How to make Windows 10 usable

In this post I will explain how to make Windows 10 usable.

1. Do a clean install of Windows 10.
2. Install ClassicShell and change the settings as follows:
1. Disable the Apps menu item
2. Disable searching the internet
3. Press the Start button and search for "Performance". Choose the option "Adjust the appearance and performance of windows". Uncheck everything except:
1. "Smooth edges of screen fonts"
2. "Show thumbnails instead of icons" (useful in picture/camera folders)
4. Change File Explorer folder view options
1. Display hidden items
2. Show file extensions
3. Show protected files and folders
4. Apply these to all folders
5. Disable Windows Search. If left running, this will eventually use up all the space on your drive, while providing no real benefit.
1. Open "Services", look for "Windows Search" and disable the service. Then stop the service.
2. Use File Explorer to go to "c:\programdata". Open the properties applet of the "Search" folder. In the Security tab, do the necessary actions to:
1. Change ownership of the Search folder and all subfolders & files to the local "Administrators" group.
2. Add a Deny rule for Write to "Everyone". Enable inheritance to propagate this security setting to all files and subfolders
3. Delete everything in the Search folder
3. Use the File Explorer to go to "C:\WindowsSearchIndex". Repeat the above procedure to empty and disable write access to this folder.

With these changes, you should find Windows 10 much easier to use, and the OS will also be much better behaved.

Rape and male-female fungibility

The recent furor over rape is just another case of misguided feminist insistence on male-female fungibility. Previously they were insisting on women being allowed in combat roles in the military. Failing to measure up, they used the big and clumsy hand of government to impose "equal pay" for unequal work, unequal ability, unequal deployability, unequal motivation, unequal dependability, etc.

Previously they were also saying that women are as productive as men in the workplace. To armchair social engineers that the elite feminists are, it looks great on paper, but to those who actually have to run a business and turn a profit, the reality is very far from the theory. Women are simply a liability to any business, which is why few businesses want them (1), including those run by women! The only "business" that is glad to hire women is the government (2, 3), but only because the government does not care about profit or loss (4, 5). Government operates by theft in the form of taxes, and by printing money... not by exchange. To this day, feminists insist on "equal pay" for unequal work and constantly lobby to have it imposed by government diktat.


In the same way, feminists claim that, just as men can wear anything they want (or nothing) out in public, women should be able to do the same. The problem is that a naked man is very different from a naked woman, so here too they seek to impose a doctrine of "equal chance of being raped" even though there is "unequal attractiveness to the opposite gender".

Their arguments are often very confused. They constantly tell us how a woman's clothing DOES NOT have any connection with her chances of being raped, but then they will go on "Slutwalks" saying that no matter what clothing a woman is wearing, it is not an invitation to rape (thereby acknowledging that provocative clothing does in fact increase a woman's chances of being raped).

To date, no research has ever been done on whether clothing increases the risk of being raped. The feminist industry has very effectively prevented any such research from ever taking place (6). One must ask, what are they so afraid of?

---

References

1. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article-1001462/Female-bosses-likely-discriminate-women-children-says-Sir-Alan-Sugar.html
2. http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/mar/27/public-private-sector-pay
3. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/opinion/are-soft-public-sector-jobs-just-another-form-of-welfare/story-e6frg9jx-1226526036986
4. http://www.policyalternatives.ca/newsroom/updates/public-and-private-sector-pay-differences
5. http://trove.nla.gov.au/work/36533060?l-australian=y&l-format=Thesis&sortby=dateDesc&l-language=eng++++++++++&l-decade=200&q&c=book&versionId=47600693
6. For an idea of how this happens, take a look at the answers to this question posed on Yahoo. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090726093456AAlXycY

Bibliography

• http://reason.com/archives/2004/07/01/confessions-of-a-woman-owned-b
• http://www.lendio.com/blog/government-women-business-reverse-discrimination/

Gun control and antibiotics

Gun control is a lot like antibiotic misuse.

First some background. There are billions of bacteria in a person's body. Some say that there are more bacterial cells than human cells in the human body. There are many types of bacteria that live on and in the human body, each preferring a different environment or part of the human body.

One of the functions of the bacteria in the human body is to keep away bad bacteria. In effect, the natural bacteria that live on the human body are a part of the human immune system. The good bacteria are very well adapted to living on the human body and generally out-breed bad bacteria just due to their sheer numbers. So bad bacteria find it difficult to get a foothold on the human body. According to Wikipedia:

Within the genitourinary and gastrointestinal tracts, commensal flora serve as biological barriers by competing with pathogenic bacteria for food and space and, in some cases, by changing the conditions in their environment, such as pH or available iron. This reduces the probability that pathogens will reach sufficient numbers to cause illness. However, since most antibiotics non-specifically target bacteria and do not affect fungi, oral antibiotics can lead to an "overgrowth" of fungi and cause conditions such as a vaginal candidiasis (a yeast infection). There is good evidence that re-introduction of probiotic flora, such as pure cultures of the lactobacilli normally found in unpasteurized yogurt, helps restore a healthy balance of microbial populations in intestinal infections in children and encouraging preliminary data in studies on bacterial gastroenteritis, inflammatory bowel diseases, urinary tract infection and post-surgical infections.

When a broad spectrum antibiotic is used by a person, it doesn't discriminate between good bacteria and bad bacteria. It kills ALL bacteria in the person's body, including good bacteria. This leaves the body like a sitting duck for bad bacteria and viruses and fungi to gain a foothold and multiply out of control.

Now you can see why gun control and antibiotic misuse are similar? By preventing normal citizens from carrying firearms, criminals with guns have the edge because the citizens have nothing to defend themselves with.

Demography is Destiny

From Ann Coulter's Demography is Destiny:

Liberals brag about having won the hearts and minds of America, as if, through logic and argument, they’ve persuaded people to accept their bankrupt European socialist ideas. 

Democrats haven’t changed anyone’s mind. They changed the people. 

Most Americans don’t realize that, decades ago, the Democrats instituted a long-term plan to gradually turn the United States into a Third World nation. The country would become poorer and less free, but Democrats would have an unbeatable majority!

Liberals need to import people because they have such a low birth-rate that they're unable to transmit their values, culture, and genes to the next generation.

Of course, conservatives don't have the same problem, but as with anything else, it is easier to just outsource reproduction.

Why house prices are so high

I came across an article while I was researching same-sex marriages:

"Suppose there were a law forbidding anyone to own more than one car. It seems obvious enough that the abolition of that law would increase the demand for cars. Sellers of cars would be better off. Buyers who did not take advantage of the new opportunity--those who bought only one car--would be worse off, since they would have to pay a higher price. Buyers who bought more than one car would be better off than if they bought only one car at the new price (otherwise that is what they would have done) but not necessarily better off than if they bought one car at the old price, an option no longer open to them."

Substitute "houses" for "cars" and you have your answer. I met someone recently who told me that he had actually bought about 15 houses. Who benefits from these arrangements? Bankers, who else!

The greater numbers of single people also drive up prices for pretty much everything, as I've explained in a previous article. They also drive down wages.

Delayed childbearing is good... for the childcare and retirement industries

On Saturday, the Bush Dance Display Group (of which I'm a member) were performing at a retirement village. Some of us started talking during the halfway break about life, ageing, children, etc. Sometime during our chat, I realized that the childcare and retirement industries benefit when women as a whole delay childbearing.

When women marry young and bear children when they're young, their parents (let us call them "the grandparents" to avoid confusion) - who may be in their mid to late forties - can help with childrearing and childminding. Thus such families will be less likely to outsource childcare. In addition, the grandparents themselves are much less likely to need care themselves at that time. When the children are adolescents, they depend less on their parents, so the parents are more likely to be able to care for the grandparents.

On the other hand, when women marry late and bear children in their 30s, the grandparents who will likely be in their 60s are less likely to be able to help with childrearing and childminding. In fact, many grandparents will need substantial care themselves at that age. And most parents will neither have the time nor resources to look after 2 sets of dependents (children and grandparents). Thus, with the lack of grandparental help in childrearing, parents are forced to live on one income or outsource childcare to the childcare industry. In addition, parents may have to move the dependent grandparents into being looked after by the retirement industry (because they're too busy looking after their young children).

Pensions and social security wouldn't even be needed if people looked after their own parents. Instead, these social programs were trying to fix a problem that didn't exist in the first place. When people are offered "free healthcare" they stop looking after themselves ("why should I look after my health when I can get free healthcare?"). When welfare programs are started to help the needy, people stop being charitable ("the government is looking after the poor, so why should we?). When people are offered "free care for the elderly" they stop looking after their elderly ("they have pensions and social security, so they can look after themselves").

All this is very good for the childcare and retirement industries, but detrimental to society as a whole. Some might call these parasitic industries, but perhaps a better name for them is "cannibalistic industries", because they cannibalize the society (of which they're a part), destroying it and eventually themselves in the process. But this process once started cannot be stopped because short term gains are always more attractive than long-term gains.

A man wants to be a woman's first love. A woman wants to be his last.

I came across this quote on Facebook today:

"A man wants to be a woman's first love. A woman wants to be his last."

Maybe the reason why so many relationships fail these days is because women can't give men <what the men want> anymore. The less women bring to the table, the less men will bring to the table as well.