That's silly, if they're the one picking up the other 95% of the tab - which is now the case when costs exceed $6500 for the patient in a single year thanks to the ACA.
It's not just what the boss will like, it's what the boss will accept. Get too creative and you step out of bounds of what your boss is willing to accept as work - you may be asked for a do-over. Probably less likely to happen in software development, but even someone going creatively off the requirements is going to be asked to "fix it" even if what they came up with is probably better in the long run.
Oh, your insurance company will cover it if it's a genuine cure. A lifetime of leukemia treatments sets them back a cool million bucks. Half of that to make you healthy so they never have to pay another cent except for checkups? They'll jump right on top of it.
Don't forget that insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies are at odds with each other. Pharma makes their money charging people as much as they can for stuff. Insurance companies make their money paying out as little of that as they can, so they'll negotiate with the pharm company to pay less than retail (often much less.)
What insurance companies won't pay for is "experimental" treatments - stuff that is still in Phase I-IV human trials - because they're not proven to work and are as liable to permanently injure you as they are to cure you. Or have no effect at all in the long run.
welllllll if we actually paid university scientists directly for research like R&D departments do instead of making them beg for grants on a yearly basis, we might not have this problem.
"Here is your lab, here is your staff. We will pay for your lab and your staff for the next five years, plus materials and equipment and a small petty cash budget for operations (computers, pizza parties.) You have five years to produce a quality research paper that is accepted for publication on the first shot. No paper, no promotion. No science happens, you're back to teaching undergrads for the rest of your career. Go!"
I learned more in my middle school shop class than I did in my "technology" class. Technology changed so fast that what I learned 20 years ago is utterly useless today. The lessons I got from shop class, though, are timeless: Always wear safety goggles. Always keep your eye on the saw. Measure twice, cut once. Work on big projects in pairs - a second pair of eyes will make you more productive AND safer. And most importantly, don't use flammable paint on your rocket!
That is pretty "wow" but suffering a nervous breakdown and having bipolar disorder are not necessarily the same thing. I feel for her but I wonder if there is more to the story than what was reported. Did she try to commit suicide during her breakdown or otherwise injure herself or the fetus? Either way, a C-section without consent is a huge deal and I hope she sues and wins.
Medicare for all would have been much simpler and much easier to understand AND to implement, but we can't have that now. Because that's socialism. Or anti-freedom, or something.
AdBlock didn't catch anything. My little stop sign didn't have any numbers on it. So whatever they're using DoubleClick for, it's not to supply an advertisement that AdBlock could catch.
Zippy and responsive. Each page was uncluttered, and what little info I had to give to "see plans in my area" was reasonable. I got back a dozen quotes in under a minute just clicking through things.
Now, the actual registration process is probably more complex, but if the rest of the website responds as beautifully as it did for me during those dozen screens I saw, then they really did a good job fixing it.
I don't mind the thinking and interpreting. It's why I enjoy art. But how am I supposed to interpret four blobs of paint on a canvas named "Untitled" in an exhibit among ten other very similar blobs of paint on canvas also called "Untitled"?
I get it - not all art is meant for other people. For some it's therapy. For others it's about the process. But if it's not something you ever want to genuinely share with others by giving them at least the tiniest clue about the meaning, then don't put it in an exhibit. (And this doesn't even apply to all "blob of paint on canvas" types - if there are nifty things going on with the texture or thematic elements or some pattern in the chaos, I'll appreciate it at face value.)
I've read some eBooks that were worth $20. I've read others that were a waste of the $2.99 sale price they cost me. Depends on the book and depends on the author.
If there's a discernible subject to the painting, then it already has meaning and doesn't need further explanation. It's the modern art students who are pretending to be Jackson Pollack and who throw paint on a canvas without any explanation to the audience looking at it. Not even "I thought it would look cool" or "I was angry at my mom that day." Making art that just looks cool is fine, too. Making art based on your emotions is awesome. At least be kind and tell me what's what you were doing instead of saying it's "Untitled #28" in which the 28 is itself an arbitrary number. (Not even "I did a painting a day for 30 days and this was made on the 28th day" - that gives the number meaning, which gives the work of art meaning.)
I used to be bored in art museums. Then one day we took a trip to the local museum and I saw a dyptich painting named 'The Dutch Wives.' It was shredded newspaper headlines with dull splashes of color. Everyone around me was puzzled trying to solve the mystery of what the heck was going on. Then I noticed that the newspaper headlines were mostly identical, but some were slightly different. I realized that the painting was saying that the two women, represented by each canvas, had nearly identical thoughts and none of them were original. It was just things they'd heard or read, all slightly colored by their individual minds.
Since then, I've viewed each painting as a puzzle and I try to reconcile what the artist was thinking when he put the work together. This is why nothing pisses me off more than "Untitled" works that are completely abstract. The artist was so absorbed in creating the meaning for himself that he or she forgot to clue in the eventual audience as well.
I clearly remember a science project where some teenager bred bacteria that could break down plastic bags in about three weeks. It won somebody's science fair project and everything.
Well, my friends have been "gosh I got this great new job" pretty frequently, but it always entails them moving across the country. The term I think is "structural unemployment" in that the places that people can afford to live are not the same places where employers are offering jobs.
It was the first thing that caught my eye as well. Remote jobs are rare and getting rarer. My current job lets us work from home only if we're contagious.
"Out in the general public" is absolutely not the same as "sitting around the dinner table" however. Even the most loud and annoying person can be quiet and indifferent on the streets.
My parents had little political discourse - his family was party machine Republican and she was a labor Democrat, but neither were very involved in politics outside of actually voting. They were more apt to fight over money than they were politics. Yet they were happily married for 39 years, and much of that was because they did talk about politics with each other in depth (or with us kids, for that matter.)
I agree. Science goes through the upgrade of hypothesis, to tested results, to verified results, to working theories, and eventually laws (although the line between the last two is arbitrary in modern science, really.) The more results that are tested again and again, the better science is as a whole.
At least my coworkers will stick to polite and civil conversation for the duration of a meal. Odds are 99 to 1 that someone in my extended family will go off on a long winded political rant and/or racist screed, such that I will try to find an animal or small child to interact with in a quiet corner rather than have to listen to them.
I don't know about your company, but the CEO of my organization really doesn't micromanage every single software project. The IT department is 2% of our workforce. He's a smart guy, but ain't nobody got time for that.
Slashdot Mirror
That's silly, if they're the one picking up the other 95% of the tab - which is now the case when costs exceed $6500 for the patient in a single year thanks to the ACA.
It's not just what the boss will like, it's what the boss will accept. Get too creative and you step out of bounds of what your boss is willing to accept as work - you may be asked for a do-over. Probably less likely to happen in software development, but even someone going creatively off the requirements is going to be asked to "fix it" even if what they came up with is probably better in the long run.
Thanks for the correction! That does make sense.
You don't "shut down" wind turbines. They only stop running when it stops being windy.
Oh, your insurance company will cover it if it's a genuine cure. A lifetime of leukemia treatments sets them back a cool million bucks. Half of that to make you healthy so they never have to pay another cent except for checkups? They'll jump right on top of it.
Don't forget that insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies are at odds with each other. Pharma makes their money charging people as much as they can for stuff. Insurance companies make their money paying out as little of that as they can, so they'll negotiate with the pharm company to pay less than retail (often much less.)
What insurance companies won't pay for is "experimental" treatments - stuff that is still in Phase I-IV human trials - because they're not proven to work and are as liable to permanently injure you as they are to cure you. Or have no effect at all in the long run.
welllllll if we actually paid university scientists directly for research like R&D departments do instead of making them beg for grants on a yearly basis, we might not have this problem.
"Here is your lab, here is your staff. We will pay for your lab and your staff for the next five years, plus materials and equipment and a small petty cash budget for operations (computers, pizza parties.) You have five years to produce a quality research paper that is accepted for publication on the first shot. No paper, no promotion. No science happens, you're back to teaching undergrads for the rest of your career. Go!"
I learned more in my middle school shop class than I did in my "technology" class. Technology changed so fast that what I learned 20 years ago is utterly useless today. The lessons I got from shop class, though, are timeless: Always wear safety goggles. Always keep your eye on the saw. Measure twice, cut once. Work on big projects in pairs - a second pair of eyes will make you more productive AND safer. And most importantly, don't use flammable paint on your rocket!
That is pretty "wow" but suffering a nervous breakdown and having bipolar disorder are not necessarily the same thing. I feel for her but I wonder if there is more to the story than what was reported. Did she try to commit suicide during her breakdown or otherwise injure herself or the fetus? Either way, a C-section without consent is a huge deal and I hope she sues and wins.
Medicare for all would have been much simpler and much easier to understand AND to implement, but we can't have that now. Because that's socialism. Or anti-freedom, or something.
AdBlock didn't catch anything. My little stop sign didn't have any numbers on it. So whatever they're using DoubleClick for, it's not to supply an advertisement that AdBlock could catch.
Actually, wasn't one of the biggest complaints on Oct 1 the fact that you had to complete the registration to even see the quotes?
Zippy and responsive. Each page was uncluttered, and what little info I had to give to "see plans in my area" was reasonable. I got back a dozen quotes in under a minute just clicking through things.
Now, the actual registration process is probably more complex, but if the rest of the website responds as beautifully as it did for me during those dozen screens I saw, then they really did a good job fixing it.
I don't mind the thinking and interpreting. It's why I enjoy art. But how am I supposed to interpret four blobs of paint on a canvas named "Untitled" in an exhibit among ten other very similar blobs of paint on canvas also called "Untitled"?
I get it - not all art is meant for other people. For some it's therapy. For others it's about the process. But if it's not something you ever want to genuinely share with others by giving them at least the tiniest clue about the meaning, then don't put it in an exhibit. (And this doesn't even apply to all "blob of paint on canvas" types - if there are nifty things going on with the texture or thematic elements or some pattern in the chaos, I'll appreciate it at face value.)
I've read some eBooks that were worth $20. I've read others that were a waste of the $2.99 sale price they cost me. Depends on the book and depends on the author.
If there's a discernible subject to the painting, then it already has meaning and doesn't need further explanation. It's the modern art students who are pretending to be Jackson Pollack and who throw paint on a canvas without any explanation to the audience looking at it. Not even "I thought it would look cool" or "I was angry at my mom that day." Making art that just looks cool is fine, too. Making art based on your emotions is awesome. At least be kind and tell me what's what you were doing instead of saying it's "Untitled #28" in which the 28 is itself an arbitrary number. (Not even "I did a painting a day for 30 days and this was made on the 28th day" - that gives the number meaning, which gives the work of art meaning.)
I used to be bored in art museums. Then one day we took a trip to the local museum and I saw a dyptich painting named 'The Dutch Wives.' It was shredded newspaper headlines with dull splashes of color. Everyone around me was puzzled trying to solve the mystery of what the heck was going on. Then I noticed that the newspaper headlines were mostly identical, but some were slightly different. I realized that the painting was saying that the two women, represented by each canvas, had nearly identical thoughts and none of them were original. It was just things they'd heard or read, all slightly colored by their individual minds.
Since then, I've viewed each painting as a puzzle and I try to reconcile what the artist was thinking when he put the work together. This is why nothing pisses me off more than "Untitled" works that are completely abstract. The artist was so absorbed in creating the meaning for himself that he or she forgot to clue in the eventual audience as well.
Thank you for all that you do. We need more teachers like you.
I clearly remember a science project where some teenager bred bacteria that could break down plastic bags in about three weeks. It won somebody's science fair project and everything.
Well, my friends have been "gosh I got this great new job" pretty frequently, but it always entails them moving across the country. The term I think is "structural unemployment" in that the places that people can afford to live are not the same places where employers are offering jobs.
It provides punctuated equilibrium in between communications with other team members, however.
It was the first thing that caught my eye as well. Remote jobs are rare and getting rarer. My current job lets us work from home only if we're contagious.
"Out in the general public" is absolutely not the same as "sitting around the dinner table" however. Even the most loud and annoying person can be quiet and indifferent on the streets.
My parents had little political discourse - his family was party machine Republican and she was a labor Democrat, but neither were very involved in politics outside of actually voting. They were more apt to fight over money than they were politics. Yet they were happily married for 39 years, and much of that was because they did talk about politics with each other in depth (or with us kids, for that matter.)
I agree. Science goes through the upgrade of hypothesis, to tested results, to verified results, to working theories, and eventually laws (although the line between the last two is arbitrary in modern science, really.) The more results that are tested again and again, the better science is as a whole.
At least my coworkers will stick to polite and civil conversation for the duration of a meal. Odds are 99 to 1 that someone in my extended family will go off on a long winded political rant and/or racist screed, such that I will try to find an animal or small child to interact with in a quiet corner rather than have to listen to them.
I don't know about your company, but the CEO of my organization really doesn't micromanage every single software project. The IT department is 2% of our workforce. He's a smart guy, but ain't nobody got time for that.