Personal computers soon be obsolete?

http://lynnsamuels.com/

Well this is interesting stuff.

But I bet the pc lobby will mount a huge counter-attack.

Just like the medical/insurance entrenched interests do with healthcare reform.

Kind of like riding the bus instead of driving your own car, right?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/jan/25/google-drive-gdrive-internet

Well OC isn't that the same thing I posted?

No, lynnsamuels.com gives me a totally blank screen. In order to get your list of stories open on lynnsamuels.com you have to go to lynnsamuels.typepad.com/. But if you go to the link, which is this case was The Guardian, a newspaper in the UK you can just copy and paste the address line.

Yeah ok I figured it out after I posted.

But why do you get a blank screen?

Because lynnsamuels.com is not the correct address. I just checked again. My status line says, "Done" and the screen is blank.

Only partisan Democrats and other lovers and believers in "nanny government" will opt for a "no hard drive" PC such as they are talkingg about.

Everyone else will say "screw that idea", I ain't about to store all my personal data on/at some web site where the Government can at anytime it wants to say "We want to see what all is stored there".

Anyway, I forsee the hard drive becoming a "thing of the past" anyway. With those read/write "flash memories" such as SanDisk sells, one really doesn't need a hard drive. And hard drives are mechanical and mechanical things are subject to failure.

Back-up and/or storage on those USB "memory sticks", that are no bigger than 3/4" wide, 1/4" thick and 2" to 4" long, is simple and damn quick compared to a CD. And you can carry them around in your pocket and plug them into any PC. To wit:

A USB flash drive consists of a NAND-type flash memory data storage device integrated with a USB (universal serial bus) interface. USB flash drives are typically removable and rewritable, much smaller than a floppy disk (1 to 4 inches or 2.5 to 10 cm), and most USB flash drives weigh less than an ounce [1].

Storage capacities typically range from 64 MB to 64 GB[2] with steady improvements in size and price per gigabyte. Some allow 1 million write or erase cycles[3][4] and have 10-year data retention,[5] connected by USB 1.1 or USB 2.0.

.

My daughter sure loves those flash drive thingies. She's got a couple of them she shuttles back & forth to school for power point presentations and notes and the like.

I agree with you totally about not storing private stuff online. Big Brother will know everything about everybody with just a couple of clicks.

Well with the bush patriot act they can look at it anyway.

It requires a whole lot more effort for the government to access my hard drive than it does your facebook or myspace or photobucket etc.

In passing the act in 2001, only 1 Senator, Russ Feingold voted against the act. Of the 398 Representatives who voted, 357 were in favor of passing the act.

In 2005, 10 Senators joined Feingold in voting against renewing the act meaning 89 still voted to keep the act while 280 Representatives voted in favor of renewing with 138 dissenting.

It's not George Bush's act. It's Washington's act and is as much a responsibility of Democrats as it is Republicans.

So when are you going to stop blaming Bush for everything?

As for computer security, I think the only guarantee is to NEVER hook it up to the internet. I'm sure once you do, if someone wants to (including big brother), they can get a peek at everything you have.

And did you also know that NSA captures every email sent and have programmed to look for certain words and phases which get flagged and reviewed?

So when are you going to stop blaming Bush for everything?

Maybe when some of you stop blaming Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton for everything ......................

I don't blame them for everything.

Just what they are responsible for.

It's not my fault your rose colored glasses can't see that Ziggy.

Unless of course you can name me one thing I've blamed them for that they ARE NOT responsible for.

Care to give it a shot?

Aaron wrote:I don't blame them for everything.

Just what they are responsible for.

It's not my fault your rose colored glasses can't see that Ziggy.

Unless of course you can name me one thing I've blamed them for that they ARE NOT responsible for.

Care to give it a shot?

Predictable response- just as I said .............................

I knew you couldn't name anything being the typical blowhard you are...

Zig is not a "blowhard."

I don't recall a single time the rightwingers have proven him wrong.

You may not agree with how he interprets the facts.

But the "facts" he cites are true.

(and I almost always agree with the way he interprets the facts as well).

But he is not a "blowhard" and I wish you could tone it down.

It does not seem to bother him, but it bothers me.

ziggy wrote:

Aaron wrote:I don't blame them for everything.

Just what they are responsible for.

It's not my fault your rose colored glasses can't see that Ziggy.

Unless of course you can name me one thing I've blamed them for that they ARE NOT responsible for.

Care to give it a shot?

Predictable response- just as I said .............................

You'll have to explain to me where the 'facts' are in Zig's response.

What I saw was him make a statement to which I answered with a challenge and instead of him answering that challenge, he came off with a flip, BS answer.

I realize he's your friend but until he 'tones' it down, I'll respond in kind and I certainly won't pull punches.

That's OK, Sodbuster.

When Aaron gets desperate he uses desperately wrong words.

When the best Aaron can say is:

So when are you going to stop blaming Bush for everything?

and then is reminded that he blames Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton for everything from the economy to blow jobs to U.S. troops being in Somolia, he claims:

I don't blame them for everything. Just what they are responsible for.

then, well, that tells us more about Aaron than about either Carter or Clinton or Ziggy!

And yet you still can't show me even one simple thing that I've blamed Carter, Clinton or Ziggy for and where they weren't responsible.

Was it the Community Reinvestment Act??

Original Act
The CRA was passed by the 95th United States Congress and signed into law by President Jimmy Carter in 1977 as a result of national pressure to address the deteriorating conditions of American cities—particularly lower-income and minority neighborhoods.

Or was it UNOSOM II?

United Nations Operation in Somalia II (UNOSOM II) was the second phase of the United Nations intervention in Somalia, from March 1993 until March 1995.

If I were wrong as often as you claim, finding one thing shouldn't be that hard.

I want to know what is wrong with laying blame where it rightfully belongs, even if we must go back decades, or a century or more to do so? I have blamed Carter for things, but I also speak about the good I know he has done since leaving office. I go back a lot further and am party blind when it comes to criticism of politicians.

I blame Richard Nixon for ending any semblance of standard based currency. I fault Herbert Hoover for disasterous policies that lead to the recession that Roosevelt turned into a depression. Although it's extremely unpopular here, I have spoken about my view that Abraham Lincoln had options other than civil war to abolish slavery in this nation.

So, keeping these things in mind, why isn't it fair to blame Clinton for steps his administration took that ultimately led to insolvency of Fannie & Freddie? Why can't I slam Kennedy & Johnson for troop build ups in Southeast Asia? Why can't I blast Roosevelt for his bad economic policies?

If we forget or even simply gloss over their poor decisions and their shitty policies things will never improve. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it, and you can't learn from history if you forget about it or hide it in the closet.

I want to know what is wrong with laying blame where it rightfully belongs, even if we must go back decades, or a century or more to do so?

Nothing is wrong with it. Heavens knows that I still loathe Lyndon Johnson with the same degree of passion that Sodbuster admires him- albeit for different reasons.

But Bush has been out of office only 8 days and I am being asked when I am going to stop blaming him for his madness in Iraq and this other big time screwups. So I point out others' continuing scorn for Carter and Clinton and others. I will not be denied my political loathings by others who flaunt theirs.

As your irrational partisan politics are hate based, I didn't ask YOU when you were going to stop blaming Bush.

I did ask Sodbuster, who while perhaps as partisan as you and sometimes irrational, has the ability to see some good in those he disagrees with and as far as I'm concerned, certainly doesn't base his beliefs on hate as you do.

And I'm STILL waiting on you to tell me what I blamed on Carter or Clinton when they weren't responsible.

So unless you are full of it, as you made the statement it shouldn't be a problem for you to come with at least one thing.