Jim ((C.A.B.))

I've got a relatively new Windows 7 laptop. Previously, I had an XP desktop computer. It was old, and the UAC settings didn't exist on it. Now, with this ridiculously strict user account control, I barely have the power to perform basic actions on my own computer without it telling me I "don't have permission". Just a few minutes ago, for example, I wished to move a file on my desktop into a folder on my desktop. Just a plain old typical moving of a file to a folder. But the stupid UAC won't even let me do that! I get a "you must have administrator permission" message. :C

Seriously, how can I tone down (or shut off - that would be better!) these overly-protective security controls?? It's to the point where I can barely use my own desktop and documents folders without running into problems!

http://news.yahoo.com/video/world-15749633/controv...

Televangelist Pat Robertson has publicly made a disgusting, blasphemous comment on what he believes is the reason behind the tragic earthquake that has killed immeasurable thousands of Haitians and left millions more suffering, dieing, injured, or stricken by the loss of a loved one. Robertson had the nerve to utter, on live television, that the disaster is a result of "a curse brought upon the people of Haiti when they made a compact with satan" hundreds of years ago.

The demented doctrines of people like Pat Robertson are one of many reasons I'll never be a "protestant". People like him will dissolve the protestant sector in time anyway; for they can't even find agreement among themselves! Even within the protestant denomination, one can find a battle raging among those who do and don't believe that Robertson's comments were justified. Their fighting is nothing more than constant feuding that is merely leading their people astray from the Truth.

I found this statement by Keith Olbermann to be a near perfect expression of my feelings toward Robertson's fallacy:

"Sir, because of your tone-deafness and your delight at human misery and your dripping self-satisfied holier-than-thou senile crap, I am now likely to believe that you ARE the devil!"

What are your thoughts on Robertson's commentary?

We're in the process of replacing my 8 year old desktop computer with a brand new laptop. Right now I'm trying to get all the old files off the old computer and transfer them onto the new one. However, this has been a painstakingly slow task, as the only way I see how to do it is by grouping the files into 700 MB "chunks", and transferring them using CD's, one at a time. If I continue transferring the files this way, it will take hours, if not days, to complete.

Ordinarily, I'd have a project like this done in mere minutes, because I've got a 500 GB external hard drive that would transfer all the files right away. However, in this computer's "old age", it has lost it's ability to recognize any device connected by USB ports (the main reason why I'm chucking it). Because the external drive goes via USB, it's been seemingly rendered useless for this task. I also cannot use DVDs because the D drive only recognizes CDs, not DVDs (it's VERY OLD). There is no compatibility with SD cards, either.

So for now, I seem to be stuck with moving many GBs of files using individual 700 MB CDs. I calculate that it will take at least 12+ CDs to get everything moved; and the computer takes 20 or so minutes to write a single CD. Does anyone know of a faster way?

I live in a house of a family of four. We previously had one single desktop computer, a Windows XP. It had just one user account that was used by all of us (we didn't use the user accounts feature, though it was there; we simply had ONE desktop which we all used).

That computer has since crashed, and we're now in the process of replacing it with two Windows 7 laptops. We decided to take use of the user accounts feature this time. So now, each member of the family has their own account / desktop. This is the case for both computers, meaning that each laptop has four accounts for each person in the family (I've set them up so they behave identically regarding the user accounts).

We are having transitional problems, though; going from using one universal account / desktop to two computers, four accounts on each (8 total user accounts between both computers). On the old computer, all of our files were stored in one location. Everyone's stuff was in the "My Documents" folder. Now, we're dividing up the files that were in that one location, and dispersing them to the correct user accounts on the new computers.

The problem is occurring when I have files that I would like shared - files that anyone on any account on either computer can retrieve. For example, our pictures. On the old computer they were all in the "My pictures" folder. Now, with all these new accounts for each person, I can't figure out how to configure it so that the pictures can be in a shared location accessible by all accounts (from both computers).

I've been working for quite a while today trying to set up a homegroup, but I have absolutely no clue how the "homegroup" feature works. It seems like each computer has different information within the homegroup area. I've gotten one set up, but the information displayed by each computer is inconsistent.

All I want is to have a simple, easy-to-access place within the file storage area to put our pictures & other files we want shared, and be able to access that location easily from the other accounts of both computers. Everything I've tried today seems far to confounding for practical, daily use.

Yet I'm sure that plenty of other people with Windows 7 computers have quickly accomplished the very thing I'm struggling with. With all these getting started tutorials the system offers, they seem to be emphasizing "how easy it is to share files & information with other people in your group". I just can't seem to figure out how to do that. What should I be doing??

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/zd/20090929/tc_zd/24449...

Mozilla development team is currently working on making the next two future models of firefox. According the the article I've linked to above, there are some pretty radical changes in store. Stuff like...

-a complete overhaul of the general look and feel

-elimination of the "home" button

-initiation of specialty tabs, such as "home tab", etc.

-applications that appear in tabs

-elimination of the menu bar (file, edit, view, etc..)

-with the elimination of the menu bar comes the elimination of the bookmarks feature (mentioned in article)

-possible replacement of the conventional bookmarks feature with a widget

-combining the address bar and search bar into a single field

Here's a picture of the new firefox in it's early development:

http://www.appscout.com/assets_c/2009/09/Firefox%2...

Truthfully, I don't think I will like these changes, should they become reality. I use the home button all the time; taking it off would cause quite an inconvenience.

The "specialty and app tabs" I think would take up too much space in the tab bar. My window of view is already small enough with the tab bar and other things... I don't want/ need it to get even smaller! As for the applications, the article states that these are merely popular sites that users visit almost every time they get online. The app tabs would be smaller than normal and meant "to give users quick and efficient access to their favorite sites". However, if I'm using the app tabs for my favorite sites, I certainly don't want them to be smaller! Besides, it is no trouble to open a regular tab and select a bookmark. The app tabs would just clog up the whole browser.

As for the menu bar, I find it vary useful, and look to it quite often for all sorts of matters, ranging from the bookmarks menu to the "delete history" feature. If it is removed, how will firefox uses be able to access the features in the menus and selections?

The worst thing firefox could do with its browser, in terms of efficiency and functionality, would be to remove the bookmarks feature, as they have hinted. I use my bookmarks list several times a day, 24 / 7! Without it, how will I get to my desired sites? I'm not about to go around memorizing those incredibly long and complex URL codes!

Firefox is trying to maximize its efficiency with these updates, but removal of the bookmarks feature (amongst the many other things I've listed) will make it incredibly difficult to navigate the web. These proposals seem to be something that be the ideal experience for one who uses the internet solely for visiting 3 or 4 sites. But for other people, who have a long list of bookmarked sites which they may want / need to visit every so often, their experience will be exacerbated.

What are your thoughts on the proposed updates?

Fellow Catholics, I thought you'd be interested in knowing that the newspaper of Columbus, Ohio, The Columbus Dispatch, is publishing a six day series all this week about life in a Roman Catholic seminary and the experiences of a seminarian as he reflects upon God's call to the priesthood. I've been reading the series as it is published day by day; and I think you all would be very interested in reading it as well.

The articles are published online at http://www.dispatch.com/thecall/

The articles are put on the website daily as to align with the newspaper. Today is day 4 of 6.

And to keep this question within the community guidelines...

What do you think about the series? Would you say it gives an accurate portrayal of the experiences of seminarians and our Church?

I've been nursing a vegetable garden for several years now, and in the last 2 growing seasons (this summer and last), I've have had absolutely terrible luck keeping my squash plants alive.

Last summer, all four squash plants developed a disease in which the plants' leaves mutated into small, swollen, shriveled stubbles. I'd never seen anything like it. Once the disease set in, the plants halted growth, and for many many weeks remained at beginners-size, looking as if on the brink of survival. Only one of my four plants managed to overcome the disease and begin growing to a somewhat reasonable size. Even so, the squash plants became so infested with a certain type of bug that eventually they simply died - very suddenly. One day they looked just fine. The next, the only one alive was limp and lifeless. Completely gone. I don't believe I got a single produce from any of the four plants last summer.

This year has been no better. I decided to plant seven squash in order to prevent last year's fiasco, but that did no good whatsoever. All but 2 of them never grew one inch. They simply sat in the state in which they'd been transplanted for weeks, until they slowly, subtly perished. Thankfully, though, that mutation disease from last summer has not reared it's ugly head.

The 2 plants that did manage to survive and grow looked excellent at first, but in the past week or so have taken a turn for the worst. Both have halted growth, and both have been losing leaves (that aren't being replenished). As of this evening, one of them is pretty much dead. The other is holding out, but it probably won't be long before it dies too. I only got one produce, a medium sized squash, from all 7 of the original plants.

Both years, insects have been a major problem. I think they are the fault for the sudden demises.

Has anyone else in the Ohio region or surrounding areas been affected in a similar way? How has your summer squash turnout been this year? Why might I be having this problem(s), and what steps should I take in the future to fix it? (it's too late to salvage this year's).

I'm trying to get pictures posted, but Shutterfly is having an argument with me... *ugh*. I'll post the pictures when I can finally get them online.

http://answers.yahoo.com/my/profile;_ylt=AsAaHX2Sg...

She's not been active on R&S (or yahoo answers in general) for at least 2 weeks. Usually I will come on here and use her Q&A (appearing on the homepage) to get right to the questions I wish to answer; she always stars the right ones. Her answers are always so beautiful and well written. I look forward to reading her input. She's been one of the bright spots in this dark cave we call R&S.

Has anyone been in contact with Spiritroaming recently? Is something going on?

And yes, I DO realize that this could be nothing more than a vacation or other incidence in her life that's kept her from accessing Y!A... I'm simply asking my contacts if they know what might be the problem.

Thanks!

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-08-01-h...

Look at this statement in paragraph 14:

<<"A Southern Baptist Home Mission Board study in 1993 estimated that 70% of all Americans are going to hell">>

This completely blows my mind, that a "Christian" group would release a report telling how many people will go to hell or not. Since when did the Lord give ANYONE the authority to judge another's soul?

I don't understand how this group can justify their actions.

Do these people think they share in God's divine power?

Do they think they are at equal level with Him?

Do they think they are gods themselves?

Whatever way it may be, these evangelicals are in direct violation of what the Lord told us in the First Commandment.

The First Commandment says the following:

-"You Shall Worship the Lord Your God"

-"Him Only Shall You Serve"

-"You Shall Have No Other Gods before Me"

-"You Shall Not Make for Yourself a Graven Image"

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c1a1.h...

By teaching a doctrine in which humans are allowed to take over the divine power of God, evangelicals are placing themselves in the status of "gods". Why, evangelicals, do you do this, when the Lord Himself has explicitly taught against it? Is this on purpose?

The Protestant sects were created no earlier than the Reformation in the 1500s -- not during the life of Christ. Historical records show this is truth.

The word "protestant" has the root "protest" in the name. Just about all protestants openly refer to themselves as "protestants" (it's only the radical fundamentalists who deny blatantly obvious history).

So, if these people openly call themselves a name that means "ones who are protesting against," what exactly are they protesting?

History clearly tells us the answer. But I want to hear the protestants' take on this.

As Manchester regulars now, isn't it our responsibility to connect with the existing regulars lol?

Who wants to do the HULA???

I do not know the names of all the 22 Eastern Catholic Rites, and am curious. A simple ordered list would be appreciated. I can't find anything on the search engines that has all the Rites listed in the same site. Thanks!

I'm 16 years old, and have never visited my fraternal grandparents' home in my life (I visit my maternal grandparents' house regularly, however).

I'm not 100% sure why, but my parents have never wanted to take me there (neither have my grandparents themselves). I see them on a regular basis, but it's always when they come to MY house.

As a matter of fact, they live only 40 minutes away, yet I've only been in their town one time - and that was for a high school football game!

I don't know much about my dad's side of the family. He (and his parents) are rather solitary, and from what I've heard, he did not have the best childhood. I can tell, as it shows in his everyday actions. His parents still reside in the same house that they raised my father. I rarely hear anything about my dad's family. As a matter of fact, the few times that I do, it's typically my mom that tells me! I know close to nothing about my dad's childhood; as well as his extended family (anyone beyond his parents). My knowledge of his family is essentially limited to him, his parents, and his brother (and a few other extended relatives whom I hear the names of every once in a while). I've been hinted that one main reason we've avoided their house is because my grandparents have a tendency to save things... a lot of things... to the point of "pack-rat" behavior.

Does this family relationship seem strange / weird? Is there anyone else who has family "issues" like this? How do they compare?

This man has already signed away billions upon billions of stimulus dollars. He's bailed out every banker imaginable, and thrown money at the auto industry like it's confetti! He's signed off $787 billion in stimulus money... for a total national debt of over 1 trillion dollars. Now we've got this "health care overhaul" crap that will tack on another trillion.

And now... THIS????:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090720/ap_on_bi_ge/us...

How the heck does Obama foresee this deficit getting fixed? $80,000 dollars for every American?? How exactly is bankrupting our country going to "fix" this economy? Is he living in a fairytale?

Thanks to Obama, this generation and the next generation of taxpayers will be forking over the majority of their income to the federal government. There will be nothing for us citizens to live off of, as every penny made for the next 100+ years will have to be shipped off to the foreign countries to whom we owe trillions.

There are quite a lot of R&S regulars who need a good history lesson!!

*cough* fundies! *cough*

Or is it just my computer?

In the past week or so I've noticed some big problems and glitches with the ratings each user gets for his/her answer.

For example, when I answer a question, it will say I answered it "1 second ago", yet I already have 3 thumbs up and 3 thumbs down. That's not even possible.

Then I refresh the page, and it says 2 - 2.

I refresh again; it goes back to 3 - 3.

I refresh again; its becomes 0 - 0.

And so on... I could refresh over and over if I felt like it, getting a different rating each and every time.

I've seen instances where the ratings have gone something like this...

4-6, 1-2, 2-3, 1-1, 4-6, 2-3, 3-2, 0-0, 1-0, 0-1, 5-4, 3-2,..... and so on... and on... and on... perpetually adding and subtracting numbers from both the thumbs up and thumbs down, with no "pattern".

The worst one of all is when the all the thumbs up ratings get transferred to thumbs down (or vice versa). For example...

1-8, 2-8, 2-8, 2-8, 10-0, 2-8, 10-0

or....

9-3, 12-0, 3-9, 9-3, 0-12, 9-3

So then, answers that are fantastically thought out and well written get seemingly "terrible" ratings.

And other answers that come from trolls, bigots, and spammers get fantastic ratings, looking as if they are fully approved by the community.

Only after the screen is refreshed several times might the ratings return to "normal". It's hard to know what's right and what's not anymore... which is upsetting, as I used to look to the ratings rather often.

Is anyone else experiencing these problems?

I have heard the following argument from fundamentalists numerous times, in their attempt to justify that the intercession of Saints is spiritually unacceptable:

"They are DEAD, don't you understand??? They cannot hear you; only Jesus can. What part about 'dead' can't you follow?"

My interpretation of this argument is that fundamentalists view saved souls in heaven as being no different than condemned souls that have been separated from God forever and are now truly dead… in hell. From this argument, they seem to be conveying that once a person physically dies on earth… that’s it. Nothing. The person no longer exists (“they’re DEAD”) and therefore cannot hear us asking for their prayers.

Yet at the same time, fundamentalist doctrine places much emphasis on believing in Jesus to be saved and thus have eternal life with God. They believe that if you believe in Jesus your soul will go on to live forever in heaven.

How can this be, fundamentalists? If believe that saved souls go on to spend eternal life with Jesus (just like we Catholics do), why don’t you believe that the Saints cannot hear our requests to pray to God for our needs on our behalf? What do you believe separates them from hearing us, and why?

... in what vacation spot would it be?

and

... which R&S regulars would you room with?

_______________________________

Thanks, Marlboro Man, for the inspiration!

The yahoo answers user, "Exposing Catholicism" accuses Catholic worship as being parallel to the ancient Babylonian belief system.

In his words...

"Catholicism is not christian it nothing more than old babylonian nimrod worship masked as christian!

Semiramus= The Catholic Mary

Tammuz= The Catholic Jesus

Nimrod=Pontifax Maximus (all Catholic Popes)!!!"

While outrageous claims against Christ's Church are nothing new to me and the other Catholic R&S regulars, this as got to be the strangest one I've heard yet! How do you think "Exposing Catholicism" conjured up such fantasies? What "proof" do you think he/she mentally uses? Or do you think he/she just randomly thought up a new way to bigot Christ's Church?

Up until the past few days, this has been the page that appears when I visit yahoo.com (which is my homepage):

http://mosquito.the.tool.googlepages.com/yahoo.png

Now, I'm getting this page when i visit yahoo.com:

http://images.ientrymail.com/webpronews/article_pi...

(It's actually a bit different than this; but this was the closest image I could find.)

Frankly, I don't like this new format. With the old format, I could easily see, at the top right corner, if I had new mail. The news tab, in the center, was quick and efficient. And the links bar at the left side had all of yahoo's sites just a click away.

Now, with the new format, it's hard to immediately tell whether I have new mail. The mail tab at the top right corner has been removed. As well, the news tab in the center seems far less efficient. And, the links bar at the left side has left out many important links, such as yahoo answers.

Is there any way to get back the original yahoo format? For some reason, this is only affecting the firefox browser (which is the browser I use). The IE browser is still in the format I like.