Of course that is expected behaviour: tux loads multiple independant shell environments. A change in one will not affect the other. The same holds true for modifying the PATH environment variable, which is how rbenv works. So I'm not sure how you're expecting rbenv to avoid that behaviour.
That, and I thought link rel="next" already existed… and had a more semantic meaning than pre-fetching.
It (and its brother, rel="prev") are meant to inform the browser (which then hopefully informs the user, but that never took off) of what the next or previous page is (in contexts where that makes sense). Maybe it's the next page of an article (evil!), or the next blog post in line. Whatever.
So it's more accurate to say that Firefox likes to prefetch pages, and will use <link rel="next"> tags to guide it. If you're going to be pre-fetching pages anyway, that seems a reasonable enough way to decide what to fetch, but I agree that I'd prefer pre-fetching to be off.
The Firefox extension "Link Widgets" also uses those to generate a menu bar for the site (it also uses the rel="top", rel="up", rel="first" and rel="last").
Your reasoning there is flawed. I'm a heavy bandwidth user, but most of the time, I'm in my home or around town where I know of the WiFi hotspots. When I'm traveling, I'm sitting in airports or in places where I can't get WiFi easily. My bandwidth requirements don't change with my location, but the accessibility of non cellular networks does.
I don't think I'd call these criticisms so much as _reasons_ why Chinese is so damn hard (for a Western speaker). It’s not like there's anyone around who designed the language to complain to.
Anyway:
Reasons 1-5 aren't about the many languages used in China (if French & Spanish are different languages, then I consider Mandarin & Cantonese to be different languages). These difficulties are due to the lack of a concise phonetic alphabet (like the roman alphabet used in English, French, Spanish…, or the hiragana alphabet used in Japanese). If the Chineses languages all used a common (small!) phonetic alphabet of some sort, many of those difficulties would dissolve (and there is no particular reason why that could not be done, technically, except that it throws out a huge part of their culture). Even if only Mandarin existed, those first 5 difficulties would remain.
Edit: OK, so using a phonetic alphabet would mean that each language would be written differently... except that this is already true, essentially. You can actually write in Cantonese in a way that a Mandarin speaker could not understand (using the same characters), and there are those who do this. I think he says this in there (I read this a long time ago), that the Mandarin writing system is just that; Mandarin. The whole country knows how to read it (without necessarily knowing how to pronounce it), so it's more about the non-Mandarin-speaking Chinese people having 2 languages that they use: their own for speaking, and Mandarin for writing. Using a purely phonetic alphabet may make this bi-lingual usage more difficult... or not. The existing writing system is already pretty painful, whether you're a native or not (though natives have more time to get used to it before they're expected to be able to use it, I suppose).
Reason 6: this isn't like reading Shakespeare (Modern English, though an earlier version of it), as far as I understand. It seems more like trying to read The Canterbury Tales (Middle English) or Beowulf (Old English, more like German than English, really). You're completely correct about it not being relevant to practical usage of any of the Chinese languages, though.
Chaucer (Canterbury Tales) actually isn't that bad, it just looks that way. If you read it aloud, you can understand it pretty easily. Old English or Anglo-Saxon actually looks more like Danish than German and is a totally different language from modern English - modern Spanish has more cognates and other similarities.
It actually doesn't need access to download & update games, since those are simply kept inside the user's home directory.
It also doesn't need admin access to view all running processes, any user on a unix system can do so.
That being said… I'm pretty sure Steam never actually asked me for an admin password (and I run in a non-privileged account), so I'm not quite sure what this guy is talking about.
In any case, Steam isn't running with any elevated privileges on my own system (I already had access enabled for assistive devices, which Steam only seems to need to actually launch its games), so I have no complaint on a security standpoint.
My only complaint with Steam so far is that it hardcodes the directory it stores the games. I want to put them elsewhere.
When an SSD modifies a page, it has to erase & rewrite the entire block. SSDs try to avoid this by marking the block as “free” and writing data to an entirely different block, if one is available.
The point here is that in order to write a tiny bit of data, SSDs have to write to a larger portion of the drive (usually).
So reducing the # of tiny writes should lengthen the lifetime of the drive. It's theory, but the theory is sound enough to me to optimize for it if there's little or no downside to the optimizations.
Edit: though, as noted elsewhere, these drives will generally last more than long enough, so the effort is probably unnecessary.
The reason for their presence may be a mistyped URL, but the URL may also be an attempt to trick you into visiting a Web site which you might mistake for a site you trust.
