Hear, hear! If I had mod points, I'd mod you up; as it is I can only comment. It is almost impossible to find a phone which does not at least have a camera these days. Like you, I DON'T WANT A CAMERA. Make the freaking phone smaller and lighter; don't just jam more crap into it.
The thought of browsing the internet on any size phone I consider acceptable is ludicrous, regardless of the resolution. And a radio? PUHLEEEZE. I'll just haul the external speakers along too, I guess!
http://www.theboyz.biz/Your source for computers, parts, electronics, small appliances and more!
Well of COURSE it's redundant - I mean, heck, the SECOND post says exactly the same thing, right???/. gets worse and worse, and the anti-slashdotters are only making things worse, not better.
http:www.theboyz.bizYour source for computers, parts, electronics, small appliances and more!
As someone familiar with the PayPal seller side of life, I can't say why this gentleman only accepts PayPal via Credit Card. (Possibly so he can tell dissatisifed customers to talk to their card provider, who will then talk to PayPal - by which time he's transferred the money elsewhere.)
However, I _can_ tell you that the payment to the merchant is exactly the same -- it goes into their PayPal account.
And for every horror story about buyers being ripped off by PayPal, I can produce one from an equally offended seller/merchant.
If you have a dispute with us, we'll be happy to work to settle it with you; we would never leave you in the hands of PayPal. That said, we're among those merchants who transfer their PayPal payments elsewhere on a regular basis.
PayPal can - and has - frozen seller acounts, even when those accounts were well in excess of any pending disputes. Whether this is for fun or profit is just speculation (it's the ignorant company indeed which doesn't understand float in today's world).
I (personally, not in conjunction with theboyz.biz) always advise people dealing with PayPal to do so at arm's length. Open a free checking account and use it for NOTHING but PayPal verification. Then take all the money and electronically transfer it to your REAL account. REGARDLESS of whether you are a buyer or a seller.... But, like so many people tell me, "heck, honey 'chile, I've done it a thousand time 'afore and 'taint nothing ever happened". Well, ok, there's a bit of paraphrasing there.;)
http://www.theboyz.biz/Your source for computers, parts, electronics, small appliances and more!
Speaking of not understanding, I _definitely_ don't understand the "not enough to call my CC company over" remark.
I've disputed smaller charges than that. How much does it cost to make that toll-free phone call, or log onto their website and click on 'dispute this transaction'?
If you have a reputable card provider, and you are in the right, you *will*, in all probability, prevail in the dispute, And the most that you'll have to do is fill out a form explaining the situation.
Think of it as $70 pay for 5 minutes work, and how much sense does it make to pass it up, phrased that way?
http://www.theboyz.biz/Your source for computers, parts, electronics, small appliances and more!
You do make some good points. Your first point in particular is valid, and good for those people who want to minimize the number of sites which potentially store their card in a hackable database. (We're very careful to _never_ write card numbers to disk.)
However, I believe your presentation is somewhat biased. Yes, fraud rates _are_ quantifiable. However, not all merchant accounts are created equal -- nor are the settings a merchant chooses to enable on that account.
Likewise, _some_ merchant accounts have higher fees than PayPal. (PayPal used to be much more competititve in this regard.) However, we actually pay more for our PayPal transactions than for our gateway account. AND we have no control over things like AVS / CVV/CV2 verification and the like.
None of the gateway solutions I've implemented have required any expensive custom programming. All of the merchant accounts we have dealt with have offered us their software (for a fee, of course), or have a large number of pre-approved packages they will support. Since our site is based on the OSS osCommerce package (well - very loosely, now;), it took more work to get PayPal IPNs working than it did to turn on the appropriate gateway module for our merchant account!
For us it comes down to customer choice. Some customers want to use PayPal (for whatever reason). Some prefer to use their credit card directly (ditto). As long as it doesn't _hugely_ increase our risk exposure - or cost us too much money - we're more than happy to offer additional choices.
But I'd suggest that another look at merchant accounts might demonstrate different conclusions than those you presented. <shrug>
http://www.theboyz.biz/Your source for computers, parts, electronics, small appliances and more!
While it's arguable that PayPal may be no better in those regards, I'd rather have my credit card data in less places than more.
Good point. Personally, I lament the day that American Express killed the program to generate single-use 'e-card' numbers. I wish more card issuers would provide this type of service -- and would go so far as to predict that credit card 'numbers' will one-day be exactly such a digitally-signed, one-time-use token, generated by a chip on the card itself.
http://www.theboyz.biz/Your source for computers, parts, electronics, small applicances and more!
From the e-tailer point of view, we added PayPal for the convenience of our customers. And a substantial percentage of our total orders are settled that way - even though we *do* take credit cards.
*WHY* people use PayPal? Well, there are those who don't have credit cards, to start. (I had a bank account _long_ before I got my first credit card, many years ago though that was.) Beyond that, there have always been people who, for whatever reason, prefer to e.g. write checks, or use their debit card. PayPal is/can be the on-line equivalent. Not to mention literally thousands of reasons of which I haven't thought.;)
http://www.theboyz.biz/Your source for computers, parts, electronics, small applicances and more!
- So, people can make modifications, host their - own versions, and not be in violation of the - terms of the GPL, although they are usually - in violation of the spirit of the GPL.
I have to take offense at that, given that I've spent the last four months hacking a GPL'd project - osCommerce - and have not / do not plan to make the source code available.
Why? Because the code is so hacked, and so site-specific, that little benefit would accrue to the OSS community. Even if I DID publish, odds are nobody would be interested in this 'fork', as it's not nearly as clean, nor as upgradable, as the base package.
I do NOT feel that this is against the spirit of the GPL, and, in fact, did recently contribute some of my changes in an area where there were no pre-existing contributions. It only took 3x as long to make the changes, compare them against a clean install and write documentation as it would have to just make the changes - time I could be using to reduce the 'todo' list of pending site changes. (I have also written and contributed to OSS projects in the past.)
Companies that want to 'privatize' their GPL modifications generally have perfectly legal ways to so do. There are many valid reasons for using GPL code and not redistributing [all of] the source. In this case, there is business logic - and hence trade secrets - built into the code.
We've had the xxx TWIN barebones servers, cases and motherboards in our catalog for some time. (We've even managed to get some of them showing on our website.;)
Ok, so it's a blatant plug -- the point remains, this is NOT a new story. Don't know why I'm surprised at that, though - this IS slashdot....
[URL:http://www.theboyz.biz] Computers, Electronics and More!
Unfortunately for WalMart, this is NOT true. Uncashed gift certificates are typicall subject to escheet laws -- meaning that if they haven't been used in some period of time (two years in some states), the money must be given _to the state_.
The only thing they have going for them is the interst they can raise on the uncashed cards. (Except in states not subject to escheet law.)
Stored value cards are _NOT_ the same as debit cards, in many important respects. For one, the customer CANNOT get cash from the card.
Stored value cards are classed exactly the same as paper gift certificates, as that is what they are. (They are also subject to escheet laws in most states.)
I was part of a small team which created the first such card - Blockbusters - and am still amazed at how fast they've proliferated.
I find myself wondering how many 'war-chalkers' actually attempt to *use* the suppoedly open networks they encounter.
Drive by my house, and you'll see what looks like an unsecured access point -- until you run into the firewall rules which bounce anything that isn't coming across a VPN. (Not that it matters, at least 5 of my neighbors have unsecured APs.;)
Lots of people talking about 'how-to', but nobody really answering your question. Typical slashdot...
The advantages of thin clients in this type of environment are many. It's almost impossible for a user to screw up what is effectively nothing but a terminal.
Downsides would include the need for a more expensive server on the back-end, as all the horsepower now has to reside in one place. Also, when the server dies, _everybody_ dies.
And if you use commodity hardware for the thin client, it can be harder to lock things down on the client end. General rule of thumb is NO drives of any kind with the client configured to boot across the network.
Many people have suggested the SunRay, and it's hard to argue with that - it's one of the first thin clients that's really usable (IMHO).
OT, but as I discovered a few months ago, if you're relying on your airbags to deploy, good luck! New Honda - less than a year old - almost directly into the side of an idiot driver. The angle of the impact was not off by more than 3 degrees from center, top.
My comment when my girlfriend said something a bit after the accident about 'the airbags didn't deploy', to which my immediate reply was 'your car has airbags'?
In discussing the issue with a variety of body-shop people (long story there), it appears that these components are _notoriously_ unreliable.
PERHAPS not quite as bad as Internet Explorer -- but I'd put more faith in the ABS and your ability to drive around and accident, personaly.
>> I think that having experts able to review each line of code checked in and put into production defeats the whole idea of using Open Source: at that point, you might as well just hire the experts to write the code in the first place and eliminate the vector all together.
Oh, please. Like anyone is going to let just anybody check code into ANY project, let alone one dealing with high-tech weapons.
I could duplicate your scenario much more easily in the closed source world, where an employee of the sub-contractor snuck code in that was never even peer-reviewed, let alone made available for whoever wanted to look at it.
Several people have offered good advice vis-a-vis the 70 page document. Keep it short, simple (facts and writing level) and heavily biased.;)
It also helps, particularly if you are a known Linux advocate, if you can find a relatively senior person who is sympathetic to your cause, and have them present the idea as if it were their own.
It's beyond sad that politics should enter into the realm of logic, but it's also inescapable....
Perhaps, but the 'cost of cleanup' from most 'little pea gravel [spots]' is the energy to lug the bike upright and continue down the road, perhaps with some road rash. In 20 years, I've only encountered one situation on the bike that I could have negotiated in the car, but could not on the bike. That involved an oil slick and a descending S-curve. And I rode away from that one.
As for noise, I have to keep the radio on my bimmer cranked if anyone is going to hear me. 'Blipping' the throttle to warn some errant driver in the next lane is almost completely ineffective, as the bike just doesn't make enough noise.
On some days I might lean towards agreement with "loud pipes save lifes", but I've never been a Harley fan to begin with (I prefer a bike I can actually ride, when, where and for however long I choose). But don't get me started on Harleys vs. real motorcycles.;)
Getting futher off topic;), the usual justification for helmet laws is the cost of maintaining the vegetable formerly known as a rider. The cost of cleanup is typically less than an auto accident, if it comes to that.
Since I'd rather not become said veggie, I wear a helmet even though it is not _really_ required by my state (which specifies "adequate head protection", but does not define same).
Either way, though, helmetless or not, I'm not likely to injure you inside your huge steel wrapper, so why do you care if I'm an organ donor? (I am, but that's beside the point.)
Every day people perform activities which have much more inherent risk than not wearing a helmet on a motorcycle. Would you have all of those people be requisite organ donors, as well?
As a long-time rider, I can assure you that any bike rider's biggest safety risk is _ALWAYS_ the unexpected. This is just as true in racing (what happens when the lead bike blows a gasket?) as it is in street riding.
Although Elena's site focuses more on the result than the process, I get the impression that she is an experienced rider, and thus cannot fail to be aware of that.
There ARE only two kinds of motorcycle riders, after all -- those that have had accidents, and those that will. (And the two are NOT mutually exclusive, what's worse.;)
But one doesn't ride a motorcycle because one is concerned about one's safety among all else, either....
(I echo an earlier poster's sentiments about the appeal of women who ride!)
Unfortunately, the best hope for ubiquitous encryption -- O.E. via FreeSWAN -- does not appear to have caught on.
Then again, how many people have access to their reverse DNS information?
Then, too, there is _NO WAY_ I am going to be able to send an encrypted message to my mother, unless the process is COMPLETELY transparent.
In the case of a lot of users, that implies support built into WinDoze. And frankly, I wouldn't trust that any such support did NOT contain a government-enabled back-door.
I've ridden a motorcycle in jeans/slacks/shorts for over 20 years now. Heck, I bought some sandals specifically because they leave my feet bare, but still have a pad under the shift lever. (Note that I ride year round, including commuting, not just two weekends in the summer.)
Now, I've just checked, and I _can_ still hear my own voice, so I haven't been struck dumb yet. And I've been called stupid over more inane issues....
I can live with a little rash, particularly when the alternative is wearing full leathers in 90+ degree temps. If I lay it down hard enough to do more than rip holes in my skin, I have bigger problems, leathers or no.
Heck, I was just in a car accident two days ago, where a car turned left in front of us. If we'd have been on the bike, we'd both be in the hospital (at best), even in full battle dress conditions, including kevlar and crash plates.
Everyone has their own level of risk aversion. Personally, I think the two guys hanging from the sheer rock wall in the Mastercard commercial are freaking nuts. But I also fly airplanes, enjoy skydiving, and am thinking about learning to fly rotocraft (among other risks).
You're certainly entitled to your opinion, howver ill-informed it may be. However, perhaps you ought to learn something about the subject before you make such sweeping statements? By your own admission you don't ride (and likely never have, from the sounds of it).
You don't have to recompile the kernel - just don't load the modules. How hard is that? Many modern distros come with all the modules pre-compiled; the only thing I had to add to my latest install was FreeS/Wan.
Some do, sure. But like any other establishment, you're at the mercy of what they decide to offer for an exchange rate. And if you've just been visiting the coffee shop, what are the odds you'll notice how badly you've just been ripped off in the exchange?
Slashdot Mirror
Hear, hear! If I had mod points, I'd mod you up; as it is I can only comment. It is almost impossible to find a phone which does not at least have a camera these days. Like you, I DON'T WANT A CAMERA. Make the freaking phone smaller and lighter; don't just jam more crap into it.
The thought of browsing the internet on any size phone I consider acceptable is ludicrous, regardless of the resolution. And a radio? PUHLEEEZE. I'll just haul the external speakers along too, I guess!
http://www.theboyz.biz/Your source for computers, parts, electronics, small appliances and more!
Well of COURSE it's redundant - I mean, heck, the SECOND post says exactly the same thing, right??? /. gets worse and worse, and the anti-slashdotters are only making things worse, not better.
http:www.theboyz.bizYour source for computers, parts, electronics, small appliances and more!
As someone familiar with the PayPal seller side of life, I can't say why this gentleman only accepts PayPal via Credit Card. (Possibly so he can tell dissatisifed customers to talk to their card provider, who will then talk to PayPal - by which time he's transferred the money elsewhere.)
;)
However, I _can_ tell you that the payment to the merchant is exactly the same -- it goes into their PayPal account.
And for every horror story about buyers being ripped off by PayPal, I can produce one from an equally offended seller/merchant.
If you have a dispute with us, we'll be happy to work to settle it with you; we would never leave you in the hands of PayPal. That said, we're among those merchants who transfer their PayPal payments elsewhere on a regular basis.
PayPal can - and has - frozen seller acounts, even when those accounts were well in excess of any pending disputes. Whether this is for fun or profit is just speculation (it's the ignorant company indeed which doesn't understand float in today's world).
I (personally, not in conjunction with theboyz.biz) always advise people dealing with PayPal to do so at arm's length. Open a free checking account and use it for NOTHING but PayPal verification. Then take all the money and electronically transfer it to your REAL account. REGARDLESS of whether you are a buyer or a seller.... But, like so many people tell me, "heck, honey 'chile, I've done it a thousand time 'afore and 'taint nothing ever happened". Well, ok, there's a bit of paraphrasing there.
http://www.theboyz.biz/Your source for computers, parts, electronics, small appliances and more!
Speaking of not understanding, I _definitely_ don't understand the "not enough to call my CC company over" remark.
I've disputed smaller charges than that. How much does it cost to make that toll-free phone call, or log onto their website and click on 'dispute this transaction'?
If you have a reputable card provider, and you are in the right, you *will*, in all probability, prevail in the dispute, And the most that you'll have to do is fill out a form explaining the situation.
Think of it as $70 pay for 5 minutes work, and how much sense does it make to pass it up, phrased that way?
http://www.theboyz.biz/Your source for computers, parts, electronics, small appliances and more!
You do make some good points. Your first point in particular is valid, and good for those people who want to minimize the number of sites which potentially store their card in a hackable database. (We're very careful to _never_ write card numbers to disk.)
;), it took more work to get PayPal IPNs working than it did to turn on the appropriate gateway module for our merchant account!
However, I believe your presentation is somewhat biased. Yes, fraud rates _are_ quantifiable. However, not all merchant accounts are created equal -- nor are the settings a merchant chooses to enable on that account.
Likewise, _some_ merchant accounts have higher fees than PayPal. (PayPal used to be much more competititve in this regard.) However, we actually pay more for our PayPal transactions than for our gateway account. AND we have no control over things like AVS / CVV/CV2 verification and the like.
None of the gateway solutions I've implemented have required any expensive custom programming. All of the merchant accounts we have dealt with have offered us their software (for a fee, of course), or have a large number of pre-approved packages they will support. Since our site is based on the OSS osCommerce package (well - very loosely, now
For us it comes down to customer choice. Some customers want to use PayPal (for whatever reason). Some prefer to use their credit card directly (ditto). As long as it doesn't _hugely_ increase our risk exposure - or cost us too much money - we're more than happy to offer additional choices.
But I'd suggest that another look at merchant accounts might demonstrate different conclusions than those you presented. <shrug>
http://www.theboyz.biz/Your source for computers, parts, electronics, small appliances and more!
While it's arguable that PayPal may be no better in those regards, I'd rather have my credit card data in less places than more.
Good point. Personally, I lament the day that American Express killed the program to generate single-use 'e-card' numbers. I wish more card issuers would provide this type of service -- and would go so far as to predict that credit card 'numbers' will one-day be exactly such a digitally-signed, one-time-use token, generated by a chip on the card itself.
http://www.theboyz.biz/Your source for computers, parts, electronics, small applicances and more!
From the e-tailer point of view, we added PayPal for the convenience of our customers. And a substantial percentage of our total orders are settled that way - even though we *do* take credit cards.
;)
*WHY* people use PayPal? Well, there are those who don't have credit cards, to start. (I had a bank account _long_ before I got my first credit card, many years ago though that was.) Beyond that, there have always been people who, for whatever reason, prefer to e.g. write checks, or use their debit card. PayPal is/can be the on-line equivalent. Not to mention literally thousands of reasons of which I haven't thought.
http://www.theboyz.biz/Your source for computers, parts, electronics, small applicances and more!
If it isn't a religous argument, it's about _ETHICS_, nor _MORALS_. Same thing, different motivations.
http:www.theboyz.biz
- So, people can make modifications, host their
- own versions, and not be in violation of the
- terms of the GPL, although they are usually
- in violation of the spirit of the GPL.
I have to take offense at that, given that I've spent the last four months hacking a GPL'd project - osCommerce - and have not / do not plan to make the source code available.
Why? Because the code is so hacked, and so site-specific, that little benefit would accrue to the OSS community. Even if I DID publish, odds are nobody would be interested in this 'fork', as it's not nearly as clean, nor as upgradable, as the base package.
I do NOT feel that this is against the spirit of the GPL, and, in fact, did recently contribute some of my changes in an area where there were no pre-existing contributions. It only took 3x as long to make the changes, compare them against a clean install and write documentation as it would have to just make the changes - time I could be using to reduce the 'todo' list of pending site changes. (I have also written and contributed to OSS projects in the past.)
Companies that want to 'privatize' their GPL modifications generally have perfectly legal ways to so do. There are many valid reasons for using GPL code and not redistributing [all of] the source. In this case, there is business logic - and hence trade secrets - built into the code.
Your new source for computers, parts, electronics and more!
We've had the xxx TWIN barebones servers, cases and motherboards in our catalog for some time. (We've even managed to get some of them showing on our website. ;)
Ok, so it's a blatant plug -- the point remains, this is NOT a new story. Don't know why I'm surprised at that, though - this IS slashdot....
[URL:http://www.theboyz.biz] Computers, Electronics and More!
Unfortunately for WalMart, this is NOT true. Uncashed gift certificates are typicall subject to escheet laws -- meaning that if they haven't been used in some period of time (two years in some states), the money must be given _to the state_.
The only thing they have going for them is the interst they can raise on the uncashed cards. (Except in states not subject to escheet law.)
Stored value cards are _NOT_ the same as debit cards, in many important respects. For one, the customer CANNOT get cash from the card.
Stored value cards are classed exactly the same as paper gift certificates, as that is what they are. (They are also subject to escheet laws in most states.)
I was part of a small team which created the first such card - Blockbusters - and am still amazed at how fast they've proliferated.
http://www.theboyz.biz/ - Your source for computers, parts and more!
Healthcare?!? And you have to wait _HOW_ long for an appointment to see anything being a GP?
I find myself wondering how many 'war-chalkers' actually attempt to *use* the suppoedly open networks they encounter.
;)
Drive by my house, and you'll see what looks like an unsecured access point -- until you run into the firewall rules which bounce anything that isn't coming across a VPN. (Not that it matters, at least 5 of my neighbors have unsecured APs.
http://www.theboyz.biz/ Your source for computer parts and more!
Lots of people talking about 'how-to', but nobody really answering your question. Typical slashdot...
The advantages of thin clients in this type of environment are many. It's almost impossible for a user to screw up what is effectively nothing but a terminal.
Downsides would include the need for a more expensive server on the back-end, as all the horsepower now has to reside in one place. Also, when the server dies, _everybody_ dies.
And if you use commodity hardware for the thin client, it can be harder to lock things down on the client end. General rule of thumb is NO drives of any kind with the client configured to boot across the network.
Many people have suggested the SunRay, and it's hard to argue with that - it's one of the first thin clients that's really usable (IMHO).
http://www.theboyz.biz/ Computer parts & more!
OT, but as I discovered a few months ago, if you're relying on your airbags to deploy, good luck! New Honda - less than a year old - almost directly into the side of an idiot driver. The angle of the impact was not off by more than 3 degrees from center, top.
My comment when my girlfriend said something a bit after the accident about 'the airbags didn't deploy', to which my immediate reply was 'your car has airbags'?
In discussing the issue with a variety of body-shop people (long story there), it appears that these components are _notoriously_ unreliable.
PERHAPS not quite as bad as Internet Explorer -- but I'd put more faith in the ABS and your ability to drive around and accident, personaly.
>> I think that having experts able to review each line of code checked in and put into production defeats the whole idea of using Open Source: at that point, you might as well just hire the experts to write the code in the first place and eliminate the vector all together.
Oh, please. Like anyone is going to let just anybody check code into ANY project, let alone one dealing with high-tech weapons.
I could duplicate your scenario much more easily in the closed source world, where an employee of the sub-contractor snuck code in that was never even peer-reviewed, let alone made available for whoever wanted to look at it.
http://www.theboyz.biz/Your source for computer parts and more!
Several people have offered good advice vis-a-vis the 70 page document. Keep it short, simple (facts and writing level) and heavily biased. ;)
It also helps, particularly if you are a known Linux advocate, if you can find a relatively senior person who is sympathetic to your cause, and have them present the idea as if it were their own.
It's beyond sad that politics should enter into the realm of logic, but it's also inescapable....
Perhaps, but the 'cost of cleanup' from most 'little pea gravel [spots]' is the energy to lug the bike upright and continue down the road, perhaps with some road rash. In 20 years, I've only encountered one situation on the bike that I could have negotiated in the car, but could not on the bike. That involved an oil slick and a descending S-curve. And I rode away from that one.
;)
As for noise, I have to keep the radio on my bimmer cranked if anyone is going to hear me. 'Blipping' the throttle to warn some errant driver in the next lane is almost completely ineffective, as the bike just doesn't make enough noise.
On some days I might lean towards agreement with "loud pipes save lifes", but I've never been a Harley fan to begin with (I prefer a bike I can actually ride, when, where and for however long I choose). But don't get me started on Harleys vs. real motorcycles.
Getting futher off topic ;), the usual justification for helmet laws is the cost of maintaining the vegetable formerly known as a rider. The cost of cleanup is typically less than an auto accident, if it comes to that.
Since I'd rather not become said veggie, I wear a helmet even though it is not _really_ required by my state (which specifies "adequate head protection", but does not define same).
Either way, though, helmetless or not, I'm not likely to injure you inside your huge steel wrapper, so why do you care if I'm an organ donor? (I am, but that's beside the point.)
Every day people perform activities which have much more inherent risk than not wearing a helmet on a motorcycle. Would you have all of those people be requisite organ donors, as well?
As a long-time rider, I can assure you that any bike rider's biggest safety risk is _ALWAYS_ the unexpected. This is just as true in racing (what happens when the lead bike blows a gasket?) as it is in street riding.
;)
Although Elena's site focuses more on the result than the process, I get the impression that she is an experienced rider, and thus cannot fail to be aware of that.
There ARE only two kinds of motorcycle riders, after all -- those that have had accidents, and those that will. (And the two are NOT mutually exclusive, what's worse.
But one doesn't ride a motorcycle because one is concerned about one's safety among all else, either....
(I echo an earlier poster's sentiments about the appeal of women who ride!)
Unfortunately, the best hope for ubiquitous encryption -- O.E. via FreeSWAN -- does not appear to have caught on.
Then again, how many people have access to their reverse DNS information?
Then, too, there is _NO WAY_ I am going to be able to send an encrypted message to my mother, unless the process is COMPLETELY transparent.
In the case of a lot of users, that implies support built into WinDoze. And frankly, I wouldn't trust that any such support did NOT contain a government-enabled back-door.
Can you say Catch-22?
I've ridden a motorcycle in jeans/slacks/shorts for over 20 years now. Heck, I bought some sandals specifically because they leave my feet bare, but still have a pad under the shift lever. (Note that I ride year round, including commuting, not just two weekends in the summer.)
Now, I've just checked, and I _can_ still hear my own voice, so I haven't been struck dumb yet. And I've been called stupid over more inane issues....
I can live with a little rash, particularly when the alternative is wearing full leathers in 90+ degree temps. If I lay it down hard enough to do more than rip holes in my skin, I have bigger problems, leathers or no.
Heck, I was just in a car accident two days ago, where a car turned left in front of us. If we'd have been on the bike, we'd both be in the hospital (at best), even in full battle dress conditions, including kevlar and crash plates.
Everyone has their own level of risk aversion. Personally, I think the two guys hanging from the sheer rock wall in the Mastercard commercial are freaking nuts. But I also fly airplanes, enjoy skydiving, and am thinking about learning to fly rotocraft (among other risks).
You're certainly entitled to your opinion, howver ill-informed it may be. However, perhaps you ought to learn something about the subject before you make such sweeping statements? By your own admission you don't ride (and likely never have, from the sounds of it).
You don't have to recompile the kernel - just don't load the modules. How hard is that? Many modern distros come with all the modules pre-compiled; the only thing I had to add to my latest install was FreeS/Wan.
Some do, sure. But like any other establishment, you're at the mercy of what they decide to offer for an exchange rate. And if you've just been visiting the coffee shop, what are the odds you'll notice how badly you've just been ripped off in the exchange?