My guess: when Uber submits documentation for road safety, patents, copyrights, etc - that information could be submitted to a third-party arbiter to verify that the technology used is unique and not infringing upon Google's patents.
Ah yes, because sexism in the workplace is just "BS". This is literally what a lot of former-Uber female engineers tend to comment on happening. If it were one or two, okay sure, but it's the vast majority of them. Here I thought intelligent professions like programming didn't have to care about who you were, looked like, smelled like, or anything else so long as you could write GOOD code. And the expectation of politeness is inherent to any business environment - so you can get over that.
> These things have all gotten cheaper over the time span you discuss.
Incorrect. A Big Mac cost 49 cents in 1967. 49 cents in 1967 has the same buying power, today, as $3.54 according to the BLS (prices are all in USD btw). Today's Big Mac costs $3.99. That's roughly a 12% increase in price. This is with inflation already calculated as well. A 1967 Volkswagen beetle, new, cost $1,769 or $12,783.04 in today's dollars. A 2017 Beetle starts off at $19995 or ~56% more expensive than its 1967 counterpart. This is including inflation in the calculation as well. Tell me, how do you account for an increase in inflation adjusted price and still claim that price has decreased? I'm paying more than I'd have paid (in inflation adjusted dollars) than I would've in 1967.
> For your 40 hours, your income has grown by 10 times.
From what time period to what time period? According to this chart (http://www.epi.org/files/2013/ib388-figurea.jpg.538) produced by the Economic Policy Insitute, wages haven't not really kept up productivity. And according to this chart (https://www.advisorperspectives.com/images/content_image/data/44/440c34f52d3d1d344a1cca6b755557ae.png) by Advisor Perspectives, when adjusted for inflation, the buying power of middle class (and lower class for that matter) homes has largely been fairly flat. Wage stagnation is a "hot button issue" and it's well documented that people today can buy less with their wages than they could decades ago.
> So, yeah, a 1940 dollar is smaller than a 1960 dollar; a 2000 dollar is smaller than a 2015 dollar; and something in 2015 which isn't bought for a 2015 price proportionally larger than its 1990 price is cheaper, even if the price tag displays a value numerically-greater.
I've disproven this in the first part of this reply. Your Big Mac today costs 12% more AFTER inflation is calculated in. And your Volkswagen Beetle? 56% MORE AFTER inflation is calculated.
The point was that in today's, investor driven, "MOAR PROFITS EVERY QUARTER" mantra companies rarely "pass on the savings" out of goodwill. Many companies, these days, don't even compete on price. Look at Wendy's, Burger King, McDonald's, and Arby's. They've all stopped competing on price - minimizing or altogether skirting the dollar menu. Secondly, even as automation has increased since the 30s, the price of goods and services hasn't gone down. As technology has made manufacturing cheaper than even, the price of my Levi's has only grown. As has the price of my car, the price of a drill, and even the price of nails. Indeed, you can't right blame the cost of labor...most of these things are made in countries that were either similar to a typical 1970s wage OR cheaper than that (with some countries paying literally pennies a day). EVEN in the places where products are made, the locals aren't exactly prospering. No one sane person says "Gee, I want to live like a sweatshop worker".
I wouldn't expect any company to lower prices simply because of automation. If history is any indicator, that price will continue to rise and the blame will be passed on as something like "inflation" despite it being cheaper/easier/safer/quicker to produce said item.
This is assuming Tesla would drop price that much. It would be like assuming Comcast would drop its data cap since it costs them next to nothing to provide infrastructure. Yet here we are with data caps in 2016.
What about when it's all kinds of jobs? What happens when you only need 1 human to maintain 300 machines who can each do the work of 500 people? As more and more of these machines come into the workplace, fewer and fewer jobs are needed. If you automate the building of these machines and that automation can build its own parts as well, you eventually get to a point where there literally isn't enough work for everyone. Capitalism's weakness is automation. It doesn't anticipate the automation of entire industries simultaneously. Most economic theories haven't - particularly when resource creation can't keep up with the population.
True random number generators are few/far in between. Most use pseudorandom generation (generally provided by the OS which itself collects usually from various sources) with a high entropy. But TRNG is extremely difficult to do.
I was replying to the AC post of: "Signal is an awesome app. It reminds me of the old TextSecure app that isn't made any longer, which was a perfect replacement for Android's stock SMS appl" by informing him (and potentially others) that the guys who made TextSecure make Signal as it seemed from the post like AC thought they were completely different apps. It's informative for those who didn't know this information previously, I'm sorry you took offense to that.
I bet their new desktop comes with NO ports (everything bluetooth), no external media drives (it's all in the cloud baby), and no monitor (they beam it into your brain).
If you're "deploying " software, the concept that most people think of is Enterprise functionality. If your "net connection" (whatever that means) "dies" (whatever that means), chances are your IT staff are working to restore that connectivity before deploying additional software (most of which tends to require SOME sort of network connectivity to be useful). In short, few people ever run entirely local apps in any sort of business...and those that do are so far behind the times that no one really cares.
...because you didn't want to pay your fair share. Sorry, Apple, it's time to pay the piper. You've benefitted off the backs of Euro taxpayers as you utilized their infrastructure. If the US was smart, we'd get our dues as well. We, THE PEOPLE, don't owe any corporation a penny. They exist solely because we allow them to and in exchange WE get income taxes. It's time to pay up. Your trademarks and assets are protected because of my country's military. That has a price, boys.
MS Spyware, Google Analytics, Alexa, and a billion other pieces of tracking out there. Face it, unless you're running everything through a VPN, through TOR, run NoScript, run an adblocker or two, never use any web features that require Javascript, and never reuse usernames then you're being tracked by some entity somewhere. And even TOR isn't a guarantee these days. You don't have privacy on the internet. You never will have privacy on the internet UNLESS you're willing to give up quite a bit of functionality. And honestly, you shouldn't really expect it. The internet isn't some bastion of freedom. It's a series of highly commercial entities who are providing stuff for you in exchange for their being able to market to you OR sell your information to someone else. It's not even about what's fair and equitable - this is simply about capitalism in its finest, unhindered state. You, the end-user, aren't usually the customer - rather you're the resource. You're going to be harvested regardless of your wishes or desires. Meanwhile you stay on an insecure OS and you make it possible for your machine to become a zombie and interrupt MY experience. Don't like it? Well set aside those Libertarian ideas that \. loves so much, boys, only regulation will fix this kind of crap.
48 vs 46.7...you're argument includes the other candidates...my argument is admittedly simpler but accurate: Hillary won the most votes (from the popular vote pool, not the electoral college) than any of the other candidates.In that sense she had the "majority".
> If we continue down this fictional route
It's a potential route, not a fictional one. A series of events, however unlikely, are plausible. I realize this is pedantic.
> You're just like every other whiny liberal snowflake I've met who's butthurt that their candidate was SO BAD that she couldn't even beat Donald Trump in an election. People like you are one of the main reasons why she lost. Your holier-than-thou-I-am-right-because-I'm-a-liberal attitude is appalling and the rest of America got so sick of it that now we have Donald freaking Trump as our president.
You do know that the number of people who voted for Clinton outmatched Trump by millions, right?
> Hearing people like you call people who didn't vote for Hillary "retards" makes me happy she lost. Get your head out of your ass and look around for a minute...you might actually learn something instead of just assuming you're right about everything because you've labeled yourself as "progressive."
You should probably take your own advice and consider that your "win" was nothing more than a Constitutional workaround. The vast majority of people didn't get the candidate that they voted for. The "rest" of America actually liked Hillary better than Trump. Perhaps it's you who needs to get your head out of your retarded ass and understand WHY the VAST MAJORITY of Americans are pissed off. And I'd assume you'd be pissed off because he's quite literally did the total opposite of "draining the swamp" by loading it with more Wall Street cronies than even Hillary would've nominated. It adds evidence that Trump supporters are counter-productive, gullible retards, better off 6 feet under than as voters.
> BS meme, as you know. EVERY business refuses to pay contractors who fail to deliver on time, violate contracts, etc.
Hundreds of contractors have come forward. Many have filed lawsuits (which were settled). This isn't standard business practice - you don't just "not pay" and avoid phone calls asking for payment. Trump isn't exactly a stranger to lawsuits either - if the work wasn't done (or done to specification) he'd more than likely sue, not just avoid paying.
> He'd love to pay manufacturers in the US
And he could. He chooses to go overseas and manufacture for cheap while trying to pass it off as a high-end "luxury" item. Luxury items are made in Germany, Italy, Japan, America, and other first world nations. They charge outrageous prices because of the name and because of the quality. Fake luxury items, like Trump's, charge outrageous prices for low quality junk. Furthermore most of what Trump does is licensing. He could easily license with a manufacturer in the States - it's not like he's actually opening factories.
> Right. They work for him. You get that, right? They report to him, as his employees.
Yes. All those firms he owes millions to...they report to him. Are you dumb enough to actually believe that?
> Well at least we know you're another classy, tolerant liberal.
Why do I need to be tolerant? Trump isn't. Why do I have to be classy? Again, Trump isn't. You're OK with that - so suck it up buttercup.
> Your smugness and condescending phony superiority complex is exactly why the Democrats have lost 900 some legislative seats, most governorships, both houses of congress, the White House, and the Supreme Court.
Let's be clear...we lost the White House because of a (yet to be finalized) Electoral College vote. In terms of popular votes (ie what "the people" want) we actually won the White House. I'll hand it to you guys for the local and state game. You redistricted the absolute shit out of many states, but so far a couple of those states were sued and found to have illegally gerrymandered their states (like Wisconsin). Otherwise the Republicans had a better state/local game plan, but they had to make one because of the ass kickings the last two POTUS elections. Without redistricting, Republicans would not have won this election. And there was a lot of effort to make voting harder for younger people/minorities (such as Republicans blocking adding early voting booths close to the University of Wisconsin because the citiy clerk thought it wouldn't "favor" the Republicans). So with a mix of a good game strategy and a lot of dirty tricks you won. Golf clap.
> There's another handful of senate seats up for election in two years - want to lose a bunch of those, too?
No, but I'm sure we will anyways. Republican gerrymandering will grow more aggressive over the next few years. If you can't win on merit at least you can win by cheating. Golf clap.
Government isn't a business. Trump's business "successes" hedged on him not paying contractors, manufacturing overseas, avoiding loan repayments, and bankruptcies. His main company, The Trump Organization, is racked with debt. It has the asset valuation to keep going, but cash on hand doesn't make the payments. As for Trump not being beholden to Wall Street, he's nominating Wall Streeters to his cabinet. He has ties to Russian banks as they were the only ones willing to continue loaning money to him. The fact that you're so blind and stupid about your choice of candidate shows just how fit of a voter you really are. You're the kind of retard who would vote for Bin Laden if he said he'd "drain the mosques".
Oh yes and when a healthcare provider closes down (whether out of retirement, bankruptcy, etc) and your records get dumped on a curb (it's happened) outside of the doctor's house because the local hospital got tired of playing record keeper, you'd be singing a different tune. Or when your doc's office goes up in flames and their entire lots worth of archived data gets burnt. But now, let's say your doc makes duplicates or triplicates of everything and stores it all offsite. Who is going to pay for that? Who keeps that storage facility safe? What if you get sick and your doc needs to pull records for the last couple of years to research it? There are PLENTY of reasons to prefer electronic over paper.
Furthermore there's tons of research that is ongoing by hospitals with JUST your data. They're finding correlations and patterns and other amazing things BECAUSE that data can be modeled and understood. Just because you're too short sighted to see the benefits, doesn't mean there aren't plenty. And the younger medical providers from doctors to dentists, from nurses to EMS techs ALL are loving digital because there are a ton of benefits.
As for your "resolution" - tell your dentist to quit being cheap and upgrade. High resolution, digital, imaging systems exist with both 2D/3D capabilities. I've seen ones that can even show you, to some degree, the folds in your own brain. And that can be tagged, shared, and consulted on by multiple dentists (or doctors or whomever). There's literally no real benefit to paper records.
The professional nomenclature is "clinical service providers" and that measure is what I consider that makes ANY healthcare organization a healthcare organization. Lab services, Imaging services, Infusion Centers, pharmacies, and even the dialysis centers are ALL what I consider "healthcare organizations" as they are involved, directly, with clinical care operations. A third-party janitorial service would not be considered as neither would be third-party IT contractors (as examples).
No, it's clearly not. The higher a state's population, the more Electoral College representation a state gets. Population matters, because that's where a MAJORITY tends to be. This is basic US civics.
I'm sorry, but our elections are not necessarily meant to be fair to sparsely populated states. Populations matters at the federal level - because that's where the majority is at. And it wasn't just "brown people in NY and LA" (kind of a racist statement there chief), it was a bunch of white people, yellow people, red people, and everyone else. If the racist folks don't like that, they should work to make their state more inviting to live in - which would boost their numbers.
"She didn't "win" a damned thing! Thanks to the wisdom of the founders, we have the electoral college so that the "more people" in California and New York don't get to rule the rest of the country."
Haha, yeah, because screw elections right? That's absolutely NOT why the founders created the EC. The EC was created so that a candidate who might be able to win on popularity contest (which is what elections essentially are), but are otherwise unfit to rule a nation not make it into the White House. This election is an entirely different situation where the "winner" was really a loser in all regards who only "won" because of a Constitutional Loophole. The EC should act more like a confirmation system where the POPULAR VOTE winner gets to be confirmed.
Slashdot Mirror
My guess: when Uber submits documentation for road safety, patents, copyrights, etc - that information could be submitted to a third-party arbiter to verify that the technology used is unique and not infringing upon Google's patents.
Ah yes, because sexism in the workplace is just "BS". This is literally what a lot of former-Uber female engineers tend to comment on happening. If it were one or two, okay sure, but it's the vast majority of them. Here I thought intelligent professions like programming didn't have to care about who you were, looked like, smelled like, or anything else so long as you could write GOOD code. And the expectation of politeness is inherent to any business environment - so you can get over that.
> These things have all gotten cheaper over the time span you discuss.
Incorrect. A Big Mac cost 49 cents in 1967. 49 cents in 1967 has the same buying power, today, as $3.54 according to the BLS (prices are all in USD btw). Today's Big Mac costs $3.99. That's roughly a 12% increase in price. This is with inflation already calculated as well. A 1967 Volkswagen beetle, new, cost $1,769 or $12,783.04 in today's dollars. A 2017 Beetle starts off at $19995 or ~56% more expensive than its 1967 counterpart. This is including inflation in the calculation as well. Tell me, how do you account for an increase in inflation adjusted price and still claim that price has decreased? I'm paying more than I'd have paid (in inflation adjusted dollars) than I would've in 1967.
> For your 40 hours, your income has grown by 10 times.
From what time period to what time period? According to this chart (http://www.epi.org/files/2013/ib388-figurea.jpg.538) produced by the Economic Policy Insitute, wages haven't not really kept up productivity. And according to this chart (https://www.advisorperspectives.com/images/content_image/data/44/440c34f52d3d1d344a1cca6b755557ae.png) by Advisor Perspectives, when adjusted for inflation, the buying power of middle class (and lower class for that matter) homes has largely been fairly flat. Wage stagnation is a "hot button issue" and it's well documented that people today can buy less with their wages than they could decades ago.
> So, yeah, a 1940 dollar is smaller than a 1960 dollar; a 2000 dollar is smaller than a 2015 dollar; and something in 2015 which isn't bought for a 2015 price proportionally larger than its 1990 price is cheaper, even if the price tag displays a value numerically-greater.
I've disproven this in the first part of this reply. Your Big Mac today costs 12% more AFTER inflation is calculated in. And your Volkswagen Beetle? 56% MORE AFTER inflation is calculated.
The point was that in today's, investor driven, "MOAR PROFITS EVERY QUARTER" mantra companies rarely "pass on the savings" out of goodwill. Many companies, these days, don't even compete on price. Look at Wendy's, Burger King, McDonald's, and Arby's. They've all stopped competing on price - minimizing or altogether skirting the dollar menu. Secondly, even as automation has increased since the 30s, the price of goods and services hasn't gone down. As technology has made manufacturing cheaper than even, the price of my Levi's has only grown. As has the price of my car, the price of a drill, and even the price of nails. Indeed, you can't right blame the cost of labor...most of these things are made in countries that were either similar to a typical 1970s wage OR cheaper than that (with some countries paying literally pennies a day). EVEN in the places where products are made, the locals aren't exactly prospering. No one sane person says "Gee, I want to live like a sweatshop worker".
I wouldn't expect any company to lower prices simply because of automation. If history is any indicator, that price will continue to rise and the blame will be passed on as something like "inflation" despite it being cheaper/easier/safer/quicker to produce said item.
This is assuming Tesla would drop price that much. It would be like assuming Comcast would drop its data cap since it costs them next to nothing to provide infrastructure. Yet here we are with data caps in 2016.
What about when it's all kinds of jobs? What happens when you only need 1 human to maintain 300 machines who can each do the work of 500 people? As more and more of these machines come into the workplace, fewer and fewer jobs are needed. If you automate the building of these machines and that automation can build its own parts as well, you eventually get to a point where there literally isn't enough work for everyone. Capitalism's weakness is automation. It doesn't anticipate the automation of entire industries simultaneously. Most economic theories haven't - particularly when resource creation can't keep up with the population.
Ah yes, the good ol' "well I'm a citizen who feels like I don't have to pay taxes, because I'm special" argument.
Yeah, I just saw it. Go ahead, downvote that post. Haha.
True random number generators are few/far in between. Most use pseudorandom generation (generally provided by the OS which itself collects usually from various sources) with a high entropy. But TRNG is extremely difficult to do.
I was replying to the AC post of: "Signal is an awesome app. It reminds me of the old TextSecure app that isn't made any longer, which was a perfect replacement for Android's stock SMS appl" by informing him (and potentially others) that the guys who made TextSecure make Signal as it seemed from the post like AC thought they were completely different apps. It's informative for those who didn't know this information previously, I'm sorry you took offense to that.
Signal is made by the same devs who make Signal.
I bet their new desktop comes with NO ports (everything bluetooth), no external media drives (it's all in the cloud baby), and no monitor (they beam it into your brain).
If you're "deploying " software, the concept that most people think of is Enterprise functionality. If your "net connection" (whatever that means) "dies" (whatever that means), chances are your IT staff are working to restore that connectivity before deploying additional software (most of which tends to require SOME sort of network connectivity to be useful). In short, few people ever run entirely local apps in any sort of business...and those that do are so far behind the times that no one really cares.
...because you didn't want to pay your fair share. Sorry, Apple, it's time to pay the piper. You've benefitted off the backs of Euro taxpayers as you utilized their infrastructure. If the US was smart, we'd get our dues as well. We, THE PEOPLE, don't owe any corporation a penny. They exist solely because we allow them to and in exchange WE get income taxes. It's time to pay up. Your trademarks and assets are protected because of my country's military. That has a price, boys.
MS Spyware, Google Analytics, Alexa, and a billion other pieces of tracking out there. Face it, unless you're running everything through a VPN, through TOR, run NoScript, run an adblocker or two, never use any web features that require Javascript, and never reuse usernames then you're being tracked by some entity somewhere. And even TOR isn't a guarantee these days. You don't have privacy on the internet. You never will have privacy on the internet UNLESS you're willing to give up quite a bit of functionality. And honestly, you shouldn't really expect it. The internet isn't some bastion of freedom. It's a series of highly commercial entities who are providing stuff for you in exchange for their being able to market to you OR sell your information to someone else. It's not even about what's fair and equitable - this is simply about capitalism in its finest, unhindered state. You, the end-user, aren't usually the customer - rather you're the resource. You're going to be harvested regardless of your wishes or desires. Meanwhile you stay on an insecure OS and you make it possible for your machine to become a zombie and interrupt MY experience. Don't like it? Well set aside those Libertarian ideas that \. loves so much, boys, only regulation will fix this kind of crap.
I read it. So there's that.
> She did not win a majority the popular vote
48 vs 46.7...you're argument includes the other candidates...my argument is admittedly simpler but accurate: Hillary won the most votes (from the popular vote pool, not the electoral college) than any of the other candidates.In that sense she had the "majority".
> If we continue down this fictional route
It's a potential route, not a fictional one. A series of events, however unlikely, are plausible. I realize this is pedantic.
> You're just like every other whiny liberal snowflake I've met who's butthurt that their candidate was SO BAD that she couldn't even beat Donald Trump in an election. People like you are one of the main reasons why she lost. Your holier-than-thou-I-am-right-because-I'm-a-liberal attitude is appalling and the rest of America got so sick of it that now we have Donald freaking Trump as our president.
You do know that the number of people who voted for Clinton outmatched Trump by millions, right?
> Hearing people like you call people who didn't vote for Hillary "retards" makes me happy she lost. Get your head out of your ass and look around for a minute...you might actually learn something instead of just assuming you're right about everything because you've labeled yourself as "progressive."
You should probably take your own advice and consider that your "win" was nothing more than a Constitutional workaround. The vast majority of people didn't get the candidate that they voted for. The "rest" of America actually liked Hillary better than Trump. Perhaps it's you who needs to get your head out of your retarded ass and understand WHY the VAST MAJORITY of Americans are pissed off. And I'd assume you'd be pissed off because he's quite literally did the total opposite of "draining the swamp" by loading it with more Wall Street cronies than even Hillary would've nominated. It adds evidence that Trump supporters are counter-productive, gullible retards, better off 6 feet under than as voters.
> BS meme, as you know. EVERY business refuses to pay contractors who fail to deliver on time, violate contracts, etc.
Hundreds of contractors have come forward. Many have filed lawsuits (which were settled). This isn't standard business practice - you don't just "not pay" and avoid phone calls asking for payment. Trump isn't exactly a stranger to lawsuits either - if the work wasn't done (or done to specification) he'd more than likely sue, not just avoid paying.
> He'd love to pay manufacturers in the US
And he could. He chooses to go overseas and manufacture for cheap while trying to pass it off as a high-end "luxury" item. Luxury items are made in Germany, Italy, Japan, America, and other first world nations. They charge outrageous prices because of the name and because of the quality. Fake luxury items, like Trump's, charge outrageous prices for low quality junk. Furthermore most of what Trump does is licensing. He could easily license with a manufacturer in the States - it's not like he's actually opening factories.
> Right. They work for him. You get that, right? They report to him, as his employees.
Yes. All those firms he owes millions to...they report to him. Are you dumb enough to actually believe that?
> Well at least we know you're another classy, tolerant liberal.
Why do I need to be tolerant? Trump isn't. Why do I have to be classy? Again, Trump isn't. You're OK with that - so suck it up buttercup.
> Your smugness and condescending phony superiority complex is exactly why the Democrats have lost 900 some legislative seats, most governorships, both houses of congress, the White House, and the Supreme Court.
Let's be clear...we lost the White House because of a (yet to be finalized) Electoral College vote. In terms of popular votes (ie what "the people" want) we actually won the White House. I'll hand it to you guys for the local and state game. You redistricted the absolute shit out of many states, but so far a couple of those states were sued and found to have illegally gerrymandered their states (like Wisconsin). Otherwise the Republicans had a better state/local game plan, but they had to make one because of the ass kickings the last two POTUS elections. Without redistricting, Republicans would not have won this election. And there was a lot of effort to make voting harder for younger people/minorities (such as Republicans blocking adding early voting booths close to the University of Wisconsin because the citiy clerk thought it wouldn't "favor" the Republicans). So with a mix of a good game strategy and a lot of dirty tricks you won. Golf clap.
> There's another handful of senate seats up for election in two years - want to lose a bunch of those, too?
No, but I'm sure we will anyways. Republican gerrymandering will grow more aggressive over the next few years. If you can't win on merit at least you can win by cheating. Golf clap.
Government isn't a business. Trump's business "successes" hedged on him not paying contractors, manufacturing overseas, avoiding loan repayments, and bankruptcies. His main company, The Trump Organization, is racked with debt. It has the asset valuation to keep going, but cash on hand doesn't make the payments. As for Trump not being beholden to Wall Street, he's nominating Wall Streeters to his cabinet. He has ties to Russian banks as they were the only ones willing to continue loaning money to him. The fact that you're so blind and stupid about your choice of candidate shows just how fit of a voter you really are. You're the kind of retard who would vote for Bin Laden if he said he'd "drain the mosques".
Oh yes and when a healthcare provider closes down (whether out of retirement, bankruptcy, etc) and your records get dumped on a curb (it's happened) outside of the doctor's house because the local hospital got tired of playing record keeper, you'd be singing a different tune. Or when your doc's office goes up in flames and their entire lots worth of archived data gets burnt. But now, let's say your doc makes duplicates or triplicates of everything and stores it all offsite. Who is going to pay for that? Who keeps that storage facility safe? What if you get sick and your doc needs to pull records for the last couple of years to research it? There are PLENTY of reasons to prefer electronic over paper.
Furthermore there's tons of research that is ongoing by hospitals with JUST your data. They're finding correlations and patterns and other amazing things BECAUSE that data can be modeled and understood. Just because you're too short sighted to see the benefits, doesn't mean there aren't plenty. And the younger medical providers from doctors to dentists, from nurses to EMS techs ALL are loving digital because there are a ton of benefits.
As for your "resolution" - tell your dentist to quit being cheap and upgrade. High resolution, digital, imaging systems exist with both 2D/3D capabilities. I've seen ones that can even show you, to some degree, the folds in your own brain. And that can be tagged, shared, and consulted on by multiple dentists (or doctors or whomever). There's literally no real benefit to paper records.
The professional nomenclature is "clinical service providers" and that measure is what I consider that makes ANY healthcare organization a healthcare organization. Lab services, Imaging services, Infusion Centers, pharmacies, and even the dialysis centers are ALL what I consider "healthcare organizations" as they are involved, directly, with clinical care operations. A third-party janitorial service would not be considered as neither would be third-party IT contractors (as examples).
No, it's clearly not. The higher a state's population, the more Electoral College representation a state gets. Population matters, because that's where a MAJORITY tends to be. This is basic US civics.
I'm sorry, but our elections are not necessarily meant to be fair to sparsely populated states. Populations matters at the federal level - because that's where the majority is at. And it wasn't just "brown people in NY and LA" (kind of a racist statement there chief), it was a bunch of white people, yellow people, red people, and everyone else. If the racist folks don't like that, they should work to make their state more inviting to live in - which would boost their numbers.
"She didn't "win" a damned thing! Thanks to the wisdom of the founders, we have the electoral college so that the "more people" in California and New York don't get to rule the rest of the country."
Haha, yeah, because screw elections right? That's absolutely NOT why the founders created the EC. The EC was created so that a candidate who might be able to win on popularity contest (which is what elections essentially are), but are otherwise unfit to rule a nation not make it into the White House. This election is an entirely different situation where the "winner" was really a loser in all regards who only "won" because of a Constitutional Loophole. The EC should act more like a confirmation system where the POPULAR VOTE winner gets to be confirmed.