I don't see how punishment is immoral: if as the first paragraph states it is in proportion to the damage of the crime. Not everything is monitary but say someone steals your wallet with $200 in it. If months later cops catch the criminal would it be unreasonable for them to take $200 from the criminals wallet and give it to you even if it isn't the same $200 they took? With emotional/physical damages it is harder to balance things out of course but neither of the alternative reasons are acceptable to me for a simple reason: changing moral norms/noisy governments/religions.
Deterrence: what if you do a crime with low impact but that the government decides is a politically great thing to be seen as cracking down on? Say gay sex a hundred years ago, or smoking pot. Getting the required level of deterrence might require a hugely disproportionate punishment on the few that you catch.
curative: social norms change and governments generally follow the lead of the masses/majority religion. So things that are otherwise not clearly harmful might be illegal for no other reason than because the government decides to run a christian/muslim/flying spaghetti monster society. What if your "crime" is a matter of personal choice and victimless? What if you don't want to be cured? When people are clearly mentally ill we might force them to be cured under the assumption that they aren't mentally able to understand the consequences of their refusing treatment (or the benefits of having treatment). But psychology is too easily controlled by societies definition of socially acceptable that you'll end up in the same situation: governments/religions will dictate what is "sane" behaviour. Example: people don't masturbate in public because it is seen as rude (and decades of religious indoctrination tells them sex is embarassing/immoral/private). But say someone wanted to have a wank on a bus, who was hurt? At worse it would be a health hazard if they don't clean up after themselves as people are quite capable of looking the other way when they don't want to see something if they chose to stare and get offended inside I'd argue that would be their problem not his.
I'm not sure how correctional correctional facilities are. I think some people will stop doing crime when they get out because they've had a theoretical punishment turn into an actual one they've experienced. A 20 yr old might think: "oh I won't get caught I'm too smart" and even if I do jails have become so easy now that big deal I'll be bored for a few years. But after having actually experienced it, and having things they didn't even think about happening (like loosing family members while in, or having their kids grow up without them etc) they don't want to go through it again. It isn't necessarily that they've been "corrected" from their bad behaviour just their relative weighting of the alternatives have been adjusted: it is no longer worth the time to do the crime.
Exactly. Also don't forget tooling. Sometimes you need to use new methodologies to get the latest code gen or other IDE goodness from your tooling. WPF for your use case might not be any better than WinForms but if you have to live with the same tools as you had in 2005 to keep using WinForms you might just have to use the new technology.
Depending on your business segment/developer churn it might also be a matter of using languages and libraries where other people know how to use it. You might be able to do it in scheme and COBOL but if you get zero interest from customers/third party extenders who cares?
The problem is people can make 3rd party servers for the purpose of supporting an older game or giving better performance, removing the requirements for a subscription to a consoles online service etc. But they can also do it so that all the burnt copies of the game will still work without cracking (or at least making it so your cracked version isn't detected eventually). Game developers argue everyone is doing the work for the second reason and presto 3rd party servers look illegal.
Not sure. There is weirdness in particle physics where you are able to break the rules as long as the duration is short enough that you never could measure it. Sometimes those "broken rules" states are simplify calculations. If you pumped in enough energy I'd guess you could get a big bang. Another option would be that the expansion of the edge of the high energy region combined with the reduction of the speed of light in this new material would be such that you stop increasing the energy density of the center of your target.
At high enough energies particles are spontaneously created. They in turn will obey Pauli Exclusion (at least if they have spin I think). So enough photons and you make matter that will prevent you from making more particles ie pumping more energy into the space.
Monocultures are a nature of the need for interop between orgs. Standards form because it is easy to confirm it will work, easy to find employees/volunteers that can use it, it solves a problem well and the opportunity cost of looking at alternatives likely will be more than any incremental improvement they offer etc. I agree FOSS is fantastic for turn around of fixes and being able to confirm the quality of the fix. Closed source can solve the problem but you might never now.
I think this calls for more monoculture: only build what is differentiated everything else should be common well understood and maintained components.
It will be come like the cable company on top of the cable company. Endless bundling of $8 a month ESPN with a dozen Swedish language Teletubby rerun stations. Shows exclusively on one platform or the other. All delivered via a regional monopoly cable layer who got bribed by the highest bidder for bandwidth. Your home internet service: low priority QoS (I wonder if that will be added to the user agreement (no servers, no kiddy porn and oh by the way your bits it the lowest priority: we'll send them... if we aren't busy))
I'm 34. I find it hard to get excited about the latest technology. Maybe that is my shortcoming maybe that is experience. Not being excited/dropping everything for the latest fad is a matter of knowing what is possible with existing technology and having been around for more than one cycle of: parallelism, single threaded performance, macro vs micro kernel etc etc. I'm not perfect but a lot of the attrition in tech can be attributed IMO to allowing HR to craft openings to use the latest acronyms rather than expecting experience/higher level thinking that they are fully unqualified to evaluate.
Good points on mixed use. I work in Toronto and commute about 1.5 hours each way (Toronto apparently beat LA recently for worst commute time). I train/bus/walk it but with one bedroom condos going for 3-500k versus 2000sqft houses on 50' lots in the burbs it just doesn't make a lot of sense to live in the city (unless you desperately want the urban life which I don't: you can't realistically afford to raise a family in the city unless both parents are working professionals). NYC might also have been forced to be more reasonable because of its island nature. If you were stuck taking a fairy and then hiring a horse every day to get to work you'd quickly learn that if you stay on the island things get much simpler. Sadly Toronto has a lot of land around it so the "Greater Toronto Area" spans an area about 70km (45mi) in all directions outside of the borders of the city proper and silly immigration policies that allow ~40% of immigrants (not to single them out just for being immigrants but for being the source of population growth in Canada) to all move to this one city creating an endless pushing out of suburbs further and further away.
I'm not sure of a good solution to the problem. A random idea: charge people/corporations a fee per commuter mile. It would either force suburbanites to move closer to work/change jobs or push employers to move to less densely populated areas where mixed use is more prevalent, or even better which I'd like: make companies have to consider if having people commute into work to do a job they could easily do from home makes sense. I saw a Ted talk last year that claimed that cities were actually more environmental though because people generally do get around on public transit/walking more, live in smaller spaces etc. I'm not sure that it took into account that say roughly 30% of a cities population had to drive into it in the morning from much further away. Perhaps if the typical city was mixed use you would loose a lot of the efficiencies as you'd have a larger proportion of families requiring larger living spaces/schools/parks.
NYC isn't the biggest in North America though: that honor goes to Mexico city (both urban and metro areas are larger (about 200k and 2M difference respectively), then NYC, LA, Toronto.
I don't think it is just the design of cities that is different. Cars (Germany may be the biggest european exception) are much more of a status/sex symbol than in europe. There is a reason why people talk about their experience in the back of the car as a teenager: those that don't drive their dates around don't get laid. If you bike in a lot of cities it has to be a cause. Oh you must be very enviromental, or you must be frugal/cheap etc. It can never be "just because", or God forbid: I actually prefer living within a 20 min bike ride of work rather than owning a car and driving an hour each way from the 'burbs.
not if you can possibly get accepted and pay for it but if you can actually hack it. The "bottom quartile" lose their money. They have 0-100k in debt and don't have the marks/career prospects to payback or at least justify the cost of the loan. They are also down 3-4 years where they could have been earning money and could now be in a situation that now that they know that they should have done trade school they no longer have the money or time to do so.
I think we as a society need to realize that some people just simply have the makings of a really good janitor but a piss poor engineer. Lets not push everyone into going to college otherwise they and their parents get labelled a failure.
I agree with the hints bit. Not as good as some shading or whatever before you try to interact with a control but even if they just did some effect when you moused over things you can click on it would have been nice. It is completely touch on a small screen centric in the OS though. You can't (easily) "hover" with a finger. Your screen is small and/or low res so you can't waste space with silly things like controls: they need to fly in only when necessary. Etc. Yet another reason why there should have been a desktop (mouse and keyboard) vs tablet interface. They could have been similar perhaps the difference would just have been whether or not the Apps menu or charms are visible by default would have gone a long way to make desktop users more comfortable. Similar to the taskbar once they were comfortable and knew where things are they could have enabled autohide.
It is part of the UI design concept: essentially they wanted to break away from trying to mimic the real world (see iBooks for example): which to an extent I agree with, adding a 1 s delay to try to pretend like you aren't on a computer is silly. But window boarder effects: I agree making them pretty doesn't hurt. They could have at least left a "Aero" mode in even if it wasn't the default.
I get sub 10 s boot time. When rebooting my monitor just recognizes no signal and then flickers when it refreshes I'm on the login screen. I don't even get to see the bios anymore because the monitor doesn't detect the computer before it is coming up on the login screen.
Win 8.1 is very usable. Stability: not so much in my experience but could be the apps I'm using. Firefox and Visual Studio generally crash once a day for me at work. That said as long as it recovers well from a crash I don't really care.
Not to mention not everywhere in the world has unlimited transfer limits on their internet. Example most ISPs in Canada have a 20-250GB/month cap counting both downloads and uploads. Afterwards you pay about another $100 a month before the penalties stop. Even if they don't directly penalize you you likely would be paying for a higher internet package/getting traffic shaped because of your high usage. So your free/cheap backup will likely cost you several hundred in penalties to backup and several hundred more should you need to restore making it almost as cost effective to just have a second 20TB array.
I get people like to do this but the easier solution for 99% of people is just to get some counseling for their hording behaviour. How likely are you t watch that S3E04 Gilmore Girls episode again? I went to university with a guy back in 2000 when storage was relatively expensive that had 1000's of anime movies. He hadn't watched most of them and didn't really intend too. He downloaded them and then if anyone recommended one of them to him he would watch it. We was downloading: just in case one day he might have a reason to be interested.
It is also a matter of the length of talks: you can only talk about one thing that worked for 15m-1hr. You can't really pass on the horror stories of the wrong directions, where you got equipment from if you are an experimentalist (I fortunately was a computational theorist so just needed access to a supercomputer), other areas you were looking in to, details about positions that are available in your group and what the group culture is like etc etc.
You really have to be there. The problem I've found is at several companies I've worked at is that the training budget is way too low (I was getting 1-2k a year for training purposes). For that kind of money you can't afford to go anywhere that doesn't happen to be in your town (and I don't live in a big conference city), you get highly encouraged to "make the most of online training opportunities". I think a big part of it is employers realize that conferences are networking opportunities and so conferences are not good for employee retention.
Try drawing graphs and charts while taking notes. Try really understanding particle physics while trying to scribble things down like crazy before the slide changes. Visual and audio are two different mediums. To reach/entertain your audience you likely need a bit of both. The problem is people don't use each of them for their respective strengths. My general experience has been either so little information on the slides that if you lose focus for a minute and come back you can't tell what is going on because the slides are all eye candy with generic text, cramming in math that takes pages to get to by skipping to every 40 lines in the proof, or cramming in a lot of text and the presenter just stands up there and reads it to you. There needs to be a balance and the slides should have clear anchors to part of the talk so when someone walks into the room they can within a couple sentences find out where you are on the slide and vis versa.
Also: unless you are a keynote talk you will have very little time for technical presentations (I have a few presentation awards for talks in physics). So: just try to make your topic seem interesting and have a couple interesting tidbits about what you actually did. Everything else will be handled in followup questions or over beers after the conference. You can't condense a years worth of 10hr days into 15min so don't even try: your talk will miss stuff but anyone truly interested (which will probably be 5 out of 200 listeners) will followup with you.
You can also overdose on B vitamins. People should be careful when taking multivitamins and such don't just assume one a day will "make sure I don't miss anything". Some vitamins are poison in high doses. If you are a meet eater especially on a high protein diet (which I'd call >10% food calories as protein) unless you have some other medical reason for needing high B vitamins you probably don't.
Oh but it is. The people on the linked letter are addiction treatment facilities and the like. They claim their concern stems from the increased addiction by patients and general public to opiates and, the not surprisingly given the correlation between the two, increased overdoses. Indeed drugs that even when used under medical supervision have a tendency to lead to addictions need to be tightly controlled. But I'd say it isn't the existence of the drugs that are meeting a medical need that is the problem, its the failure in the controls. Perhaps the newest batch of drugs should only be prescribed to terminal cases (if your dead in 2 months it doesn't much matter if you get addicted), or come with a mandatory requirement for substance abuse counseling afterwards/during treatment. This would drastically increase the cost of treating with these types of substances but perhaps when the nuclear option is needed for pain it is the price that must be paid.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't see how punishment is immoral: if as the first paragraph states it is in proportion to the damage of the crime. Not everything is monitary but say someone steals your wallet with $200 in it. If months later cops catch the criminal would it be unreasonable for them to take $200 from the criminals wallet and give it to you even if it isn't the same $200 they took? With emotional/physical damages it is harder to balance things out of course but neither of the alternative reasons are acceptable to me for a simple reason: changing moral norms/noisy governments/religions.
Deterrence: what if you do a crime with low impact but that the government decides is a politically great thing to be seen as cracking down on? Say gay sex a hundred years ago, or smoking pot. Getting the required level of deterrence might require a hugely disproportionate punishment on the few that you catch.
curative: social norms change and governments generally follow the lead of the masses/majority religion. So things that are otherwise not clearly harmful might be illegal for no other reason than because the government decides to run a christian/muslim/flying spaghetti monster society. What if your "crime" is a matter of personal choice and victimless? What if you don't want to be cured? When people are clearly mentally ill we might force them to be cured under the assumption that they aren't mentally able to understand the consequences of their refusing treatment (or the benefits of having treatment). But psychology is too easily controlled by societies definition of socially acceptable that you'll end up in the same situation: governments/religions will dictate what is "sane" behaviour. Example: people don't masturbate in public because it is seen as rude (and decades of religious indoctrination tells them sex is embarassing/immoral/private). But say someone wanted to have a wank on a bus, who was hurt? At worse it would be a health hazard if they don't clean up after themselves as people are quite capable of looking the other way when they don't want to see something if they chose to stare and get offended inside I'd argue that would be their problem not his.
I'm not sure how correctional correctional facilities are. I think some people will stop doing crime when they get out because they've had a theoretical punishment turn into an actual one they've experienced. A 20 yr old might think: "oh I won't get caught I'm too smart" and even if I do jails have become so easy now that big deal I'll be bored for a few years. But after having actually experienced it, and having things they didn't even think about happening (like loosing family members while in, or having their kids grow up without them etc) they don't want to go through it again. It isn't necessarily that they've been "corrected" from their bad behaviour just their relative weighting of the alternatives have been adjusted: it is no longer worth the time to do the crime.
Exactly. Also don't forget tooling. Sometimes you need to use new methodologies to get the latest code gen or other IDE goodness from your tooling. WPF for your use case might not be any better than WinForms but if you have to live with the same tools as you had in 2005 to keep using WinForms you might just have to use the new technology.
Depending on your business segment/developer churn it might also be a matter of using languages and libraries where other people know how to use it. You might be able to do it in scheme and COBOL but if you get zero interest from customers/third party extenders who cares?
The problem is people can make 3rd party servers for the purpose of supporting an older game or giving better performance, removing the requirements for a subscription to a consoles online service etc. But they can also do it so that all the burnt copies of the game will still work without cracking (or at least making it so your cracked version isn't detected eventually). Game developers argue everyone is doing the work for the second reason and presto 3rd party servers look illegal.
Not sure. There is weirdness in particle physics where you are able to break the rules as long as the duration is short enough that you never could measure it. Sometimes those "broken rules" states are simplify calculations. If you pumped in enough energy I'd guess you could get a big bang. Another option would be that the expansion of the edge of the high energy region combined with the reduction of the speed of light in this new material would be such that you stop increasing the energy density of the center of your target.
At high enough energies particles are spontaneously created. They in turn will obey Pauli Exclusion (at least if they have spin I think). So enough photons and you make matter that will prevent you from making more particles ie pumping more energy into the space.
They'll come preloaded with heartrate monitors. When you die the drones will come for you like Valkeries.
Monocultures are a nature of the need for interop between orgs. Standards form because it is easy to confirm it will work, easy to find employees/volunteers that can use it, it solves a problem well and the opportunity cost of looking at alternatives likely will be more than any incremental improvement they offer etc. I agree FOSS is fantastic for turn around of fixes and being able to confirm the quality of the fix. Closed source can solve the problem but you might never now.
I think this calls for more monoculture: only build what is differentiated everything else should be common well understood and maintained components.
It will be come like the cable company on top of the cable company. Endless bundling of $8 a month ESPN with a dozen Swedish language Teletubby rerun stations. Shows exclusively on one platform or the other. All delivered via a regional monopoly cable layer who got bribed by the highest bidder for bandwidth. Your home internet service: low priority QoS (I wonder if that will be added to the user agreement (no servers, no kiddy porn and oh by the way your bits it the lowest priority: we'll send them ... if we aren't busy))
I'm 34. I find it hard to get excited about the latest technology. Maybe that is my shortcoming maybe that is experience. Not being excited/dropping everything for the latest fad is a matter of knowing what is possible with existing technology and having been around for more than one cycle of: parallelism, single threaded performance, macro vs micro kernel etc etc. I'm not perfect but a lot of the attrition in tech can be attributed IMO to allowing HR to craft openings to use the latest acronyms rather than expecting experience/higher level thinking that they are fully unqualified to evaluate.
Actually ask for a specific thing rather than everything that someone has ever done online? What if they miss something.
How quaint.
Good points on mixed use. I work in Toronto and commute about 1.5 hours each way (Toronto apparently beat LA recently for worst commute time). I train/bus/walk it but with one bedroom condos going for 3-500k versus 2000sqft houses on 50' lots in the burbs it just doesn't make a lot of sense to live in the city (unless you desperately want the urban life which I don't: you can't realistically afford to raise a family in the city unless both parents are working professionals). NYC might also have been forced to be more reasonable because of its island nature. If you were stuck taking a fairy and then hiring a horse every day to get to work you'd quickly learn that if you stay on the island things get much simpler. Sadly Toronto has a lot of land around it so the "Greater Toronto Area" spans an area about 70km (45mi) in all directions outside of the borders of the city proper and silly immigration policies that allow ~40% of immigrants (not to single them out just for being immigrants but for being the source of population growth in Canada) to all move to this one city creating an endless pushing out of suburbs further and further away.
I'm not sure of a good solution to the problem. A random idea: charge people/corporations a fee per commuter mile. It would either force suburbanites to move closer to work/change jobs or push employers to move to less densely populated areas where mixed use is more prevalent, or even better which I'd like: make companies have to consider if having people commute into work to do a job they could easily do from home makes sense. I saw a Ted talk last year that claimed that cities were actually more environmental though because people generally do get around on public transit/walking more, live in smaller spaces etc. I'm not sure that it took into account that say roughly 30% of a cities population had to drive into it in the morning from much further away. Perhaps if the typical city was mixed use you would loose a lot of the efficiencies as you'd have a larger proportion of families requiring larger living spaces/schools/parks.
NYC isn't the biggest in North America though: that honor goes to Mexico city (both urban and metro areas are larger (about 200k and 2M difference respectively), then NYC, LA, Toronto.
I don't think it is just the design of cities that is different. Cars (Germany may be the biggest european exception) are much more of a status/sex symbol than in europe. There is a reason why people talk about their experience in the back of the car as a teenager: those that don't drive their dates around don't get laid. If you bike in a lot of cities it has to be a cause. Oh you must be very enviromental, or you must be frugal/cheap etc. It can never be "just because", or God forbid: I actually prefer living within a 20 min bike ride of work rather than owning a car and driving an hour each way from the 'burbs.
not if you can possibly get accepted and pay for it but if you can actually hack it. The "bottom quartile" lose their money. They have 0-100k in debt and don't have the marks/career prospects to payback or at least justify the cost of the loan. They are also down 3-4 years where they could have been earning money and could now be in a situation that now that they know that they should have done trade school they no longer have the money or time to do so.
I think we as a society need to realize that some people just simply have the makings of a really good janitor but a piss poor engineer. Lets not push everyone into going to college otherwise they and their parents get labelled a failure.
I agree with the hints bit. Not as good as some shading or whatever before you try to interact with a control but even if they just did some effect when you moused over things you can click on it would have been nice. It is completely touch on a small screen centric in the OS though. You can't (easily) "hover" with a finger. Your screen is small and/or low res so you can't waste space with silly things like controls: they need to fly in only when necessary. Etc. Yet another reason why there should have been a desktop (mouse and keyboard) vs tablet interface. They could have been similar perhaps the difference would just have been whether or not the Apps menu or charms are visible by default would have gone a long way to make desktop users more comfortable. Similar to the taskbar once they were comfortable and knew where things are they could have enabled autohide.
I thought it was "great success". Now I go have sexy time with my sister.
It is part of the UI design concept: essentially they wanted to break away from trying to mimic the real world (see iBooks for example): which to an extent I agree with, adding a 1 s delay to try to pretend like you aren't on a computer is silly. But window boarder effects: I agree making them pretty doesn't hurt. They could have at least left a "Aero" mode in even if it wasn't the default.
I get sub 10 s boot time. When rebooting my monitor just recognizes no signal and then flickers when it refreshes I'm on the login screen. I don't even get to see the bios anymore because the monitor doesn't detect the computer before it is coming up on the login screen.
Win 8.1 is very usable. Stability: not so much in my experience but could be the apps I'm using. Firefox and Visual Studio generally crash once a day for me at work. That said as long as it recovers well from a crash I don't really care.
Not to mention not everywhere in the world has unlimited transfer limits on their internet. Example most ISPs in Canada have a 20-250GB/month cap counting both downloads and uploads. Afterwards you pay about another $100 a month before the penalties stop. Even if they don't directly penalize you you likely would be paying for a higher internet package/getting traffic shaped because of your high usage. So your free/cheap backup will likely cost you several hundred in penalties to backup and several hundred more should you need to restore making it almost as cost effective to just have a second 20TB array.
I get people like to do this but the easier solution for 99% of people is just to get some counseling for their hording behaviour. How likely are you t watch that S3E04 Gilmore Girls episode again? I went to university with a guy back in 2000 when storage was relatively expensive that had 1000's of anime movies. He hadn't watched most of them and didn't really intend too. He downloaded them and then if anyone recommended one of them to him he would watch it. We was downloading: just in case one day he might have a reason to be interested.
It is also a matter of the length of talks: you can only talk about one thing that worked for 15m-1hr. You can't really pass on the horror stories of the wrong directions, where you got equipment from if you are an experimentalist (I fortunately was a computational theorist so just needed access to a supercomputer), other areas you were looking in to, details about positions that are available in your group and what the group culture is like etc etc.
You really have to be there. The problem I've found is at several companies I've worked at is that the training budget is way too low (I was getting 1-2k a year for training purposes). For that kind of money you can't afford to go anywhere that doesn't happen to be in your town (and I don't live in a big conference city), you get highly encouraged to "make the most of online training opportunities". I think a big part of it is employers realize that conferences are networking opportunities and so conferences are not good for employee retention.
Try drawing graphs and charts while taking notes. Try really understanding particle physics while trying to scribble things down like crazy before the slide changes. Visual and audio are two different mediums. To reach/entertain your audience you likely need a bit of both. The problem is people don't use each of them for their respective strengths. My general experience has been either so little information on the slides that if you lose focus for a minute and come back you can't tell what is going on because the slides are all eye candy with generic text, cramming in math that takes pages to get to by skipping to every 40 lines in the proof, or cramming in a lot of text and the presenter just stands up there and reads it to you. There needs to be a balance and the slides should have clear anchors to part of the talk so when someone walks into the room they can within a couple sentences find out where you are on the slide and vis versa.
Also: unless you are a keynote talk you will have very little time for technical presentations (I have a few presentation awards for talks in physics). So: just try to make your topic seem interesting and have a couple interesting tidbits about what you actually did. Everything else will be handled in followup questions or over beers after the conference. You can't condense a years worth of 10hr days into 15min so don't even try: your talk will miss stuff but anyone truly interested (which will probably be 5 out of 200 listeners) will followup with you.
Sorry: 10% by weight not but calories. Calories would probably be more like 15-20% range (forgot the water :)).
You can also overdose on B vitamins. People should be careful when taking multivitamins and such don't just assume one a day will "make sure I don't miss anything". Some vitamins are poison in high doses. If you are a meet eater especially on a high protein diet (which I'd call >10% food calories as protein) unless you have some other medical reason for needing high B vitamins you probably don't.
Oh but it is. The people on the linked letter are addiction treatment facilities and the like. They claim their concern stems from the increased addiction by patients and general public to opiates and, the not surprisingly given the correlation between the two, increased overdoses. Indeed drugs that even when used under medical supervision have a tendency to lead to addictions need to be tightly controlled. But I'd say it isn't the existence of the drugs that are meeting a medical need that is the problem, its the failure in the controls. Perhaps the newest batch of drugs should only be prescribed to terminal cases (if your dead in 2 months it doesn't much matter if you get addicted), or come with a mandatory requirement for substance abuse counseling afterwards/during treatment. This would drastically increase the cost of treating with these types of substances but perhaps when the nuclear option is needed for pain it is the price that must be paid.