that eat organic bran muffins "elitists" you are in fact the elitist as you expect to be waited on hand foot as a function of income and you don't care if people have to die in the gutters for that to happen. And yes the lying douchbaggery of those who are actual elitists labeling those of us on the left who want more equality for all "elitists" does disgust me, it ought to disgust any thinking person IMO.
Your completely unsourced quote was the following:
"The Canadian health care system costs every Canadian family an average of C$12,000 per year--that's US$13,000, more or less. That's triple the cost of a deluxe health plan in the US."
And the reality, 100% the opposite:
"Price of health care
Health care is one of the most expensive items of both nationsâ(TM) budgets. The U.S. government spends more per capita on health care than the government does in Canada. In 2004, the government of Canada spent $2,120 (in US dollars) per person on health care, while the United States government spent $2,724.[11]
However, U.S. government spending covers less than half of all health care costs. Private spending for health care is also far greater in the U.S. than in Canada. In Canada, an average of $917 was spent annually by individuals or private insurance companies for health care, including dental, eye care, and drugs. In the U.S., this sum is $3,372.[11] In 2006, health care consumed 15.3% of U.S. annual GDP. In Canada, only 10% of GDP was spent on health care.[5] This difference is a relatively recent development. In 1971 the nations were much closer, with Canada spending 7.1% of GDP on health while the U.S. spent 7.6%."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_and_American_health_care_systems_compared#Price_of_health_care
See also:
"Results In 1999, health administration costs totaled at least $294.3 billion in the United States, or $1,059 per capita, as compared with $307 per capita in Canada. After exclusions, administration accounted for 31.0 percent of health care expenditures in the United States and 16.7 percent of health care expenditures in Canada. Canada's national health insurance program had overhead of 1.3 percent; the overhead among Canada's private insurers was higher than that in the United States (13.2 percent vs. 11.7 percent). Providers' administrative costs were far lower in Canada."
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/349/8/768
You can pull the wool over some peoples eyes but not those will access to a search engine and 30 seconds of time, smirk.
thethibs said:
"It's the socialist society that can't survive without eliminating choice."
Tell that to the Swedish that have tax payer supported health care, University education, etc, and a thriving market that produces Volvo cars among other things. Socialism yes by most peoples definition, market yes, choice yes.
Life without oversimplifications is sooooo complicated. But that's OK thethibs you can go back to the comforting simplifications fed to you by everyone from Rush on the simplistic end to Milton Friedman on the intellectual end, just don't expect anyone paying attention in the real world to believe that is the way the world actually works. Market crash due to deregulated ISVs and overturning Glass Stegall ring a bell?
What a load of crap. I am 42 i.e. younger than Obama and I always set up an e-mail client on a computer usually mail.app on a Mac or Thunderbird on Windows or Linux. Most mail clients have vastly better spam filtering than web based interfaces, are faster to check e-mail with, and allow for easy mailing of links from web browsers.
So don't ASSume anything.
And next time use the generally understood mail client rather than the pretentious MUA and save someone a useless time wasting google search.
Kthksbye.
"Like Jones, Crosier tried to cast a straight party Democratic vote at the courthouse annex, âoeand it came up straight party, Republican party.â
Crosier recognized her election trainer, who was helping to monitor the polls, and called him over. âoeWe went back through the process and it did it again,â she said of the third time the touch-screen machine suggested she vote Republican."
The machine IS flipping votes if she went over it with an election monitor and STILL couldn't get it to work right. Nice try though trying to blame the victim. If we get President McFascist and young earth creationist loon Moosolini in there despite being 10 points down in the polls, some of us won't be fooled that everything is fine, nothing to see here.
Very true 1.5 minute boot up on OS X generally means one of three things:
1. Corrupt fonts,, validate them with forntbook done
2. HP Scanner or Printer "device manager" solution designate one of you computer as print station and delte that software off the rest of your computers
3. Old cache files or file system permission problems, run cocktail or Onyx and fix these as well.
Having done that my MacBook running leopard off a slow 80 gig 5200 rpm notebook drive takes about 45 seconds to boot.
I'm glad I got the used MacBook with the plastic case cheap from Craigs list with firewire so I can you know USE it to edit video, run vastly superior firewire external drives, firewire audio break out boxes etc.
OK you can go back to your lame sexual frustration jokes now, happy?
I hear you loud and clear and that's my situation as well.
MacBook, G5 tower firewire external drive and I'd like another because my "MyBook" USB2 is a slow piece of crap, plus a 3 chip minidv camera. I'm just glad now I got the Panasonic 1000 camera and not the 2500 Canon or I'd be REALLY pissed.
Yeah or people with 2500 dollar prosumer 3 chip Cannon video cameras. Just throw out like it's garbage, uh-hu sure Apple. What apple is going to do here is drive many people to Craigslist to pick up a cheap year old MacBook Pro when they want to upgrade their MacBook IMO. It's just stupid because a MacBook even a 1.5 year old one like mine does have enough horsepower to run Final Cut Pro at least 5.1. Stupid, stupid, stupid, grrrrrr...
Tell that to people holding on to 1000+ 3 chip minidv camcorders like myself. I'm just glad I got a used MacBook and G5 tower, no sale on the new MacBooks without firewire Apple.
Also I find USB2 external drives to be WAY slower than even firewire 400 drives. There is theoretical bandwidth and then real world, real world USB2 bandwidth sucks.
Floppies of course were dead when Apple discontinued them, firewire? Not so much...
Wow common sense, thanks! I want neither the mediocreness of a Sarah Palin running the country NOR the "meritocracy" of a currency speculator like Soros who has crashed other entire societies for fun and PROFIT, running the country either.
IMO we need someone who combines the best Liberal qualities of a Ralph Nader/FDR withe best Conservative qualities of a Dwight Eisenhower as President. Now where is that person? And would they get campaign funding if we found them?
And p.s. i just named tow white guys because they are the names that occurred to me off the top of my head PLEASE suggest people from ALL backgrounds, thanks
There is a difference between positive wherewithal for survival and plowing into another car with a family in it because you can, it's called not being a douchebag.
I'm an atheist as well, but being an atheist does NOT have to imply being immoral and self centered. For example Kant's categorical imperative says that one ought to do actions as though the outcome is going to effect you exactly like the second party, this does not involve gods, goddesses, or other unquantifiable "energies" yet does remind us to take others into consideration when we act.
I still maintain that Americans callous utterly self centered attitude and it's closely correlated greed is why we are hated in the world. And yes it does effect me and my safety should I chose to travel to the third world so thanks for being assholes, assholes!
Must we always be early adopters? I happen to abhor the sort of shallow chit chat that goes with twitter, cell phones, facebook, etc. I had a myspace account a couple years ago and let it lapse because I got tired of flashing glitter gifs and messages saying
HI I LUV YOUR PROFILE LOL!:)
Note I don't say this as a luddite a have a Macbook with XP in Parallels, 31,000 songs on my itunes, I have designed web sites since 1995, experimented with Linux since 1998, etc. However, I always reserve the right to adopt technologies or reject technologies based on my own personal criteria of for example quiet time needed to think and read. YMMV of course.
Because we live in a society that judges VERY much on style on other superficial appearance characteristics. If I am posting in an online forum I'd prefer people take my ideas seriously as ideas and not tie them to the fact that I am a balding middle age man who refuses to spend a lot of money on the latest "stylish" overpriced crap clothes made in a sweat shop in China. IMO in some ways we are past the golden age of the internet when it was more like the sort of publishing medium that allowed for anonymous broadsides like the Fderalist and anti-Federalist papers. That was possible on usenet, BBSs, and the early less visual dial up web. Would we have won the American revolution if the British had had facebook pictures of George Washington drinking a beer and consorting with a teenager to spread around the world? Pictures of him as an unattractive man with wooden teeth? I wonder...
Crashing into another car on the highway will likely result in a multiple car collusion and many deaths and injuries. Doing you best to drive off the road would only endanger yourself, thus I maintain the OPs recommended course of action is 100% selfish in nature.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week. :)
If you were in Michigan like me would you think different? Serious question, not baiting.
Just because you handle "certifications" doesn't mean you engage in best practices. In fact as an old school Linux/Unix nerd who remembers the command line days I often find there is an inverse relationship between qualifications on paper and competence. The best hackers in the old school sense of hacking as creative coding were not the people who went though cubicle drone tech certs., but those who had a passion for computers starting with a TRS-80 with a tape drive when they were 12. Most of these people later became bearded "hippies" with no certs whatsoever and those people now run entire networks at the world wide level despite never having had a cert. Ignore the advice of these people at your own peril.
I hope you don't also consider yourself to be some kind of capitalist or something. Excessive security that reduces your efficiency is not going to help your business compared to another company that has more flexible security policies that lock up actual sensitive data while letting those with non sensitive data work at maximum computational efficiency. Your attitude is that of a Soviet bureaucrat that policy consistency trumps actual on the ground working conditions, and it will only be to your loss when your competitor gets their computational work involving non security hazard done more quickly.
What joy do people derive from flaming? I don't get it... :(
And yes this is an obvious flame considering since the OP is not working with sensitive data.
As a lefty I sincerely want to thank you for being thoughtful and crossing party lines and voting for the more stable and sane of two mainstream choices we are given. Know that I have voted for Greens since 1992 and I'd rather vote for McKinney but I myself am crossing over from the left to vote for Obama because I think the aggressive rhetoric calling for ever more war and divisiveness of McCain Palin ticket is the wrong choice for the country at this time. Know also that I am very disappointed by Obama caving on FISA and taking a lot of money from Wall St. He is far from perfect but I fear the alternative is far worse.
There I've done it, I've become a "lesser of two evililest" something I never thought I would do, sigh.
Once again for the dumbasses with reading comprehension problems American's are paying MORE per capita and we are receiving fewer visits to the doctor and we have less of a life expectancy for the DOUBLE we are paying:
"Facts on the Cost of Health Insurance and Health Care
Introduction
By several measures, health care spending continues to rise at the fastest rate in our history.
In 2007, total national health expenditures were expected to rise 6.9 percent â" two times the rate of inflation.1 Total spending was $2.3 TRILLION in 2007, or $7600 per person.1 Total health care spending represented 16 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP).
U.S. health care spending is expected to increase at similar levels for the next decade reaching $4.2 TRILLION in 2016, or 20 percent of GDP.1
In 2007, employer health insurance premiums increased by 6.1 percent - two times the rate of inflation. The annual premium for an employer health plan covering a family of four averaged nearly $12,100. The annual premium for single coverage averaged over $4,400.2
Experts agree that our health care system is riddled with inefficiencies, excessive administrative expenses, inflated prices, poor management, and inappropriate care, waste and fraud. These problems significantly increase the cost of medical care and health insurance for employers and workers and affect the security of families."
http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml
I swear Republicans have been fact free since 1980. It's so infuriating like talking to a wall or something. :(
OK now you are starting to make me mad you lying bullshit artist:
"Canadian health care in comparison
The Canadian health care system is often compared to the US system. The US system spends the most in the world per capita, and was ranked 37th in the world by the World Health Organization in 2000, while Canada's health system was ranked 30th. The WHO ranking has been criticized by some for its choice of ranking criteria and statistical methods, and the WHO is currently revising its methodology and withholding new rankings until the issues are addressed.[49][50] Canada spent approximately 9.8% of GDP on health care in 2005, almost one percentage point higher than the average of 9.0% in OECD countries.[29] According to the Canadian Institute for Health Information, spending is expected to reach $160 billion, or 10.6% of GDP, in 2007.[51] This translates to $4,867 per person. Most health statistics in Canada are at or above the G8 average.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada#Canadian_health_care_in_comparison
See also:
"As the chart below reveals, the cost gap between the United States and Canada has only widened since 1993, and per capita health care expenditures in the United States are now almost double those in Canada ($6,401 vs. $3,359). Canada's per capita health expenditures rose about 65% from 1993 to 2005, while costs in the United States rose by over 90%. Yet infant mortality in the United States is higher and life expectancy at birth is less than in Canada. It is also noteworthy that despite Canada's much lower expenditures on health care, Canadians consult with physicians far more often than do Americans. The average number of physician consultations per capita was 6.0 in Canada, versus 3.8 in the United States.1"
http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/webfeatures_snapshots_20071205
"Advantages and Drawbacks
The single-payer system seems to have many significant advantages: Per capita spending on health care, for example, is much lower than it is in the United States, and the coverage is universal, whereas in the US health care is not guaranteed, except to those under the federal poverty level or to those over 65. Life expectancy is also much higher in Canada than in the United States; the Canadian average of 79 years comes in just below 80 years in the top-rated nation, Japan (life expectancy in the US is among the lowest in industrialized nations, only 76.7 years). Disadvantages of the Canadian system include fewer physicians per 1,000 population than the G7 average (though not substantially fewer than in the US), fewer scanners and MRI machines, slightly longer wait times for some procedures, and a comparable infant mortality and cancer mortality rate to the low-rated United States (although Canadaâ(TM)s heart disease mortality rate is significantly better)."
http://healthfieldmedicare.suite101.com/article.cfm/american_canadian_british_health_care_systems
I'll trade a few MRI machines for cheaper health care that is available to ALL people with longer life expectancy.
The dirty secret of neo-cons is though you may call poor people that eat organic bran muffins "elitists" you are in fact the elitist as you expect to be waited on hand foot as a function of income and you don't care if people have to die in the gutters for that to happen. And yes the lying douchbaggery of those who are actual elitists labeling those of us on the left who want more equality for all "elitists" does disgust me, it ought to disgust any thinking person IMO.
Your completely unsourced quote was the following: "The Canadian health care system costs every Canadian family an average of C$12,000 per year--that's US$13,000, more or less. That's triple the cost of a deluxe health plan in the US." And the reality, 100% the opposite: "Price of health care Health care is one of the most expensive items of both nationsâ(TM) budgets. The U.S. government spends more per capita on health care than the government does in Canada. In 2004, the government of Canada spent $2,120 (in US dollars) per person on health care, while the United States government spent $2,724.[11] However, U.S. government spending covers less than half of all health care costs. Private spending for health care is also far greater in the U.S. than in Canada. In Canada, an average of $917 was spent annually by individuals or private insurance companies for health care, including dental, eye care, and drugs. In the U.S., this sum is $3,372.[11] In 2006, health care consumed 15.3% of U.S. annual GDP. In Canada, only 10% of GDP was spent on health care.[5] This difference is a relatively recent development. In 1971 the nations were much closer, with Canada spending 7.1% of GDP on health while the U.S. spent 7.6%." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_and_American_health_care_systems_compared#Price_of_health_care See also: "Results In 1999, health administration costs totaled at least $294.3 billion in the United States, or $1,059 per capita, as compared with $307 per capita in Canada. After exclusions, administration accounted for 31.0 percent of health care expenditures in the United States and 16.7 percent of health care expenditures in Canada. Canada's national health insurance program had overhead of 1.3 percent; the overhead among Canada's private insurers was higher than that in the United States (13.2 percent vs. 11.7 percent). Providers' administrative costs were far lower in Canada." http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/349/8/768 You can pull the wool over some peoples eyes but not those will access to a search engine and 30 seconds of time, smirk.
thethibs said: "It's the socialist society that can't survive without eliminating choice." Tell that to the Swedish that have tax payer supported health care, University education, etc, and a thriving market that produces Volvo cars among other things. Socialism yes by most peoples definition, market yes, choice yes. Life without oversimplifications is sooooo complicated. But that's OK thethibs you can go back to the comforting simplifications fed to you by everyone from Rush on the simplistic end to Milton Friedman on the intellectual end, just don't expect anyone paying attention in the real world to believe that is the way the world actually works. Market crash due to deregulated ISVs and overturning Glass Stegall ring a bell?
What a load of crap. I am 42 i.e. younger than Obama and I always set up an e-mail client on a computer usually mail.app on a Mac or Thunderbird on Windows or Linux. Most mail clients have vastly better spam filtering than web based interfaces, are faster to check e-mail with, and allow for easy mailing of links from web browsers. So don't ASSume anything. And next time use the generally understood mail client rather than the pretentious MUA and save someone a useless time wasting google search. Kthksbye.
"Like Jones, Crosier tried to cast a straight party Democratic vote at the courthouse annex, âoeand it came up straight party, Republican party.â
Crosier recognized her election trainer, who was helping to monitor the polls, and called him over. âoeWe went back through the process and it did it again,â she said of the third time the touch-screen machine suggested she vote Republican."
http://www.mineralwellsindex.com/local/local_story_298161535.html
The machine IS flipping votes if she went over it with an election monitor and STILL couldn't get it to work right. Nice try though trying to blame the victim. If we get President McFascist and young earth creationist loon Moosolini in there despite being 10 points down in the polls, some of us won't be fooled that everything is fine, nothing to see here.
Very true 1.5 minute boot up on OS X generally means one of three things:
1. Corrupt fonts,, validate them with forntbook done
2. HP Scanner or Printer "device manager" solution designate one of you computer as print station and delte that software off the rest of your computers
3. Old cache files or file system permission problems, run cocktail or Onyx and fix these as well.
Having done that my MacBook running leopard off a slow 80 gig 5200 rpm notebook drive takes about 45 seconds to boot.
I'm glad I got the used MacBook with the plastic case cheap from Craigs list with firewire so I can you know USE it to edit video, run vastly superior firewire external drives, firewire audio break out boxes etc.
OK you can go back to your lame sexual frustration jokes now, happy?
I hear you loud and clear and that's my situation as well.
MacBook, G5 tower firewire external drive and I'd like another because my "MyBook" USB2 is a slow piece of crap, plus a 3 chip minidv camera. I'm just glad now I got the Panasonic 1000 camera and not the 2500 Canon or I'd be REALLY pissed.
Yeah or people with 2500 dollar prosumer 3 chip Cannon video cameras. Just throw out like it's garbage, uh-hu sure Apple. What apple is going to do here is drive many people to Craigslist to pick up a cheap year old MacBook Pro when they want to upgrade their MacBook IMO. It's just stupid because a MacBook even a 1.5 year old one like mine does have enough horsepower to run Final Cut Pro at least 5.1. Stupid, stupid, stupid, grrrrrr...
Tell that to people holding on to 1000+ 3 chip minidv camcorders like myself. I'm just glad I got a used MacBook and G5 tower, no sale on the new MacBooks without firewire Apple.
Also I find USB2 external drives to be WAY slower than even firewire 400 drives. There is theoretical bandwidth and then real world, real world USB2 bandwidth sucks.
Floppies of course were dead when Apple discontinued them, firewire? Not so much...
Wow common sense, thanks! I want neither the mediocreness of a Sarah Palin running the country NOR the "meritocracy" of a currency speculator like Soros who has crashed other entire societies for fun and PROFIT, running the country either.
IMO we need someone who combines the best Liberal qualities of a Ralph Nader/FDR withe best Conservative qualities of a Dwight Eisenhower as President. Now where is that person? And would they get campaign funding if we found them?
And p.s. i just named tow white guys because they are the names that occurred to me off the top of my head PLEASE suggest people from ALL backgrounds, thanks
There is a difference between positive wherewithal for survival and plowing into another car with a family in it because you can, it's called not being a douchebag.
I'm an atheist as well, but being an atheist does NOT have to imply being immoral and self centered. For example Kant's categorical imperative says that one ought to do actions as though the outcome is going to effect you exactly like the second party, this does not involve gods, goddesses, or other unquantifiable "energies" yet does remind us to take others into consideration when we act.
I still maintain that Americans callous utterly self centered attitude and it's closely correlated greed is why we are hated in the world. And yes it does effect me and my safety should I chose to travel to the third world so thanks for being assholes, assholes!
Must we always be early adopters? I happen to abhor the sort of shallow chit chat that goes with twitter, cell phones, facebook, etc. I had a myspace account a couple years ago and let it lapse because I got tired of flashing glitter gifs and messages saying
HI I LUV YOUR PROFILE LOL! :)
Note I don't say this as a luddite a have a Macbook with XP in Parallels, 31,000 songs on my itunes, I have designed web sites since 1995, experimented with Linux since 1998, etc. However, I always reserve the right to adopt technologies or reject technologies based on my own personal criteria of for example quiet time needed to think and read. YMMV of course.
Because we live in a society that judges VERY much on style on other superficial appearance characteristics. If I am posting in an online forum I'd prefer people take my ideas seriously as ideas and not tie them to the fact that I am a balding middle age man who refuses to spend a lot of money on the latest "stylish" overpriced crap clothes made in a sweat shop in China. IMO in some ways we are past the golden age of the internet when it was more like the sort of publishing medium that allowed for anonymous broadsides like the Fderalist and anti-Federalist papers. That was possible on usenet, BBSs, and the early less visual dial up web. Would we have won the American revolution if the British had had facebook pictures of George Washington drinking a beer and consorting with a teenager to spread around the world? Pictures of him as an unattractive man with wooden teeth? I wonder...
Crashing into another car on the highway will likely result in a multiple car collusion and many deaths and injuries. Doing you best to drive off the road would only endanger yourself, thus I maintain the OPs recommended course of action is 100% selfish in nature.
Thanking you for saying something sensible and sane with a systems view when many Americans instead think like this:
http://www.gladwell.com/2004/2004_01_12_a_suv.html
Of course that IS changing with high has prices and a bad economy now, which is a silver lining to the U.S.'s otherwise dire position in the world.