pointer left

best advice button white

Pros and Cons

This is page 1 of Pros and Cons
last edited on: Friday, June 02, 2006, 11:36 AM Central Daylight Savings Time

Pros & Cons
The positive and negative aspects of a thing, an idea, an event, etc...
below is a simple example of one of my pros and cons exercises:

pros and cons of a desktop computer:

Pro: A desktop computer is safer to use.

Why? because it usually stays at home where it's never without power
and where it's not subject to being dropped like a laptop.

Also,  a desktop computer is connected to a land line and is not likely to be hacked or retrieved by a remote wireless mobile system like the kind criminals use when they travel in their sports utility vehicles or vans scanning for wireless computers to intercept data that can be used for you know what.

In addition,  a desktop computer has a larger hard drive.  It also is located in a room where all the back up dvd and cd ROMs are at and that makes it convenient for you to take care of personal business.

It costs less money to use a land line telephone line with a desktop computer in the home.
It provides greater on line security and it also affords privacy and less piracy.

Pro: A laptop computer is smaller, easy to take when traveling and convenient to use with a cellular wireless system.

Also,  a laptop can cost less than a desktop and it comes with it's own monitor and ports to add a printer and sometimes certain models let you connect to a docking system at the office or at home so you can use a large flat screen monitor and download all your important files to a separate in house hard drive system.

Plus,  a laptop can be used to listen to music on a cd using headphones while spending time waiting for a plane.

Also,  a laptop can be used to read books on disc or watch movies to pass the time while waiting in an airport or other transportation port.

Plus,  laptops are perfect for presentations and for group sessions at the office by letting you bring your work in video format ready to go on an as needed basis.

Con: A desktop computer is bulky and takes up lots of space and uses lots of power and is subject to damage in the event of power failures or power surges, especially during heavy thunder storms.

A desktop computer often has to be upgraded,  about once every 4 to 5 years,  by that I mean it requires extended RAM or DRAM etc and updated drivers for your monitor and sound system to make it more compatible with the latest operating systems on the market An example is: The year is 2005.  You have bought a new PC desktop computer.  It's operating system is a pre installed Microsoft Windows XP. 

The year is 2006 and the beta version of Microsoft Windows Vista, formerly coined Long Horn, is available to developers.  The Full version for home and for business will be made available sometime in the year 2007.  The thing is,  you have downloaded the program that Microsoft provides you to see if your computer will work properly if you decide to buy Microsoft Windows Vista sometime in 2007.  After performing the test of your system you find out that the video memory in your current desktop computer is not enough and will have to be upgraded.  You also find out that you will need to buy a new and more powerful monitor to make it be compatible with the higher graphics that will be imposed by the newer and greater memory powered video graphics card to make it compatible fully with the new operating system.

This means one thing, upgrade or buy a newer computer altogether.

Con: A laptop computer can run out of power before you can get to a charger.
A laptop is subject to theft.  You can't just walk around in public with a laptop without looking over your shoulder,  even in an environment where half the people there are carrying cell phones and laptops with wireless routers built in.  The thing is,  like the mp3 players,  they are a hot commodity to thieves and as long as we live in such a world as this,  I recommend using your laptop in the privacy of your home or office or a secured public library not in a park or on a college campus on the lawn or under a tree on a bench.
You can try it.

Basically the only logical difference between a laptop and a desktop computer is their size and virtual capacity.

I personally would buy a laptop lap top or palm top computer if I had the money.
I use a desktop system.  I buy a new computer every 5 years.  Every 5 years or less even there is a new operating system on the market and every 5 years or less,  there are more dynamic dvd recording and mp3 apparatuses as well as higher mega pixel resolution digital cameras out there that make it essential to keep your computer upgraded to meet the demands of current technology.

The idea of a laptop or a desktop that would be upgradable and reusable for 30 years would be an economic disaster to the computer marketing industry.  It is the very nature of the market that the personal computer be of planned obsolescence.  Just like much everything else manufactured today!

entry no. 0001
Saturday,  March 05,  2005,  2:05 PM,  CDST

The fact that you can pay your bills on line and that you can buy practically anything
also on the internet doesn't really make it a good thing.

Pro: Yep it's fast, and you save on gasoline and there is less paper work.
Con: But, there are internet bandits that prey on us every time we log on.
The possibility of having our identity stolen from us by doing business on line is a matter
of fact.

Pro: You use Secured server,  and you are using BASE 64 encryption and you run a fire wall.
Con: Everybody does! So why have so many people had their bank accounts emptied by an unknown internet hacker criminal?

Pro: You like to be able to get your account information on line so you can check your balances and see when your items will be shipped to you.
Con: So does the cyber terrorist! The On Line Evil Doer has your credit card account information and your drivers license and so forth. The thing is, you will never know until you find out your account has been frozen and you get phone calls and letters that tell you you are over drawn.

Consequences: There are just as many or more Cons than Pros to this issue so it is not a good thing in my estimation, no matter how secure your computer and the ISP you're using is. There's just no way to be 100% sure that your on line activities will be kept private, safe and reliable not just once,  but every single time!

Solution: Pay your bills with a check. Take them to the post office and mail them inside.
Purchase on line items only if they accept check payments, not mandatory debit or credit payments on line, if not, do your shopping via order sheet in the back of your favorite magazines and catalogs and use UPS or USPS or Federal Express, whatever.
I still like to go on line to see what is out there but I only purchase on line holding my breath. I spend most of my shopping money at retailers.

They are still our best bet. You actually get to see, touch, smell and taste what you're about to spend cold hard cash on.

You don't wonder what kind of shape something is once it arrives via mail carrier and you're hands are covered in ink and dust from the outside of the package. These packages that come via mail trucks can be quite dirty at times. Mainly I love to go into Burlington Coat Factory or Tuesday Mornings to just browse in real time. Nothing beats that!

Pros and Cons

entry no. 0002
Friday,  May 27,  2005, 1:15 PM,  CDST

There are positive and negative attributes to any argument or situation
that can help pin point more specific issues or underlying roots to a situation and they too can have both positive and negative attributes and the attributes in  themselves can lead to finding more and more sub issues or undercurrents that are either directly connected or indirectly connected to the causes and effects of sub issues and subsequent circumstances as they are routed up the tree of origin to the present and then back to the roots of their origins, then finally the bigger environment that holds these elements into play, the world outside.

The perimeters of any issue can be as microscopically small as a a proton or as macro cosmically large as the cosmos. From the beginnings of man's knowledge first recorded in stone to the digitally recorded data that has been sent into space on Voyager. It is within these boundaries the pros and the cons can be focused upon, from the most trivial and ridiculous to the most sublime and profound. Somewhere between these extremes and held within these walls of life and of death the truth can be found. Then what we do with what he have learned is up to us to either make a future for man or prevent it from even taking place.

Even now, although we don't actually feel the rumbling of the primordial world with all it's fire and storms, the after shocks, the ripples that have been sent rolling through generations, and eons in time are still there. Things both tiny and huge have been set into motion that even mankind can not stop. We can't predict when and if the world will end. Many have predicted it will end with a Comet or Asteroid that has been waiting thousands of years to enter into an orbital proximity of our solar system, and moreover into the orbital plane of the Earth itself. In spite of this prediction there are so many eventualities coming into play.

We are products of a bigger force, that we have no control of. We think we wage wars on our own as if we had some ability to see into the future and foresee a positive outcome. We don't realize that the circumstances that led to war in every case were the product of millions of human lives that for some parallel reason or cause led themselves down the same old road of self destruction. The Con about all wars is that we are not in control of their beginnings nor endings. The effects of war are universal. But the cause is much more deep and far reaching, and it happened a long time ago. When first man had discovered that by killing another person he could then have what his victim possessed. This is the all too simple analysis of man's kill or be killed nature.

If it is in man's nature to both kill and also to let live, then there are always possible 2 roads to travel in individual life, but however, in war, it is not in man's nature to understand the profound apocalyptic devastation of war that is so over powering that no one man can diminish by his own good will.

We sometimes pray the war will be over soon. But unless we understand the causes of and the effects of war we can never cure our destructive disease and make it vanish from the face of Earth for all time to come.

Kill or be killed. If you kill me my brother will kill you and so on and so on.

The very act of war is a simplistic and 2 dimensional concept that enables us to wrap our brains around it in a way that we can accept. But does that help? It is a factor that is in our genes to survive, to deal with things we have no control over.

Pro: You can decide not to kill.
Con: You may have no choice but to kill.

Reality, they are both true and War is bigger than society at large. It started when first the man who thought killing would win him power, material wealth, influence, perhaps eternal life through immortality and so on. The ripple effects of the first war are stronger now than they have ever been. Man is growing more and more desperate as he pulls further and further away from meaning and grows closer and closer to a life of zero humanity. This formula is real. There are ways to put it on paper by using graphs and logistical references and so on.

The wars we are in now in Iraq and elsewhere are but a symptom of man's falling away from his first origins. We have the ability as a planet to become one people, but we are often so hell bent on being independent from one another that we form oppositions that are our own undoing.

The potential for the planet Earth to be destroyed by nuclear bombs is a thousand fold!

The likelihood of life existing on Earth by the middle of the next century is close to less than 5 on a scale from 1 to 100, 1 being almost impossible and 100 being hardly a thought.

Even if humans live into the next 100 or 500 years. What kind of hellish nightmare will await them?

Do you really think we can analyze it long enough to prevent the eventualities that have already been set into motion thousands of years in our past?

If other worlds like us have been created, the only logical conclusion can come to for them never being discovered is this, they are out there only they have no means to communicate because like us, all or most of these Earth like planets have already self destructed. They probably have already fought their last war!

Think about it for a moment while you sip on your mocha cappuccino for a little bit.

What will be the population of people by the year 2050? 2099? 2150? That's a 150 year projection, about 20 generations of human life in the future. Nobody really can say.
The population of the world might be the same if we somehow stop reproducing.

If that were the scenario, one would have to ask why and how did human beings stop having children in excess and what would this imply?

It would imply mandatory control of the human population from forced sterilization of billions of people or voluntary personal choice to not have a child  in some cases.

If we could control the snow ball effect of exponential population growth today the world would remain overpopulated with well over 8 billion by 2050. Even if we had 90% compliance to a complete cessation of births for the next 45 years.

The war is said to help slow down population growth, like a fire in a forest burns down many millions of trees just to make room for the future growth of new trees somewhere down the line.

I think that is a gross absurd notion! War isn't in and of itself the solution to over population. We can not give credit to war for being anything good for or an excuse for anything positive to come from it.

War is like a plague, a disease, that people are not able to understand. We see it like a game of chess that has 100,000 billion squares and tens of thousands of chess players on those squares. We see war kind of like a child looks upon a video game.

We feel distant and detached from a war. It is over there. We are over here, and to those who are over there, it is us against them, kill of be killed, the basic fundamental survivor instinct, the adrenal cortex and the part of brain that controls aggression, anger, and other lizard brain functions that have been with us since the beginning of time.

But, the war is one thing, and population is yet another, but at some point, the war will end and lend itself to a time of peace followed by other smaller or greater wars yet to come and during this time more and more people will be born and the population will be 12 billion or greater by then, between 2050 and 2080.

By that time the most important thing all humans will be wanting is pure water to drink.
The basic survival mode of ancient man and ancient animals on a quest for quenching thirst, will reduce humanity to it's basic rudimentary level of find water or die.

From Feast to Famine in less than a century!

That is what we have facing us just around the corner. Our children's children will be in a life time battle not with bullets but a battle looking for water and food just to stay alive!
All else, philosophy, religion, science, art, medicine, self expression and so on will be washed away by the tears of sorrow in a world that has less than 10 percent of the human population's resources for basic food and water, and by the way, the air will be far more contaminated by that time also. It all falls back to the start of industrialization.

Pro: Cars are convenient and take us where we need to go.
Con: Cars emit hydrocarbons that ultimately lead to Earth's global warming.
Pro: Without a car I couldn't get to the my job, nor to the store or to visit my neighbors.
Con: We are emotionally dependent on cars to survive. Television is the single greatest perpetrator of the lie that a car is essential to prosperity and survival.

Yet just because most people say, heck no. Cars are cool. I love my car,  or I love my SUV,  my car and my pick up truck! Yep. We are living in a golden age as far as automotive technology. But it seems that in spite of the beautiful interiors and the swell sounding stereo from XM satellite radio, what burns me up to see are the graphic news photos of overturned, and twisted metal wreckage that does in deed occur all over the globe leaves little to the imagination as to what happened to the fragile person or persons who trusted their very lives with that now essential by product of the mind's eye.

The rate of production of cars is far greater than the rate we dig up the earth to prepare for a million more miles of concrete for them to roll over upon!

And that's just one aspect of why we as humans face such a dismal future ahead.

The dirty bomb is a singular instant of terrorism, but the dirty air we breath from cars,  trucks,  SUVs,  tractor trailers,  jets,  busses,  cabs,  boats,  trains,  motor bikes,  and so on is a constant, with exponential factors. Increase the number of cars and other motor vehicles on the road influences how much of an increase there is to the level of pollution in the air.  The level of and the exponential factor of air pollution from all vehicles world wide combined is beyond the scope of modern meteorology but is being looked into by many university professors across the world. 

We are told by representatives of certain well known organizations to whom I will not name here that We need to start acting locally and thinking globally. Well,  I think we should try to in fact act globally now.  Time's running out if we keep our heads buried into our own little communities.  We really need to start acting like a one world order.  We need to unite,  but of course this is the ideal.

The real is not ideal.  Nobody wants to act globally except a few countries,  like America and Britain.  We as Americans are in fact acting globally because everything we do in the war on terror and the war in Iraq will have and in deed is having a direct and immediate effect on the state of the world's economy and trade and is indeed effecting the collective unconscience to be on the look out for immediate threats of terrorism and so on.

But,  that takes me back to the primordial brain of man,  the instinct to kill or be killed.
I hate that we expect to have a war that has positive consequences when we don't have any control of it's outcome and have no real clue as to it's causes.

Did war just happen? Perhaps the war has never ended,  but in fact has been always just looming over the horizon,  and we were always in the calm before the storm.

Hm. Perhaps that is so.

The war is in our DNA. That's it.

Wake up and smell the afterglow for the sun shines for all to see so look ahead please.


My website consists of the following pages:

Pros and Cons page 1

lookat desktop magazine
Pros and Cons page 1


Get Firefox!