There are relatively stringent procedures in place to ensure the privacy of medical records in America. Not exhaustive nor sufficient, but certainly effective enough to warrant them being treated distinct from the other issues mentioned in this thread.
A medical transcriptionist is far more cognizant of the confidentiality required of him than the presswoman printing an IPO offering circular, speaking as one acquainted with both professions.
I think the principal loophole in the protection of medical records involves the claims procedure in an accidental injury case. The release I signed when making a claim in an automobile accident allowed the defendant's insurer to make an exhaustive search of my medical history in order to substantiate that any claims I might make were not the result of a previous condition. This information was explicitly to be used only for the purposes of such an evaluation, but I didn't get any witnessed signatures from the insurer and I have no way of monitoring their subsequent behavior!
The right to privacy was "codified" in the twentieth century by US Supreme Court rulings extrapolating upon the protection from unreasonable search and seizure. Katz's construction is perfectly accurate. We may also say that abortion is constitutionally protected in that the Constitution has authorized the Supreme Court to rule on these matters. Ashcroft used just such a construction in his testimony to the Judiciary Committee today, characterizing abortion as "constitutionally protected health services."
There are lots of ways to extend and modify the behavior of an XML dialect and an associated DTD/schema without touching the core standard. That's the Xtensible part. They are merely holding veto power over back-propagation of enhancements into the original work.
The point of XML is to standardize the manner of extension. Even SGML allowed for internal subsets of markup declaration to extend the core DTD. The goal of such a standard is not to eliminate incompatibility but to minimize the pain of dealing with it.
Forking a DTD is like forking pudding, it doesn't do anything.
Sure. I'd be interested to see what I could get out of the new architecture. Funny, I was just asking myself this question this morning when a saw the nice price point on the Powerbooks: "Hell, what would I run if I bought one?"
Son, I'm suprised to hear you say that. I just don't see how you can
question the superiority of America's political and economic systems.
Particularly at this juncture, when the colonization of the planet by
our legal and economic standards is just gathering steam, when the
triumph of our language, the enforcement of our trade and property law,
the success of our brand of pane et circensis finally approaches its
destined global scope.
As to your concern about corporate power, how small a thing does any individual corporation's force seem when you know that it is merely an arm of that incorporation of corporations, the United States government. Rest assured that American corporate interests are working arm in arm with our good friends and fellow board members rotating into service at the head of federal agencies. We will maintain our close working relationship to ensure the continued coordination of our economic, political and military forces toward the common goal of global hegemony.
Why ask about other countries in which to reside? There will be plenty of time to choose, once the remaining minor threats to our power are driven to heel, among the residual climates and cultural heritages around the globe.
Consider a future device for individual use, which is a sort of mechanized private file and library. It needs a name, and, to coin one at random, "memex" will do. A memex is a device in which an individual stores all his books, records, and communications, and which is mechanized so that it may be consulted with exceeding speed and flexibility. It is an enlarged intimate supplement to his memory.
It consists of a desk, and while it can presumably be operated from a distance, it is primarily the piece of furniture at which he works. On the top are slanting translucent screens, on which material can be projected for convenient reading. There is a keyboard, and sets of buttons and levers. Otherwise it looks like an ordinary desk.
on the LGP here. It may be a pretty good deal, provided they can get the expertise they need to keep the distro up to snuff. The price is certainly right.
Microsoft gave us an embraced and extended XSLT processor and was in no way alone in forwarding a schema proposal, which is after all merely a port of DTDs to XML syntax. Microsoft doesn't have anyone sitting on the XSL WG. MS has played, sometimes well, sometimes badly.
Active at the beginning of the fourteenth century.
Re:Printing Press Did Not Bring About Renaissance
on
The Renaissance
·
· Score: 1
Paul Johnson is an eminently qualified and erudite, albeit populist, historian whose work is widely read and generally admired for its attention to detail, if not for precision of analysis. Your comment is absurd.
Re:Printing Press Did Not Bring About Renaissance
on
The Renaissance
·
· Score: 1
This comment displays a dramatic lack of familiarity with the the early history of print. Hundreds of versions of vernacular poetry are published in Italy prior to the sixteenth century. Even in belated and benighted England, Caxton had published his Morte D'Arthur by 148%.
Re:The Cannon brought about the Renaissance
on
The Renaissance
·
· Score: 1
It has been argued that the conceptual dawn of the Renaissance is coincident with Dante and Petrarch working the humane themes of the Provençale poets against classical forms in the vernacular Italian. Certainly the activities of the Renaissance printers of Italy attests to the signal popularity and importance of these texts to the new reading audience.
Re:Printing Press Did Not Bring About Renaissance
on
The Renaissance
·
· Score: 1
I think Johnson would argue only in the matter of impact. How pervasive and disruptive would the ideas of Northern Italy be without the broad dissemination the press makes possible. Depending on who you ask, the Renaissance predates print by a century and a half, but it is merely a game of scholiasts, antiquarians and Florentine and Venetian bohos until Aldus and Gutenberg. Suddenly, every clerk in Europe is empowered to influence the kultur and innovation in thinking and representation become pervasive.
Similarly, the Reformation can be viewed as a renaissance in thought about the dominant social institution of the time. Erasmus makes clear that the Reformation is impossible without the rebirth of classical ideas, the reification it makes possible, the search for original truths and first insights (the return to Scripture).
There can be no question that the vernacular Bibles are instrumental to the Reformation, but they are likewise crucial to the Renaissance: the very impetus for the vernacular versions stems from the realization that the Vulgate was not some bedewed and bejeweled moment of Heaven-dropt science, channeled by St. Jerome, but was once a vernacular itself, merely rendered out of the Greek by Hieronymus.
These witless pseudo-libertarian rants must be quashed along with the moderators who love them. You are making knee-jerk liberals look thoughtful.
Let's examine this missive point by point:
Government intervention...( e.g. some subsidized service )...never without a cost at least as great as the benefit ( e.g. higher tax rates ). There is an interesting feature of modern life called collectivisation of risk/reward. It is an essential aspect of private insurance coverage and is at play in all economies of scale. I don't want to buy and maintain a snowplow to clear the road for the firetrucks. I don't want to build a cell-block in my backyard to deter potential burglars. You will find that privatisation in many service areas only occurs after governments have established a need and instituted a service at the behest of the people for whom it represents the collective voice.
The gist: not all markets are obvious; market development can be prohibitively expensive.
In the abscence [sic] of regulation, people do business wherever it is mutually beneficial. Regulation means that people are prohibited from engaging in some mutually beneficial action, therefore it's bad overall. Let's pass over, for a moment, the absurd assertion that only beneficial activities are subject to regulation. The real problem with this "all cretans are liars" argument is enclosed in the happy illusion of mutual beneficiality and its relationship to the place of business.
A quick overview of the legal basis of capitalism will reveal an essential foundation of adversarialism. Markets stand in adversarial relation to government, consumers to merchants, each pursuing their own benefit. The competitive pursuit of market advantage is the cornerstone of the capitalist edifice. I do business where it is in *my* benefit to do so. Caveat emptor and the invisible hand work against me to ensure that I offer my wares at a reasonable price. A glance at the map of Canada will reveal the importance of government regulation of certain services. It will be a long time before it is in anyone's commercial interest to lay phone lines to large sections of the Laurentian shield, capice?
Others have poked at the ridiculous statement regarding monopolies, so I will demure from belaboring the point. I trust, nevertheless, that any note of sarcasm or malice in this critique is taken in the spirit of belittling, mean-spirited contempt in which it is intended.
You are right, this race was Gore's to win. Nader was nothing more than a distraction and should have played into his hand if he had given it a little thought.
I remain proud to have pulled four votes for Nader in MN, including a former Goldwater republican I like to call my dad.
You analysis is correct and I look forward to Nader actually spiking the election in four years. Gimme seven percent nationally and a Green representative for Vermont!
Nader pulled over 80,000 in Florida, BTW. There are those who will argue that he's responsible, but Al pissed this one away.
Slashdot Mirror
God, you're right. The pie is not limited. After the methane ice mines of Triton are tapped out, we'll move on to new planetary systems.
Loosen your tie, buddy, your brain isn't getting enough oxygen.
while I respect your choices regarding your child's upbringing, I feel strongly that your comments betray you a pathetic bigot.
There are relatively stringent procedures in place to ensure the privacy of medical records in America. Not exhaustive nor sufficient, but certainly effective enough to warrant them being treated distinct from the other issues mentioned in this thread.
A medical transcriptionist is far more cognizant of the confidentiality required of him than the presswoman printing an IPO offering circular, speaking as one acquainted with both professions.
I think the principal loophole in the protection of medical records involves the claims procedure in an accidental injury case. The release I signed when making a claim in an automobile accident allowed the defendant's insurer to make an exhaustive search of my medical history in order to substantiate that any claims I might make were not the result of a previous condition. This information was explicitly to be used only for the purposes of such an evaluation, but I didn't get any witnessed signatures from the insurer and I have no way of monitoring their subsequent behavior!
The right to privacy was "codified" in the twentieth century by US Supreme Court rulings extrapolating upon the protection from unreasonable search and seizure. Katz's construction is perfectly accurate. We may also say that abortion is constitutionally protected in that the Constitution has authorized the Supreme Court to rule on these matters. Ashcroft used just such a construction in his testimony to the Judiciary Committee today, characterizing abortion as "constitutionally protected health services."
Their license would appear to prohibit that which their chosen technology is intended to facilitate.
There are lots of ways to extend and modify the behavior of an XML dialect and an associated DTD/schema without touching the core standard. That's the Xtensible part. They are merely holding veto power over back-propagation of enhancements into the original work.
The point of XML is to standardize the manner of extension. Even SGML allowed for internal subsets of markup declaration to extend the core DTD. The goal of such a standard is not to eliminate incompatibility but to minimize the pain of dealing with it.
Forking a DTD is like forking pudding, it doesn't do anything.
Sure. I'd be interested to see what I could get out of the new architecture. Funny, I was just asking myself this question this morning when a saw the nice price point on the Powerbooks: "Hell, what would I run if I bought one?"
The answer: "OS X"
Son, I'm suprised to hear you say that. I just don't see how you can question the superiority of America's political and economic systems. Particularly at this juncture, when the colonization of the planet by our legal and economic standards is just gathering steam, when the triumph of our language, the enforcement of our trade and property law, the success of our brand of pane et circensis finally approaches its destined global scope.
As to your concern about corporate power, how small a thing does any individual corporation's force seem when you know that it is merely an arm of that incorporation of corporations, the United States government. Rest assured that American corporate interests are working arm in arm with our good friends and fellow board members rotating into service at the head of federal agencies. We will maintain our close working relationship to ensure the continued coordination of our economic, political and military forces toward the common goal of global hegemony.
Why ask about other countries in which to reside? There will be plenty of time to choose, once the remaining minor threats to our power are driven to heel, among the residual climates and cultural heritages around the globe.
Consider a future device for individual use, which is a sort of mechanized private file and library. It needs a name, and, to coin one at random, "memex" will do. A memex is a device in which an individual stores all his books, records, and communications, and which is mechanized so that it may be consulted with exceeding speed and flexibility. It is an enlarged intimate supplement to his memory.
It consists of a desk, and while it can presumably be operated from a distance, it is primarily the piece of furniture at which he works. On the top are slanting translucent screens, on which material can be projected for convenient reading. There is a keyboard, and sets of buttons and levers. Otherwise it looks like an ordinary desk.
Vanavar, who? Son-uv-a Bush.
on the LGP here. It may be a pretty good deal, provided they can get the expertise they need to keep the distro up to snuff. The price is certainly right.
Microsoft gave us an embraced and extended XSLT processor and was in no way alone in forwarding a schema proposal, which is after all merely a port of DTDs to XML syntax. Microsoft doesn't have anyone sitting on the XSL WG. MS has played, sometimes well, sometimes badly.
Active at the beginning of the fourteenth century.
Paul Johnson is an eminently qualified and erudite, albeit populist, historian whose work is widely read and generally admired for its attention to detail, if not for precision of analysis. Your comment is absurd.
This comment displays a dramatic lack of familiarity with the the early history of print. Hundreds of versions of vernacular poetry are published in Italy prior to the sixteenth century. Even in belated and benighted England, Caxton had published his Morte D'Arthur by 148%.
It has been argued that the conceptual dawn of the Renaissance is coincident with Dante and Petrarch working the humane themes of the Provençale poets against classical forms in the vernacular Italian. Certainly the activities of the Renaissance printers of Italy attests to the signal popularity and importance of these texts to the new reading audience.
This is an excellent point.
I think Johnson would argue only in the matter of impact. How pervasive and disruptive would the ideas of Northern Italy be without the broad dissemination the press makes possible. Depending on who you ask, the Renaissance predates print by a century and a half, but it is merely a game of scholiasts, antiquarians and Florentine and Venetian bohos until Aldus and Gutenberg. Suddenly, every clerk in Europe is empowered to influence the kultur and innovation in thinking and representation become pervasive.
Similarly, the Reformation can be viewed as a renaissance in thought about the dominant social institution of the time. Erasmus makes clear that the Reformation is impossible without the rebirth of classical ideas, the reification it makes possible, the search for original truths and first insights (the return to Scripture).
There can be no question that the vernacular Bibles are instrumental to the Reformation, but they are likewise crucial to the Renaissance: the very impetus for the vernacular versions stems from the realization that the Vulgate was not some bedewed and bejeweled moment of Heaven-dropt science, channeled by St. Jerome, but was once a vernacular itself, merely rendered out of the Greek by Hieronymus.
quite so. this is the first thing I do when I find myself on a windows box.
tell us how you *really* feel, Taco.
These witless pseudo-libertarian rants must be quashed along with the moderators who love them. You are making knee-jerk liberals look thoughtful.
Let's examine this missive point by point:
Government intervention...( e.g. some subsidized service )...never without a cost at least as great as the benefit ( e.g. higher tax rates ). There is an interesting feature of modern life called collectivisation of risk/reward. It is an essential aspect of private insurance coverage and is at play in all economies of scale. I don't want to buy and maintain a snowplow to clear the road for the firetrucks. I don't want to build a cell-block in my backyard to deter potential burglars. You will find that privatisation in many service areas only occurs after governments have established a need and instituted a service at the behest of the people for whom it represents the collective voice.
The gist: not all markets are obvious; market development can be prohibitively expensive.
In the abscence [sic] of regulation, people do business wherever it is mutually beneficial. Regulation means that people are prohibited from engaging in some mutually beneficial action, therefore it's bad overall. Let's pass over, for a moment, the absurd assertion that only beneficial activities are subject to regulation. The real problem with this "all cretans are liars" argument is enclosed in the happy illusion of mutual beneficiality and its relationship to the place of business.
A quick overview of the legal basis of capitalism will reveal an essential foundation of adversarialism. Markets stand in adversarial relation to government, consumers to merchants, each pursuing their own benefit. The competitive pursuit of market advantage is the cornerstone of the capitalist edifice. I do business where it is in *my* benefit to do so. Caveat emptor and the invisible hand work against me to ensure that I offer my wares at a reasonable price. A glance at the map of Canada will reveal the importance of government regulation of certain services. It will be a long time before it is in anyone's commercial interest to lay phone lines to large sections of the Laurentian shield, capice?
Others have poked at the ridiculous statement regarding monopolies, so I will demure from belaboring the point. I trust, nevertheless, that any note of sarcasm or malice in this critique is taken in the spirit of belittling, mean-spirited contempt in which it is intended.
You are right, this race was Gore's to win. Nader was nothing more than a distraction and should have played into his hand if he had given it a little thought.
I remain proud to have pulled four votes for Nader in MN, including a former Goldwater republican I like to call my dad.
You analysis is correct and I look forward to Nader actually spiking the election in four years. Gimme seven percent nationally and a Green representative for Vermont!
Nader pulled over 80,000 in Florida, BTW. There are those who will argue that he's responsible, but Al pissed this one away.
The panhandle is central time, but the polls close at the same time across the state, opening and closing an hour earlier in Pensacola, by the clock.
Which O'R titles did you find obsolete?
The money stewarded by charitable foundations is piled in a closet somewhere?
A properly organized foundation delivers benefits by distributing the return on the investment of its principal in *equity* markets, dipshit.
Pardon my french, I can't believe this outburst is scored *insightful*.
It is unclear to me how a sentient being can consider voting for anyone other than Ralph Nader.