Ah, okay... That's quite a strange way to put it. I think I understand now. Let's just say "new europe" = "supporting the US" and "old europe" = "warning the US not to get into this mess". It technically has nothing to do of who has greater seniority in the EU.
"old Europe" vs. "new Europe" that Rumsfeld was calling for? Old Europe was France & Germany, the new ones where the new members and Spain and Italy.
Well, then Mr. Rumsfield needs to learn his history. If we talk about "new member states", we think about the states that joined after 2000. Italy has been there since the beginning and Spain joined in 1989... that's over 15 years ago! (Member states of the EU
I do understand where you're coming from. It is clear that you know how to manage your money and have a grasp what you can and cannot do. The problem is not people like you, nor people like me: it's people that do not understand how it works and get the impression they can buy anything they want.
Those are the people that end up paying their TVs 5x....
The premise to save something before you buy, is the most healthy stance. In your scenario, you can come in serious shit in case of a job loss, unexpected high expenses, etc....
Credit cards give you flexibility, but there is a price to pay: self discipline. Many lack that, end up with huge debt. My self discipline consist in not buying stuff when I cannot afford it, your self discipline consists in managing your cedit responsibly. I can assure you that my self discipline is way easier to have than yours: the temptation isn't as big. People that have a problem with self discipline are way better on my track than on yours.
The statement was a bit extreme. However, I might point out that the discussion was about credit cards and nobody pays a house and/or car on his credit card.
I agree for big things like houses and cars. I had a loan for my car.... But for anything where you actually can use a credit card: no... There saving is superior. If you have to scrimp 5 years for a big screen TV, you are simply not in the market for one. If you need 5 years to pay off a simple consumer item, then you cannot afford it. Plain and simple. Besides, you're going to pay it over 5 times due to the interest rates! Cars and housing are different, because technically it's going to be hard to go without.
Big expensive items -> loan at bank Smaller items (inexpensive or not) -> save up till you can get it.
As said, take my "Saving is always superior to debt..." in the context of credit cards.
Ah, just in case you didn't understand my reasoning: See my reply here. Saving is always superior to debt... I just wish most people got to understand that.
I've seen many places that accept debit but don't accept credit
Must be a Candian thing. Everywhere in the US that I've been my credit card was warmly accepted, even for buying a beer in a bar... If I'd do that in Europe (where I live), they wouldn't be happy. That said, except for smaller stores, credit cards are accepted pretty much everywhere in Europe where I've been too.
If you had to go to the bank and get a consumer loan for each purchase you couldn't afford to make, you'd see a lot less people with bankruptcy problems.
Yes, that was my whole point: it is called "Financial Responsibility"... Postponing a purchase because you need to apply for a loan gives you time to overthink the purchase in question. After all, "I can't really afford it right now, but if I save three months, I can..." is really something that should be considered. You automatically do that before you apply for a consumer loan. Oh, yes, and before you ask: I am indeed 100% debt free. Well, if you don't count the few hundred euros that I have on my credit card right now. It's not really debt, after all I have them on my current account.
Credit should only be used if you don't have the cash to pay for something.
Could you please explain why I have a credit card then? I always pay everything at the end of the month.
Credit cards are handy because they are accepted everywhere and debit cards, well, often aren't. Credit Cards also have certain guarantees (Check your contract!). For example: sometimes you get extra warranty on an item you buy. That, plus I like the fact that once a month I get a bill and I can see where I did stupid things again. A 1000$ bill huts much more than 10 smaller 100$ withdrawals with a debit card.
Besides, if you cannot afford something you have two real options:
Don't buy it.
Go to the bank and ask for a loan. (There is a thing called a "Consumer Loan" for smaller items) You will much likely get better interest rates than on your credit card.
Option number "3", which is using your credit card for it and pay it off over an undetermined time is foolish and expensive. A credit card is for convenience, not to build up debt. Once you understand that, you're golden.
Oh, and if you talk about those impulse buys of 50" Plasma screens, you should reconsider your buying behavior. You do not buy a 50" Plasma screen on a whim, and that means you do have the time to go to the bank to get a real loan.
Of particular interest would be polyglots or other people with exceptional ability in communicating and understanding.
Why do you think polyglots are anything special? We're not... I speak five languages not because I wanted to learn them, but because my "survival" in the society I live in pretty much required it.
Sure, I can... I needed a new laptop though (old one was physically falling apart. It was a P-III, you'll understand it was old). I used the excuse back then, even if I bought el-cheapo laptop that wasn't even that much more expensive than a PS3.
Oh, and I only got "fashion conscious" after meeting her. I had no idea was that brand was, nor all the others she knows about... To me a bag is a bag is a bag. Won't spend much money on those if I can avoid it:-)
Why would they do that? Just wondering, I do believe you... My "impulse-buy" schema is more like this: see a product I want, wander restlessly for over 15 minutes in front of it, thinking that I'd be better of saving the money and don't really need it. Go grocery shopping, return because I reminded myself that I still had some unspent cash from Christmas and hope that wifey won't be too upset I managed wasting money again. (Usually, I can hush her by reminding her last Louis Vuitton handbag... damn, those things are expensive...)
Hmmmm, well, the problem is that people that know about DX10 are the "hardcore games". Those are the kind of people that do not mind spending 3000€ on a new machine just because the game they want to play doesn't run at least at 60fps during action sequences. Sure, there are savvy gamers, but the bunch of them are clueless lusers that only want to play games and couldn't install an operating system if their life depended on it. To them it is "DX10 is better than DX9, so I need DX10!".
Most "gamers" are idiots in regard to computers. I know, this will offend many slashdotters that consider themselves gamers, but they are only a small tiny subset of those that call themselves gamers.
I also heard (but cannot confirm) that DX10 programming has been significantly easier than DX9, so developers will jump on it as soon as they can. I also bet that DX10 programmed games will be easy to port to the XBox 360 so adding an additional audience for not much effert....
Well, true... I'm not as anti-Sony as one typically finds here on slashdot. I own a PS2 and a PSP and, yes, I have a MiniDisc player and that thing was very useful in the transition period from tapes to mp3 players.
Now, I wouldn't mind giving a PS3 a "new home", but it has to be reasonable. I only bought that PSP because I got it for 250€ with three free games. That was okay for me. A 300€ PS3? I'd probably do an impulse buy someday (even though, I like to limit that, I try to save to buy a house...). 600€? No way in hell...
I would probably have "impulse-bought" a Wii, if I had found one somewhere by accident;-) Of course, *those* shelves are always empty....
That must be the new Sony console everybody's been talking about.... especially since the PS3 flopped. The PS3 III might be the next big thing in console gaming!
Most security issues do not make popular media. I have heard the occasional big virus scare (ILoveYou, CodeRed) on the radio, but something like "Remote ANI vulnerability found in Windows - Patch your systems"? Never....
If not for microsoft, the word "rootkit" might not exist?
Is this a joke I hear whooshing past my head or are you being serious. You know that "root" part of "rootkit", it talks about the Unix superuser known as "root". The roots (pardon the pun) of a rootkit are most definitely in the Unix heritage. Look it up for yourself.
Well, I did not choose that computer. It was there before me, I just made it acceptable again. Back then I had an Apple iBook and she loved it. Alas it died of Logic Board failure and it was a pain to get my data out of it because there were no other Mac users I knew. It was around the announcement that they would switch to Intel, so buying a new one was out of the question.... putting me back in the PC world, where I have remained for cheapness sake.
As for installing applications: even if she had a Mac or even a Linux machine, it is clear that she still can be tricked in installing something bad for her. This has not anything to do with being "Adult". What it means is that it is not her area of expertise. To get back to your shoes example: she can compare there, but in software she cannot. Mainly also because software companies present their product as "the one and only". In a shoe shop, the other manufacturers shoes are next to the one she is evaluating. If you're on a website, you do not have this luxury.
So, no, normal users should not be installing applications without being informed and they are not informed mainly because it is not their area expertise. That's why system administrators have a job (and the ones you know seem to be lousy at it, because pretty much all corporate desktops that I have touched were locked down hard! That said, I work mainly in the financial sector). Evidently, a normal user has no way of hiring a (good) system administrator so we got the status quo: people administering machines without the required knowledge.
And, no, running malware, even sandboxed (meaning, it can't damage your system, nor send data over the network, which usually makes the software non-functional), for the simple reason that you should not support or even promote malware applications. That's a principle thing, not a technical limitation.
Oh, and finally, I quote you "Because both of those are huge wastes of time made necessary by MS's design choices.". That is a false statement. True windows 9x had no security and that was BAD(tm). However the NT line has had security in mind from the beginning. What really happened is that the application writers didn't bother to write software to run on machines that had user separation and probably didn't understand the system in the first place. So, even today, software is being developed that only runs as Administrator. Often completely unneeded!
Sure, Microsoft made the bad decision that the first user created was Administrator (but so does Mac OS X) thus implicitly keeping compatibility with the 9x line. That, however was no design decision. It was purely made from Marketing point of view because existing software wouldn't work anymore. This in turn didn't encourage software developers to code carefully for running Software without Admin rights. Vicious circle and all...
True, Microsoft has some responsibility, but *we*, the software developers are equally responsible.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't need the Onion for floppy raid...
Ah, okay... That's quite a strange way to put it. I think I understand now. Let's just say "new europe" = "supporting the US" and "old europe" = "warning the US not to get into this mess". It technically has nothing to do of who has greater seniority in the EU.
"old Europe" vs. "new Europe" that Rumsfeld was calling for? Old Europe was France & Germany, the new ones where the new members and Spain and Italy.
Well, then Mr. Rumsfield needs to learn his history. If we talk about "new member states", we think about the states that joined after 2000. Italy has been there since the beginning and Spain joined in 1989... that's over 15 years ago! (Member states of the EU
I do understand where you're coming from. It is clear that you know how to manage your money and have a grasp what you can and cannot do. The problem is not people like you, nor people like me: it's people that do not understand how it works and get the impression they can buy anything they want.
Those are the people that end up paying their TVs 5x....
The premise to save something before you buy, is the most healthy stance. In your scenario, you can come in serious shit in case of a job loss, unexpected high expenses, etc....
Credit cards give you flexibility, but there is a price to pay: self discipline. Many lack that, end up with huge debt. My self discipline consist in not buying stuff when I cannot afford it, your self discipline consists in managing your cedit responsibly. I can assure you that my self discipline is way easier to have than yours: the temptation isn't as big. People that have a problem with self discipline are way better on my track than on yours.
The statement was a bit extreme. However, I might point out that the discussion was about credit cards and nobody pays a house and/or car on his credit card.
I agree for big things like houses and cars. I had a loan for my car.... But for anything where you actually can use a credit card: no... There saving is superior. If you have to scrimp 5 years for a big screen TV, you are simply not in the market for one. If you need 5 years to pay off a simple consumer item, then you cannot afford it. Plain and simple. Besides, you're going to pay it over 5 times due to the interest rates! Cars and housing are different, because technically it's going to be hard to go without.
Big expensive items -> loan at bank
Smaller items (inexpensive or not) -> save up till you can get it.
As said, take my "Saving is always superior to debt..." in the context of credit cards.
Ah, just in case you didn't understand my reasoning: See my reply here. Saving is always superior to debt... I just wish most people got to understand that.
I'm still on a 38" CRT and I have no intention in changing that. It was just an example why credits aren't worth it.
I've seen many places that accept debit but don't accept credit
Must be a Candian thing. Everywhere in the US that I've been my credit card was warmly accepted, even for buying a beer in a bar... If I'd do that in Europe (where I live), they wouldn't be happy. That said, except for smaller stores, credit cards are accepted pretty much everywhere in Europe where I've been too.
If you had to go to the bank and get a consumer loan for each purchase you couldn't afford to make, you'd see a lot less people with bankruptcy problems.
Yes, that was my whole point: it is called "Financial Responsibility"... Postponing a purchase because you need to apply for a loan gives you time to overthink the purchase in question. After all, "I can't really afford it right now, but if I save three months, I can..." is really something that should be considered. You automatically do that before you apply for a consumer loan. Oh, yes, and before you ask: I am indeed 100% debt free. Well, if you don't count the few hundred euros that I have on my credit card right now. It's not really debt, after all I have them on my current account.
Credit should only be used if you don't have the cash to pay for something.
Could you please explain why I have a credit card then? I always pay everything at the end of the month.
Credit cards are handy because they are accepted everywhere and debit cards, well, often aren't. Credit Cards also have certain guarantees (Check your contract!). For example: sometimes you get extra warranty on an item you buy. That, plus I like the fact that once a month I get a bill and I can see where I did stupid things again. A 1000$ bill huts much more than 10 smaller 100$ withdrawals with a debit card.
Besides, if you cannot afford something you have two real options:
Option number "3", which is using your credit card for it and pay it off over an undetermined time is foolish and expensive. A credit card is for convenience, not to build up debt. Once you understand that, you're golden.
Oh, and if you talk about those impulse buys of 50" Plasma screens, you should reconsider your buying behavior. You do not buy a 50" Plasma screen on a whim, and that means you do have the time to go to the bank to get a real loan.
I wasn't aware that Billy Borg really had assimilation powers...
Please go read the "Logo" section in the wikipedia Article. It was a tribute to Newton... Even, I, a non-Apple users knew that.
Of particular interest would be polyglots or other people with exceptional ability in communicating and understanding.
Why do you think polyglots are anything special? We're not... I speak five languages not because I wanted to learn them, but because my "survival" in the society I live in pretty much required it.
Sure, I can... I needed a new laptop though (old one was physically falling apart. It was a P-III, you'll understand it was old). I used the excuse back then, even if I bought el-cheapo laptop that wasn't even that much more expensive than a PS3.
Oh, and I only got "fashion conscious" after meeting her. I had no idea was that brand was, nor all the others she knows about... To me a bag is a bag is a bag. Won't spend much money on those if I can avoid it :-)
Yep, mainland Europe... I didn't search hard of course... I just didn't see any where I went shopping.
Why would they do that? Just wondering, I do believe you... My "impulse-buy" schema is more like this: see a product I want, wander restlessly for over 15 minutes in front of it, thinking that I'd be better of saving the money and don't really need it. Go grocery shopping, return because I reminded myself that I still had some unspent cash from Christmas and hope that wifey won't be too upset I managed wasting money again. (Usually, I can hush her by reminding her last Louis Vuitton handbag... damn, those things are expensive...)
Hmmmm, well, the problem is that people that know about DX10 are the "hardcore games". Those are the kind of people that do not mind spending 3000€ on a new machine just because the game they want to play doesn't run at least at 60fps during action sequences. Sure, there are savvy gamers, but the bunch of them are clueless lusers that only want to play games and couldn't install an operating system if their life depended on it. To them it is "DX10 is better than DX9, so I need DX10!".
Most "gamers" are idiots in regard to computers. I know, this will offend many slashdotters that consider themselves gamers, but they are only a small tiny subset of those that call themselves gamers.
I also heard (but cannot confirm) that DX10 programming has been significantly easier than DX9, so developers will jump on it as soon as they can. I also bet that DX10 programmed games will be easy to port to the XBox 360 so adding an additional audience for not much effert....
Well, true... I'm not as anti-Sony as one typically finds here on slashdot. I own a PS2 and a PSP and, yes, I have a MiniDisc player and that thing was very useful in the transition period from tapes to mp3 players.
Now, I wouldn't mind giving a PS3 a "new home", but it has to be reasonable. I only bought that PSP because I got it for 250€ with three free games. That was okay for me. A 300€ PS3? I'd probably do an impulse buy someday (even though, I like to limit that, I try to save to buy a house...). 600€? No way in hell...
I would probably have "impulse-bought" a Wii, if I had found one somewhere by accident ;-) Of course, *those* shelves are always empty....
DirectX 10?
All DirectX versions have been adopted by games devs, very shortly after they have been released.
That's why... Then, I'm not a gamer and thus do not care.
Developing on the PS3 III
That must be the new Sony console everybody's been talking about.... especially since the PS3 flopped. The PS3 III might be the next big thing in console gaming!
Most security issues do not make popular media. I have heard the occasional big virus scare (ILoveYou, CodeRed) on the radio, but something like "Remote ANI vulnerability found in Windows - Patch your systems"? Never....
It doesn't make good mainstream news...
If not for microsoft, the word "rootkit" might not exist?
Is this a joke I hear whooshing past my head or are you being serious. You know that "root" part of "rootkit", it talks about the Unix superuser known as "root". The roots (pardon the pun) of a rootkit are most definitely in the Unix heritage. Look it up for yourself.
I don't know about Sarkozy, but Chirac was a beer-lover... So, in that context he was right.
My French is as it should be, as is my German... Yes, that is exactly what it translates into.
You saying that Walt Disney was the model for Uncle Scrooge? Makes sense somehow ;-)
Well, I did not choose that computer. It was there before me, I just made it acceptable again. Back then I had an Apple iBook and she loved it. Alas it died of Logic Board failure and it was a pain to get my data out of it because there were no other Mac users I knew. It was around the announcement that they would switch to Intel, so buying a new one was out of the question.... putting me back in the PC world, where I have remained for cheapness sake.
As for installing applications: even if she had a Mac or even a Linux machine, it is clear that she still can be tricked in installing something bad for her. This has not anything to do with being "Adult". What it means is that it is not her area of expertise. To get back to your shoes example: she can compare there, but in software she cannot. Mainly also because software companies present their product as "the one and only". In a shoe shop, the other manufacturers shoes are next to the one she is evaluating. If you're on a website, you do not have this luxury.
So, no, normal users should not be installing applications without being informed and they are not informed mainly because it is not their area expertise. That's why system administrators have a job (and the ones you know seem to be lousy at it, because pretty much all corporate desktops that I have touched were locked down hard! That said, I work mainly in the financial sector). Evidently, a normal user has no way of hiring a (good) system administrator so we got the status quo: people administering machines without the required knowledge.
And, no, running malware, even sandboxed (meaning, it can't damage your system, nor send data over the network, which usually makes the software non-functional), for the simple reason that you should not support or even promote malware applications. That's a principle thing, not a technical limitation.
Oh, and finally, I quote you "Because both of those are huge wastes of time made necessary by MS's design choices.". That is a false statement. True windows 9x had no security and that was BAD(tm). However the NT line has had security in mind from the beginning. What really happened is that the application writers didn't bother to write software to run on machines that had user separation and probably didn't understand the system in the first place. So, even today, software is being developed that only runs as Administrator. Often completely unneeded!
Sure, Microsoft made the bad decision that the first user created was Administrator (but so does Mac OS X) thus implicitly keeping compatibility with the 9x line. That, however was no design decision. It was purely made from Marketing point of view because existing software wouldn't work anymore. This in turn didn't encourage software developers to code carefully for running Software without Admin rights. Vicious circle and all...
True, Microsoft has some responsibility, but *we*, the software developers are equally responsible.