Problem with plan A) Being healthy is that there is no such thing as a "Healty gene" there are genes with more or less risk. Your genes might have low risk for all diseases but that doesn't mean you're immune. Insurance is there for the offchance you do get a disease and you don't want to pay a million for treatment out of your pocket.
Problem with plan B) Most treatments cost way more then insurance.
Let's say your treatment costs a million dollars and your genes say you have a 5% chance of getting it With your suggestion you have to somehow save up a million dollars that you have to have availible just in case you get sick. With insurance your insurance company will have you pay 5%+margins of that over the course of your life and will cover the expensive treatmeant if you get the disease.
Ofcourse if there is 100% sure knowledge it changes all that since the insurance would cost more then the treatment but from what I know of genetics the odds are never all that high for most genetic diseases.
The point of insurance is cover risks, not facts. You don't expect your house to burn down but you insure your house in case is does, once it stops being a risk and starts being inevitable insurance isn't really the right tool anymore.
They're not talking about MTBF(Mean time before failure) at all. They're talking about MTTDL(Mean time to Data Loss).
I suspect they expect you to replace the harddrives as they fail.
The largest benefit they seem to offer is the really really low maintenance cost, since the drives are powered off 95% of the time the electricity cost is minimal so almost all the cost is just replacing failed drives.
Your average high school kid should be able to transform any voltage to any voltage any maybe even build a compatible contact. If they can do that now I don't see why they wouldn't in a more high tech future.
1) Copyright infringement isn't theft 2) It seems to say (I'm no lawyer) that a citizen of a state can't do anything whatsoever in federal court against a state where he doesn't live.
Laws against common crimes like jaywalking and speeding aren't there to make your life miserable. They are there lower the amount of accidents due to jaywalking/speeding by giving a financial incentive to do it less.
If there were no traffic laws I seriously doubt that traffic would work.
Well, the idea is that there is a baseline level of creativity needed to make a work that is copyrighted and by definition machines can't be creative so if you make a machine that makes songs by itself those songs arn't creative and thus can't be copyrighted.
Now in this specific example there is still creative work in doing the vocals and the machine is just doing the backup but if you had another program to make the vocals automatically you could have real fun:P
In Sweden anything that has been made by a machine can't be copyrighted so I'd guess you can't get sued for it and the RIAA might even risk losing their copyright.
In performance a high end PC always win against a console and always will, the PS3 was beaten the day it was released.
The console hardware is cheaper because it's sold at a loss but they'll make that money back on the game prices which makes me believe pc vs console are fairly close in cost
Consoles become more expensive then PC's once you've bought 20 games or so.
Also Blizzard games have all so far run well on MacOS and they do as far as I know support(As in don't mind if you do, I don't think they will answer tech support about it though) the use of WoW on linux
I couldn't hear it from their MP3's but when I went into audacity I could hear up to 19k, I don't think my headphones liked that very much though since I hear it making strange sounds at the same time.
My point was that the rights aren't truly universal.
The rights are what they are because we've agreed that those are agreeable basic rights. For example for a long long time during human history people were not subject to the same rights, the nobility could easily get away with killing a commoner.
The idea of everyone having the same rights is rather new just like the bill of rights and constitution are new by historical standards.
So currently we have decided that everyone having the same rights is a very good idea because no one would like having the short end of the stick, however in the future we might have to reevaluate who "everyone" is.
Should just humans have these rights? What if we find out other species are also sentient, are they then too subject to these rights?
Also as technology advances we might notice that we don't have enough guaranteed rights and they need to be expanded.
My point is that the Universal rights have changed and will probably change again in both scope and detail (Who and what rights).
Contrary to the laws of nature the Universal rights are not constant, they're something we humans have discussed and agreed upon, and as such it is something we can discuss and decide to change.
I'd argue that rights are very much a part of the goverment and politics.
That is the reason every country has different rights, there is some international standard based on the UN Human Rights altough that isn't complied to very well (For example the U.S likes to violate the right to live quite a lot).
There is no such thing as basic universal rights, what they are is pure politics about what people agree to be basic rights.
Any "Bill of Rights" or "Constitution" will eventually become outdated and in need of change.
Where I live in Sweden the constitution is rather simple to change, however any change to the constitution has to the voted through twice with an election in between. Here we have a tradition of seeing the government as a benevolent being that everyone expects to take care of them though. The risk of the government turning fascist is rather low since the standing army is something in the order of 20 thousand compared to the population of nine million.
the software doesn't check for the unique key it just checks that the key fulfills some criteria that makes a random guess at a key unlikely to succeed. It's the reason CD key generators work.
Guy: Would you have sex with me for a million? Chick: Yeh Guy: How about one dollar? Chick: What do you think I am? Guy: We already established that, now we're just negotiating price
I don't know of any way to get an anonymous credit card in sweden, it might be possible though.
We have had parts of your problem in another way though with the so called "SMS Loans" where you can take a loan with your mobile phone with no actual ID or Credit check.
However since the problem arose most banks have terminated their agreements with such services and the law is being changed so you can't take a loan without a proper credit check.
Anyhow, The solution should imo be that you shouldn't be able to get credit without proper identification.
I'm always rather appaled by how easy it is to pay with my debit card, most of the time the clerk doesn't even look at my ID and when it comes to online transactions it's just scary, someone could rob me blind by just taking a photo of my card.
To use that kind of number isn't American Specific.
Here in Sweden you get a number at birth we call "Personal Number".
It's basically Year-Month-Day-HHYX
Where HH is the code for your hospital, Y is a number showing your gender (odd = man, even = woman) and X is a control figure calculated to show that its a real number.
Anyhow, I think the problem with SSN is that you somehow think it's secret. If you worked from the opposite assumption that the SSN is as wellknown as your name and should just be used as a personal identifier I think it would be more usefull.
Like the SSN can be used to find your entry in a database, but it should not be usable to take money from your account, for that they better know a real secret like your password or sign with your signature.
Slashdot Mirror
That's really hard to argue when it comes to near monopolies like ISP's, Microsoft etc, usually none of the above isn't a real option.
In Europe we tend to prefer to not rely on the whims of the corporations and instead just force them to do what we want.
Problem with plan A)
Being healthy is that there is no such thing as a "Healty gene" there are genes with more or less risk. Your genes might have low risk for all diseases but that doesn't mean you're immune. Insurance is there for the offchance you do get a disease and you don't want to pay a million for treatment out of your pocket.
Problem with plan B)
Most treatments cost way more then insurance.
Let's say your treatment costs a million dollars and your genes say you have a 5% chance of getting it
With your suggestion you have to somehow save up a million dollars that you have to have availible just in case you get sick. With insurance your insurance company will have you pay 5%+margins of that over the course of your life and will cover the expensive treatmeant if you get the disease.
Ofcourse if there is 100% sure knowledge it changes all that since the insurance would cost more then the treatment but from what I know of genetics the odds are never all that high for most genetic diseases.
The point of insurance is cover risks, not facts. You don't expect your house to burn down but you insure your house in case is does, once it stops being a risk and starts being inevitable insurance isn't really the right tool anymore.
Are you trying to claim that the authors of the MenuetOS are in their right minds?
I think they tried to make cheap long term storage.
They're not talking about MTBF(Mean time before failure) at all. They're talking about MTTDL(Mean time to Data Loss).
I suspect they expect you to replace the harddrives as they fail.
The largest benefit they seem to offer is the really really low maintenance cost, since the drives are powered off 95% of the time the electricity cost is minimal so almost all the cost is just replacing failed drives.
How advanced do you think Electricity is o.O
Your average high school kid should be able to transform any voltage to any voltage any maybe even build a compatible contact. If they can do that now I don't see why they wouldn't in a more high tech future.
1) Copyright infringement isn't theft
2) It seems to say (I'm no lawyer) that a citizen of a state can't do anything whatsoever in federal court against a state where he doesn't live.
Laws against common crimes like jaywalking and speeding aren't there to make your life miserable. They are there lower the amount of accidents due to jaywalking/speeding by giving a financial incentive to do it less.
If there were no traffic laws I seriously doubt that traffic would work.
They're the opposite of a paladin.
Holy Light->Death coil
Devotion aura->Unholy aura
Divine shield->Death pact
Resurection->Animate dead
(WC3)
in WoW they'll be a dps/tank class like warriors only they only use 2-handed weapons and instead of stance changing they switch runes on their sword.
Well, the idea is that there is a baseline level of creativity needed to make a work that is copyrighted and by definition machines can't be creative so if you make a machine that makes songs by itself those songs arn't creative and thus can't be copyrighted.
:P
Now in this specific example there is still creative work in doing the vocals and the machine is just doing the backup but if you had another program to make the vocals automatically you could have real fun
In Sweden anything that has been made by a machine can't be copyrighted so I'd guess you can't get sued for it and the RIAA might even risk losing their copyright.
In performance a high end PC always win against a console and always will, the PS3 was beaten the day it was released.
The console hardware is cheaper because it's sold at a loss but they'll make that money back on the game prices which makes me believe pc vs console are fairly close in cost
Consoles become more expensive then PC's once you've bought 20 games or so.
Also Blizzard games have all so far run well on MacOS and they do as far as I know support(As in don't mind if you do, I don't think they will answer tech support about it though) the use of WoW on linux
If I can have MORE then 16Mbps sustained that's a bit of proof that it's possible.
I have a 100Mbs unfiltered connection for $25 a month living in Sweden.
I couldn't hear it from their MP3's but when I went into audacity I could hear up to 19k, I don't think my headphones liked that very much though since I hear it making strange sounds at the same time.
I thought the whole point was that there isn't any competition when it comes to ISP's in the US.
My point was that the rights aren't truly universal.
The rights are what they are because we've agreed that those are agreeable basic rights. For example for a long long time during human history people were not subject to the same rights, the nobility could easily get away with killing a commoner.
The idea of everyone having the same rights is rather new just like the bill of rights and constitution are new by historical standards.
So currently we have decided that everyone having the same rights is a very good idea because no one would like having the short end of the stick, however in the future we might have to reevaluate who "everyone" is.
Should just humans have these rights? What if we find out other species are also sentient, are they then too subject to these rights?
Also as technology advances we might notice that we don't have enough guaranteed rights and they need to be expanded.
My point is that the Universal rights have changed and will probably change again in both scope and detail (Who and what rights).
Contrary to the laws of nature the Universal rights are not constant, they're something we humans have discussed and agreed upon, and as such it is something we can discuss and decide to change.
I'd argue that rights are very much a part of the goverment and politics.
That is the reason every country has different rights, there is some international standard based on the UN Human Rights altough that isn't complied to very well (For example the U.S likes to violate the right to live quite a lot).
There is no such thing as basic universal rights, what they are is pure politics about what people agree to be basic rights.
Any "Bill of Rights" or "Constitution" will eventually become outdated and in need of change.
Where I live in Sweden the constitution is rather simple to change, however any change to the constitution has to the voted through twice with an election in between. Here we have a tradition of seeing the government as a benevolent being that everyone expects to take care of them though. The risk of the government turning fascist is rather low since the standing army is something in the order of 20 thousand compared to the population of nine million.
They're fine as long as they don't give away the IP to anyone else.
You're not allowed to store my address either without my permission.
the software doesn't check for the unique key it just checks that the key fulfills some criteria that makes a random guess at a key unlikely to succeed. It's the reason CD key generators work.
It's more like this
Guy: Would you have sex with me for a million?
Chick: Yeh
Guy: How about one dollar?
Chick: What do you think I am?
Guy: We already established that, now we're just negotiating price
I don't know of any way to get an anonymous credit card in sweden, it might be possible though.
We have had parts of your problem in another way though with the so called "SMS Loans" where you can take a loan with your mobile phone with no actual ID or Credit check.
However since the problem arose most banks have terminated their agreements with such services and the law is being changed so you can't take a loan without a proper credit check.
Anyhow, The solution should imo be that you shouldn't be able to get credit without proper identification.
I'm always rather appaled by how easy it is to pay with my debit card, most of the time the clerk doesn't even look at my ID and when it comes to online transactions it's just scary, someone could rob me blind by just taking a photo of my card.
To use that kind of number isn't American Specific.
Here in Sweden you get a number at birth we call "Personal Number".
It's basically Year-Month-Day-HHYX
Where HH is the code for your hospital, Y is a number showing your gender (odd = man, even = woman) and X is a control figure calculated to show that its a real number.
Anyhow, I think the problem with SSN is that you somehow think it's secret. If you worked from the opposite assumption that the SSN is as wellknown as your name and should just be used as a personal identifier I think it would be more usefull.
Like the SSN can be used to find your entry in a database, but it should not be usable to take money from your account, for that they better know a real secret like your password or sign with your signature.