After the way Google ratted out that guy who drew an unflattering picture of some Hindu saint and he got beaten and forced to eat out of the same bowl he'd used as a toilet, I think I'll pass on Google Health.
Having them turn any information I was stupid enough to give them over to an insurance company, cop, nosy government official or random thug on the street wouldn't be all that good for my health.
Let's see an iron-clad, carved-in-stone, sue-for-millions commitment from them and maybe we can talk. Otherwise, I'd just be begging to get myself hurt when they rolled over on me because some slimy insurance company whined that they didn't have enough access to my personal life.
I suspect you might be mistaken about communication being restricted to only the most important information. Once communication was established and the really vital stuff had been exchanged, there would be a steady two-way data stream going at the maximum available bandwidth. Assuming friendly relations, the goal would be to build the best possible picture of the two civilizations, and that would require a lot more than just the high-end basics.
Eventually, you'd be looking at a picture of the other civilization that was as complete as possible, but whatever number of years out-of-date.
I'm a loud critic, and I work with Vista frequently. I flat-out detest it. Leaving aside all the "pretty-pretties", about which I couldn't care less, it is the most astounding resource pig I've ever encountered. I'm supposed to take a performance hit like that (and incompatibility with a lot of peripherals) for the kind of security I get by running XP Pro with ZoneAlarm and Comodo BOClean?
Except for updates, BOClean never bothers me, and ZoneAlarm asks whether or not something should be allowed to run about a hundredth as often as Vista.
I have never had a problem in two-plus years with this set-up, and I run an on-line scan every month or so to be reasonably sure I'm not kidding myself.
Vista is like a transvestite in a dark bar. It looks pretty good 'til you get close, and then it comes to you all of a sudden that you sure as hell don't want it anywhere near you.
I'm surprised NRA members aren't all over this like a cheap suit. One of their primary arguments is that if possession of guns is criminalized, only criminals will have guns.
The argument against this kind of secrecy is identical. When these agencies have the power to classify anything they want "Secret", the only people who know what they're up to are terrorists, spy organizations and other malefactors. They don't seem to have much trouble defeating the "security" protecting sensitive and embarrassing information.
I realize that some of the people who are given moderator points are fools or worse, unaccustomed and incompetent at the exercise of editorial control. However, it would be nice if they could somehow expand their mean and impoverished vocabulary to include the term "fair comment", and its proper place in a forum dedicated to the free exchange of ideas.
The last estimates I saw that made a serious attempt to do an apples-to-apples comparison indicated that the Canadian system delivers roughly twice the health care dollars to the sharp end (doctors, nurses, equipment and supplies, etc.) as the American model.
That doesn't tell the whole story by any means, but it seems to indicate that the insurance companies which infest the American system are feeding very, very well.
I don't know what the "start up" cost or "changeover" cost might be. Canada made the move so many years ago that I'm not sure any actions taken then would be relevant today.
The longer they're around, the more indications we see that Google's left coast, we're-all-in-this-together, good guy image is nothing more than just another example of corporate PR spin.
Can anybody still believe Google has no plans to surrender all those search records they've been hoarding to the first fascist prick who waves a writ in their face? The people who allowed this to happen should be made to walk the plank.
I know there are lots more applications for this, but what the health care system could really use right now is cheaper imaging technology. I'd love to see a similar breakthrough that reduced the cost of an MRI machine to about five grand.
Is this the place where those of us who loathe Vista as a bloated, DRM-ridden piece of crap that just can't wait to rat on its owners come for an apology from all those people who accused us of spreading FUD about it?
Did you notice the part that said, "Never"? That would include at work, in a library (they have computers there, I hear,and they're hooked up to the internet, too. It's all the rage, these days), at a friend or neighbor's place, etc.
"Never" is the key. In the overwhelming number of cases, I simply don't see how "never" would be possible without a conscious decision to avoid on-line communication. In this day and age, occasional access is trivially simple, and the occasional need to reach family, health care providers, the bank or some other institution immediately is a given in most peoples' lives.
So if you want to call people names, you might want to bear in mind that "elite" means the highest or best of a group. The jackass quotient amongst an elite group is usually much lower than it is amongst that class of people who engage in pointless and inane vituperation.
The CRTC has a long record of sitting on its bureaucratic ass and doing nothing while ownership of Canadian media has concentrated to a degree most nations would find frightening, while telemarketers began entering peoples' homes to prey on the elderly and vulnerable, and while it became more and more difficult for average people to obtain redress for outrages inflicted on them by cable companies and telcoms.
I doubt whether they will ultimately require any more of Bell than a statement saying "There's congestion. Honest. "
It is probably fair to suggest that many of the 20% in this situation have made a conscious choice to avoid computers with the same determination one would bring to avoiding a rabid dog.
Would it be unfair to note that according to the American Research Group, George Bush's job approval rating is somewhere around 20%, and speculate that perhaps members of one group may be just a tad over-represented in the other?
It might be illuminating to see what percentage of this group believe evolution is "just a theory", and what percentage believe family reunions are good places to meet babes, too.
I'm not sure I'm saying it properly, but it seems to me that this is going beyond calling somebody nasty names into an entirely new game. The case apparently centers on the manipulation of a minor through cold-blooded deceit and willful misrepresentation. It's the difference between beating somebody up during a fight and torturing a helpless prisoner.
I'm not sure a law covering something like this wouldn't wind up being a cure worse than the disease. However, if this woman actually did what she's alleged to have done, she's a sadist at least and probably a sociopath. People like her wind up getting caught with dead people chained in their basement.
I think you're missing the point. There's more than a few ham-handed, techno-illiterate, minimum-wage half-wits working for US Customs. They have been known to damage and/or lose laptops. And even if everything goes well, they don't necessarily give it back to you in a timely manner. You give them a laptop. There's a good chance that what you get back, eventually, is a doorstop.
And suspicion has nothing to do with whether or not they ask for your machine, for the most part. They don't want to be accused of profiling, so they're as likely to pick you for their love as anybody else.
There was a time when university campuses were bastions of free thought and conscience. Of course, the administrations were usually composed of the worst variety pedantic, bum-kissing bureaucrat the academic version of Social Darwinism could produce.
I'm not sure about free thought and conscience anymore, but the administration part seems to be just about the same.
Nowhere is it implied that they inspect every laptop, or even close to it. However, at least two law firms I know send their people across the Canada - US border with nothing on the laptops except the OS because of confidentiality concerns. Once across, they get what they need from the office.
This is certainly not FUD. The concerns are real, and there is at least one lawsuit currently underway as a result of US customs loss of a computer they took.
Thanks for a creative, workable solution to at least part of the problem, maybe more. The bottom line on attacks like this is that they aren't going to stop unless we find a way to put a metaphorical gun to a few corporate heads. The prize is simply too valuable: unrestricted access to the eyes and ears of everybody old enough to access the internet, and no enforceable legal control. It's a bottom-feeder's wet dream.
Some things call for the proverbial nuclear response: boycotts, lawsuits, all-out opposition. This is one of them. Once one of these corporations gets away with this, it's game over for those of us who want a corner of our lives that doesn't have some lying prick forcing his way into it to sell us something, spin the information we get and otherwise screw with our reality in a way that works to somebody else's advantage at our expense.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure about this. In order to be, ahem, fair to the other players, I'd have to stand a long way back, and my eyes aren't that good.
After the way Google ratted out that guy who drew an unflattering picture of some Hindu saint and he got beaten and forced to eat out of the same bowl he'd used as a toilet, I think I'll pass on Google Health.
Having them turn any information I was stupid enough to give them over to an insurance company, cop, nosy government official or random thug on the street wouldn't be all that good for my health.
Let's see an iron-clad, carved-in-stone, sue-for-millions commitment from them and maybe we can talk. Otherwise, I'd just be begging to get myself hurt when they rolled over on me because some slimy insurance company whined that they didn't have enough access to my personal life.
I suspect you might be mistaken about communication being restricted to only the most important information. Once communication was established and the really vital stuff had been exchanged, there would be a steady two-way data stream going at the maximum available bandwidth. Assuming friendly relations, the goal would be to build the best possible picture of the two civilizations, and that would require a lot more than just the high-end basics.
Eventually, you'd be looking at a picture of the other civilization that was as complete as possible, but whatever number of years out-of-date.
Hi, there.
I'm a loud critic, and I work with Vista frequently. I flat-out detest it. Leaving aside all the "pretty-pretties", about which I couldn't care less, it is the most astounding resource pig I've ever encountered. I'm supposed to take a performance hit like that (and incompatibility with a lot of peripherals) for the kind of security I get by running XP Pro with ZoneAlarm and Comodo BOClean?
Except for updates, BOClean never bothers me, and ZoneAlarm asks whether or not something should be allowed to run about a hundredth as often as Vista.
I have never had a problem in two-plus years with this set-up, and I run an on-line scan every month or so to be reasonably sure I'm not kidding myself.
Vista is like a transvestite in a dark bar. It looks pretty good 'til you get close, and then it comes to you all of a sudden that you sure as hell don't want it anywhere near you.
I'm surprised NRA members aren't all over this like a cheap suit. One of their primary arguments is that if possession of guns is criminalized, only criminals will have guns.
The argument against this kind of secrecy is identical. When these agencies have the power to classify anything they want "Secret", the only people who know what they're up to are terrorists, spy organizations and other malefactors. They don't seem to have much trouble defeating the "security" protecting sensitive and embarrassing information.
I realize that some of the people who are given moderator points are fools or worse, unaccustomed and incompetent at the exercise of editorial control. However, it would be nice if they could somehow expand their mean and impoverished vocabulary to include the term "fair comment", and its proper place in a forum dedicated to the free exchange of ideas.
The last estimates I saw that made a serious attempt to do an apples-to-apples comparison indicated that the Canadian system delivers roughly twice the health care dollars to the sharp end (doctors, nurses, equipment and supplies, etc.) as the American model.
That doesn't tell the whole story by any means, but it seems to indicate that the insurance companies which infest the American system are feeding very, very well.
I don't know what the "start up" cost or "changeover" cost might be. Canada made the move so many years ago that I'm not sure any actions taken then would be relevant today.
The longer they're around, the more indications we see that Google's left coast, we're-all-in-this-together, good guy image is nothing more than just another example of corporate PR spin.
Can anybody still believe Google has no plans to surrender all those search records they've been hoarding to the first fascist prick who waves a writ in their face? The people who allowed this to happen should be made to walk the plank.
I know there are lots more applications for this, but what the health care system could really use right now is cheaper imaging technology. I'd love to see a similar breakthrough that reduced the cost of an MRI machine to about five grand.
Is this the place where those of us who loathe Vista as a bloated, DRM-ridden piece of crap that just can't wait to rat on its owners come for an apology from all those people who accused us of spreading FUD about it?
Just wondering...
Did you notice the part that said, "Never"? That would include at work, in a library (they have computers there, I hear,and they're hooked up to the internet, too. It's all the rage, these days), at a friend or neighbor's place, etc.
"Never" is the key. In the overwhelming number of cases, I simply don't see how "never" would be possible without a conscious decision to avoid on-line communication. In this day and age, occasional access is trivially simple, and the occasional need to reach family, health care providers, the bank or some other institution immediately is a given in most peoples' lives.
So if you want to call people names, you might want to bear in mind that "elite" means the highest or best of a group. The jackass quotient amongst an elite group is usually much lower than it is amongst that class of people who engage in pointless and inane vituperation.
Just sayin'.
The CRTC has a long record of sitting on its bureaucratic ass and doing nothing while ownership of Canadian media has concentrated to a degree most nations would find frightening, while telemarketers began entering peoples' homes to prey on the elderly and vulnerable, and while it became more and more difficult for average people to obtain redress for outrages inflicted on them by cable companies and telcoms.
I doubt whether they will ultimately require any more of Bell than a statement saying "There's congestion. Honest. "
It is probably fair to suggest that many of the 20% in this situation have made a conscious choice to avoid computers with the same determination one would bring to avoiding a rabid dog.
Would it be unfair to note that according to the American Research Group, George Bush's job approval rating is somewhere around 20%, and speculate that perhaps members of one group may be just a tad over-represented in the other?
It might be illuminating to see what percentage of this group believe evolution is "just a theory", and what percentage believe family reunions are good places to meet babes, too.
I'm not sure I'm saying it properly, but it seems to me that this is going beyond calling somebody nasty names into an entirely new game. The case apparently centers on the manipulation of a minor through cold-blooded deceit and willful misrepresentation. It's the difference between beating somebody up during a fight and torturing a helpless prisoner.
I'm not sure a law covering something like this wouldn't wind up being a cure worse than the disease. However, if this woman actually did what she's alleged to have done, she's a sadist at least and probably a sociopath. People like her wind up getting caught with dead people chained in their basement.
I think you're missing the point. There's more than a few ham-handed, techno-illiterate, minimum-wage half-wits working for US Customs. They have been known to damage and/or lose laptops. And even if everything goes well, they don't necessarily give it back to you in a timely manner. You give them a laptop. There's a good chance that what you get back, eventually, is a doorstop.
And suspicion has nothing to do with whether or not they ask for your machine, for the most part. They don't want to be accused of profiling, so they're as likely to pick you for their love as anybody else.
PS I use TrueCrypt myself. Excellent program.
Um, did I say they were? Perhaps you're experiencing of one of those LSD "flashbacks". Seeing things that aren't there and all.
Sorry.
There was a time when university campuses were bastions of free thought and conscience. Of course, the administrations were usually composed of the worst variety pedantic, bum-kissing bureaucrat the academic version of Social Darwinism could produce.
I'm not sure about free thought and conscience anymore, but the administration part seems to be just about the same.
Nowhere is it implied that they inspect every laptop, or even close to it. However, at least two law firms I know send their people across the Canada - US border with nothing on the laptops except the OS because of confidentiality concerns. Once across, they get what they need from the office.
This is certainly not FUD. The concerns are real, and there is at least one lawsuit currently underway as a result of US customs loss of a computer they took.
"They are the size of fleas but they eat ladybugs? How does that work, exactly?"
The key word here is "they". It's plural. I eat cows...but not by myself.
Where I live (south of Toronto), we actually do have some options.
It will be interesting to see if a major ISP steps forward with an offer to provide completely unthrottled service, perhaps at a premium price.
Would an across-the-board failure to offer such an obvious consumer winner provide grounds for charges of collusion or racketeering?
Your vocabulary is mean and impoverished, but more than adequate to express your thoughts.
Thanks for a creative, workable solution to at least part of the problem, maybe more. The bottom line on attacks like this is that they aren't going to stop unless we find a way to put a metaphorical gun to a few corporate heads. The prize is simply too valuable: unrestricted access to the eyes and ears of everybody old enough to access the internet, and no enforceable legal control. It's a bottom-feeder's wet dream.
Some things call for the proverbial nuclear response: boycotts, lawsuits, all-out opposition. This is one of them. Once one of these corporations gets away with this, it's game over for those of us who want a corner of our lives that doesn't have some lying prick forcing his way into it to sell us something, spin the information we get and otherwise screw with our reality in a way that works to somebody else's advantage at our expense.
...to give these fuckers a lesson in just how slippery and hard to control the truth can be.