wfunction

Googling should provide plenty of answers to this question, but I'll quote a couple differences here for your convenience:

1. "According to the EFTA, your potential liability for fraudulent debit card transactions is virtually unlimited. Under the FCBA, your maximum liability for fraudulent credit card transactions is $50." [1]

2. "The real difference between a debit card and a credit card when it comes to fraud is in how you get your money back. When a fraudulent transaction occurs on your credit card, you have lost no money. You can report the fraud, get a credit on your statement, and the issue will never affect your bank account. With a debit card, your bank account balance is affected from the moment the fraudulent transaction takes place. If the transactions are significant, you could experience a domino effect of financial headaches. Fraudulent charges can tie up funds so that legitimate charges are declined or cause overdrafts." [1]

3. Individual credit cards have other protections for your purchases, e.g. Citi has Price Rewind and Extended Warranty for your purchases. I haven't seen these with debit cards, and I'd be happy to hear if you know of any that do have these features. But it's icing on the cake anyway; the above are far more important.

4. A number of credit cards allow generating temporary card numbers with limited amounts or expiration dates for online purchases. I use this all the time. Again, I haven't seen any debit cards that allow this.

[1] https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/credit-cards/credit-card-vs-...

What percentage of those carrying a balance are living in debt though? Like even someone with perfect credit and means to pay would happily take advantage of a 0% balance transfer offer to carry a balance for a couple of years when he could pay it off fully. I would be curious what percentages of these revolving balances are due to a strict lack of funds rather than due to wanting to keep emergency cash on hand, or taking advantage of a sensible offer, or otherwise.

That said, even 35% is more than a third of the population, which should be more than enough reason to suggest you shouldn't be telling everyone you meet not to get a credit card. The consumer protection is far greater, and it's far less risky than carrying a debit card. (I would be surprised if anyone here didn't know these already, but then I'm surprised at the advice being given.)

I don't think you answered my question. I'm trying to say that people use credit cards even when they have the money and aren't going into any kind of debt.

Do you think your advice generalizes though? Do you really think most people who have a credit card go into debt because of it?

> In fact, a significant majority do not lose free agency; should they all be restricted because some people can't handle it?

What's the difference between this argument and "why should I have to pay for the insurance of others who get sick? should we all have to pay because a few can't live a healthy life?"?

> Apple has never worked with any government agency from any country to create a backdoor in any of our products or services.

Is there any reason for them to not automatically generalize this to "...with any entity from any country"? I'm wondering about a case where a government agency hides behind some other veil and makes Apple insert some backdoor.

> A Linux workstation at the very least involves X

That's kind of a strange comment given that in these very same comment boxes the most ardent *nix users tend to bash the entire concept of GUI (no pun intended) and just assert that a command-line interface is the right way to use a computer.

>> Wasn't that the first beta release of insider? I thought they fixed inode support

> They did. My point was that I just don't want to encounter bugs.

What an awful response. If that's the problem you have then the solution is that you don't run beta software. You're not really making a sensible point by citing bugs in explicitly-marked-as-beta software as a reason to avoid release software that has already fixed those bugs. I would give the final version a try before complaining about nonexistent bugs.

Ah okay, awesome.

Would you mind elaborating a bit? What's the exact functionality that's required? Is it like notification support for file modification or something?

> What they should say is, they will never transfer the unencrypted data to a third party, and will never enable a third party with the encrypted data to decrypt it.

Doesn't really work... they can send the encrypted data to Y and the encryption key to Z so that Y and Z can make their own agreements.

These two articles went around a while ago (Microsoft, Pinterest):

[1] https://www.theverge.com/2016/3/18/11262888

[2] https://qz.com/659196

> Windows 10 is much better but unfortunately not everyone is on that OS yet.

Implying Windows 8.1 has security problems... what are they?

Thanks, but see my reply to a sibling comment -- Paint.NET falls a bit short on all counts actually.

Oh, I didn't realize that! Thanks for the clarification!

To be honest Paint.NET fails on all counts, many because of the .NET aspect:

- It starts up in what I'm eyeballing to be around 750ms on my computer, which is I guess common these days, but nothing like Paint (which looks practically instant to me). And on a machine with a hard disk (yes, these still exist, and I know people who have them and would need to use something like this on them) I'm projecting a much longer startup time, at least for a cold start.

- It doesn't quite look or feel native, but explaining this is like trying to explain the different between Arial and Verdana in a comment box. :-) You just have to be able to see it and notice the subtle UI transitions, and if you're the kind that doesn't notice, then more power to you... unfortunately some of us can't "un-see" these now. ;) I'd say the "look" part might be visible to you in the font smoothing in [1], which makes me want to poke my eyes out; the "feel" part I can't really show, but the buttons just don't animate the same. This is all because .NET just never looks or feels quite native. This becomes more of an issue when tools meant to deal with Win32 windows fail to work with "custom" windows, but I don't have an example off-hand.

- It's not something I'd say my grandma can use. There are 4 separate tool windows and 7 menus with a History panel and a "Hardness" control and such (never mind "resampling" and all that)... all of which is pretty confusing/foreign and quite a cognitive overload compared to Paint for someone who's used to that. So I'd have a much harder time guiding people through using Paint.NET than Paint.

[1] http://imgur.com/hIIHq2x

I never use the calculator except on a brand new installation where I have to compute sector offsets or something.

Use the PowerToy calculator from Windows XP. You can either run it in compatibility mode or patch it so that it doesn't check the Windows version (exercise left for the reader).

Alternatively, use a third-party program like SpeedCrunch.

This is awful. I use Paint all the time. Anyone know of a comparable alternative? (I mean that starts up in a blink, that my grandma could use, and that can do more or less everything Paint can. Very much preferably not depending on frameworks like Java or .NET or Python, since none of those start in a blink, and they also often don't feel "native", if you know how to notice that kind of thing.)

Dude, put down your guns and chill out a bit? When you said "obtaining rocket fuel on a given rocky planet" and "springboard to the wider universe" I naturally assumed you meant launching a rocket from Venus's surface, not making a colony in the upper atmosphere. That seemed quite reasonable to me, but obviously not to you. So you replied with a snarky comment telling me to read the literature of Venusian colonies (which wasn't even the topic), and after you changed the subject, I asked what makes YOU think we could actually build one when we haven't even had anything like it on Earth. (I emphasize YOU because you had asked us to convince YOU, not some random researcher in NASA.) My comment there wasn't sarcastic; it was a completely serious comment that did consider the fact that people have been researching the idea seriously.

I stand by it: just because people are proposing the idea of a base over Venus seriously that doesn't mean much about its feasibility compared to a base on the moon, and just because one person is convinced something is possible, that doesn't mean another person will be. (As a more Earthly example of this, I might respect Elon Musk, and I know he knows what he's talking about more than I ever will, but that still doesn't mean I'm convinced the Hyperloop is as feasible as he seemed to think. I still respect the idea and will take it seriously if he does, but that doesn't mean I'm convinced by it in any way. Same here.)

Now, instead of firing all your cannons at me and flaming me, I suggest you calm down and take a walk before replying, so we can be a little more civil here. If you're already an expert on the topic, maybe explain a little more of what you already know and why you do/don't find it convincing when you're asking your question, so the rest of us plebeians have a foundation to build on that you won't find "offensive".

It's not really about budgeting or tracking your expenses, rather it's about (1) making it easier to search for the exact amount and having the payment pop up (e.g. in one shot in your email inbox, in some cases) when others ask you if they paid, and (2) avoiding a misunderstanding where someone asks you if they reimbursed you for something a few weeks later and you say "no" because the amount you looked for didn't match what they actually paid you.

Addendum: One useful thing I've found about reimbursing (note: NOT splitting, which is what you were talking about) some other bills down to the penny is that it makes it much easier to search for them afterward if you want to figure out whether you remembered to pay for them. Like if you buy someone dinner and they insist on paying, don't round $10.49 down to $10 or up to $11. Because then you have different numbers showing up on different accounts (credit card statement vs. bank statement vs. Venmo/whatever) and it makes it harder to see if you remembered to pay for it or not.

Aside from the social awkwardness/pettiness, it doesn't really work for typical bill splitting anyway, since it's not like they would remember what amount to search for, given that usually the person paying has the only receipt. Where this method really shines is when someone is reimbursing you in a bulk/lump payment -- in that case it's far more valuable to know that the actual amount was $304.01 instead of just something rounded to $300, since then it'll be a lot more work to figure out if that payment included a $6.23 item or another $7.98 item or whatever.

When was the last time you saw a hovering colony on Earth that now you think we could make one on Venus?

> I've never heard a particularly convincing argument for using the Moon as a springboard to the wider universe as opposed to Venus

The mere fact that Venus has a thick CO2 atmosphere surrounding a surface with a temperature 872°F should be more than convincing, let alone the 90 atmosphere pressure and sulfuric acid clouds and all the other icing on the cake.

I would love to know too, though I wouldn't be surprised if the genuine answer is that most of it can't really be put into words.

Is the game that data-intensive? What data is there to send/receive that you're comparing it with streaming video?

I've seen them around alright, just not realized how common or easy-to-set-up they might be for an event like this, or how they work from an inter-provider standpoint. Do they not cost a whole ton for the organization setting up the event, and wouldn't every provider (T-Mobile, AT&T, etc.) be required to set one up? It seems like such a massive headache and cost for something like a Pokemon-catching crowd that might not even generate much revenue(?) that I'm confused how everyone is saying "just deploy extra capacity". Like do providers just follow crowded events for free and put antennas wherever people are as if it's no big deal?

How do you just "deploy extra capacity"? Do they install new antennas just for an event?

This is awesome. The one question on my mind is: is there really no barrier to doing this, like regulation of some kind? I would imagine there's an added fire risk with that kind of battery at home?

> the national parks are almost fully funded by the people that visit them.

Source on this? I feel like if this was already the case then the issue of cutting national park funding wouldn't be such a big deal, and yet it is.

I agree with you entirely about the success but I don't think that implies a lack of a failure. Yes, the entire point of a park is for people to visit, and I love that people are doing that, but "visiting" a public place is not the same as trashing it. Especially given that there are rare flora there -- the point is for people to be able to enjoy them, not destroy them. How do you respond to that? Do you just think "who cares about rare plants, just plant grass or everyday flowers or something", or do you think there's value to having something less commonplace? Obviously these all need care, and fining people doesn't really fix the problem of letting the plants grow, since when the crowd is large there's always going to be someone messing something up, even if it's a small percentage of the people.