Why is this so surprising? This is the watch list. Kindof like a tornado watch. A tornado has not been spotted yet but the conditions are right. They have strong ties and/or other reasons to be suspected. If they were a known terrorist then they should be arrested so almost by definition the watch list and even the "cannot fly" list should be primarily suspected terrorists not actual terrorists. A list like this is probably natural in any investigation but just like any suspect list it's what you do with the list that matters. It's common in a murder investigation to tell the lead suspect to not leave town and sometimes even to take away their passport but not arrest them because there is not enough evidence yet. One difference though with the terrorist list is that it's ongoing and neverending so there probably needs to be a time limit where someone can only be on there for 6 months or some way to get off it. Either that or that the list is just a reference for police to refer to and it means nothing. So it really comes down to what the list is used for. Even in a murder case when a lead goes cold the police will decide that person X is no longer a person of interest and removed from the list of suspects. I would hope the same thing is happening with this list.
Same here. I've had multiple disputes on paypal and they all were decided in my favor. My dad had several thousand dollars stolen from his account and paypal gave him all his money back. I never leave money in my account so there is really nothing they can seize from me and their arbitration leaves an extra layer of protection against fraud.
A larger portion of the cost of developing a drug is the 30% profit margin the corporations with their draconian patent-protected monopolies demand be paid to their shareholders. 30%. Let that sink in for a minute. That's 3 times better than companies that extract liquid gold from the ground for pennies on the dollar of its worth and sell it.
That might seem high but 9 out of 10 drugs fail at the human trial phase so for every drug with a 30% markup there are 9 drugs with no profit at all so using your number of 30% and averaged together these drugs only have a 3% markup. Individual drugs actually have a much higher markup than 30%. That 30% is company profit but it basically works out to the same thing. It's not the corporations that are demanding 30% to be paid but rather the shareholders demanding it be paid. If you think that 30% is without risk then feel free to invest in these companies yourself. Drug development companies go bust all the time. In a high risk industry like drug development you have to make a fairly high profit on the drugs and companies that are actually successful to cover the cost of all the failed experiments.
A large part of the cost of developing a drug is getting it approved as safe for human use. For instance you can buy a vaccine for lyme disease for both your dog and your horse but there is no such legal vaccine for humans. The beginning stages of testing are relatively cheap and you can afford to have several of them in the works if for no other reason than to pad your patent portfolio. Many of the very early beginning stages also tend to cost nothing (i.e. A researcher happened to notice that drug X had this side effect while working on something else) It doesn't mean it's effective, it really doesn't mean anything but if you (or one of your coworkers) is faced with almost certain death then you will try it on the off chance that it might work.
So, people knowingly paying to watch children being raped have no responsibility whatsoever.
Another option to reduce demand for child porn would be first to legalize child porn where there is no victim (i.e. artificially generated, etc..) A second much more controversial option would be to provide a government sponsored website where people could watch child porn for free. No more demand for child porn so no more people being paid to rape children. This same website could also have advertisement where people could go and get help, etc... I don't know why some people are attracted to children. I also don't know why some people are attracted to the same sex but attempts to deprogram gays hasn't worked very well so my guess is that it won't work very well on paedophiles either so it might be better to give them a safe, legal, outlet to prevent them from victimizing more children because unlike homosexuality which can be consentual there will never be a way to have consentual sex with a child so your 3 options are: throw them all in prison before they commit a crime, figure out some way to deprogram them (hasn't worked well for homosexuals), or give them some morally acceptable way of relieving that desire.
As a society, we need to stop trying to prosecute both sides of the crime. This creates an incentive for the sides to work together to conceal. It has been shown that it's more effective to only prosecute the person receiving the bribe than it is to prosecute both sides. If you only prosecute the receiver then the receiver never knows whether it is entrapment or not.
I think the same could be done for child porn and drugs. Stop going after the users but instead give a $10k reward if they report someone and it results in a successful prosecution. Now instead of the users working with the dealers every single user becomes a potential double crosser either now or any time in the future.
Both are making assumptions but the later is the correct assumption. Unless you have a rational reason for WHY testosterone levels fell then it makes alot more sense to say that "the rise of civilization caused testosterone to fall" than it does to say that some unknown force caused testosterone to fall which caused civilization to rise so the correct headline should read:
Ancient Skulls Show Testosterone Fell as Civilization Rose
"When I log into someone's email I always ask them for permission and then ask them for their username and password. ALWAYS. "
I assume you mean you ask them to type in their password to the keyboard right?
No IT policy should endorse users giving passwords to anyone, including IT staff. Otherwise social engineering becomes trivial.
Great post, btw.
So when someone calls IT and asks for you to make a change to their account then you just make it? Of course you need to ask for their password and/or other information to verify that they are truly who they say they are before changing their account or you make social engineering of IT just as trivial. When I call my bank I fully expect them to ask me for my password, my account number, and/or my social security number before they start talking to me. IT is no different. Social engineering education is very similiar to educating kids. You tell kids "an adult should never ask you for help". You tell your users the same thing. IT should never ask you for help. If YOU need help and call them then expect them to ask you for personal information to verify your account before they help you but never give out information to anyone that calls you and asks you for the information.
When it's the discussion about budgets that affect your department, including laying off staff, you're a complete fool if you don't get your resume out there.
When as IT should you ever be reading a "discussion"? You might see a subject or two about budget or even layoffs but you shouldn't be reading the actual emails and without violating your position and reading the emails you are usually just guessing at what is really going on. If you find yourself constantly curious and want to read other people's emails because of some snippet you saw then you might want to think of changing to a career where you are not constantly being tempted to do something illegal/immoral.
The being said, I did once discover someone in the office was pregnant before it was announced after seeing a subject of "What to expect your 9th week". I kept my mouth shut and didn't say anything and she soon announced it but it could have had a different outcome. She might have been tracking her sister's pregnancy, she might have decided to have an abortion, or I could have misinterpretted the snippet that I saw. Either way, NOONE, not even your boss wants to know or think about the fact that you have access to their emails. When I log into someone's email I always ask them for permission and then ask them for their username and password. ALWAYS. I don't need their username and password to access their email but I don't need to draw attention to that fact as most people routinely treat their email as private and although if they think about it they probably realize that you have access to everything they would rather pretend that you don't. We run a web based service and our phone support actually do the same thing with our customers. They always ask for their username and password. Again, they don't need the password and amusingly enough they can't even easily verify that the password is correct but it seems to calm people when they voluntarily give you their username and password before you start messing with their "private" data.
The way we find information has changed. Why shouldn't laws change to reflect how we want to interact with the new reality?
Because that's just it, it's the way we find information, it's not the information itself. This is the equivalent of making google maps and/or rand mcnally not list strip clubs on their maps. The strip club is still there. It's still operating, it's just slightly harder to find. If you don't like strip clubs then go after the strip club not the map maker.
thats what i thought. the guy sounds like a dick. probably even tried to leverage the threat of the tweet to get what he wanted.
This and there is probably alot more to the story. It was probably either because he was making a scene or the flight attendant was also being a dick.
I flew southwest less than a week ago (July 26th to be exact) with chidren the exact same age (6 and 8). A flight attendant saw me queueing up to wait my turn and freely offered to let me board early so I could sit with my kids. They announce free pre-boarding for parents with children under 4 but this isn't the first time they unofficially also allowed me to board early with kids older than that. I didn't even have to ask. They just happened to notice me.
As a side note, it seems strange that they don't just have a computer quickly assign seats 5 seconds before boarding. A simple algorithm would be alot more efficient at keeping groups together than the free-for-all they currently have.
Even as a free app it doesn't seem that useful to me. Youtube already has queue. It even has publicly browsable queues. If I really wanted to watch 2 hours of cute kittens then I'm sure there is probably a queue that I could hit play on and sit back and watch. It's fairly simple to queue up a bunch of videos and tell them to play in sequence without interruption. What exactly did Qplay do that ANYONE would fine useful? It seems like a solution looking for a problem.
Obviously they weren't attempting to save this patient when they are already trying to put his organs up for match.
Yes, they obviously weren't attempting to save this patient but that doesn't mean that "organ donation" was the reason. They thought him a goner and were beginning to discuss the "next step". If he wasn't an organ donor they probably would have been discussing cremation, etc... Who's to say that they wouldn't have already removed life support and moved him to end-of-life care if he wasn't an organ donor. Being on the organ donor list might have very well saved his life as it probably delayed them pronouncing him dead and kept him in the actively monitored section of the hospital.
This is a case of poor bedside manner. Nothing more. The doctors were discussing the possibility of organ donation in case the patient didn't pull through. They made the mistake of having this discussion both too soon and in front of the patient but there doesn't appear to be any discussion of hastening his death. This would be the equivalent of discussing the possibility of "pulling the plug" regardless of the status of organ donation. Organ donation happens AFTER someone is declared dead and/or declared unlikely to survive. At this point, if someone is not an organ donor, they are shipped off to the morge to be cremated and/or embalmed. At this point your chances of survival are probably higher as an organ donor connected to life support than as a corpse being carried away in hearse.
there have been paramedics who have outright announced that they don't work as hard to save donors.
#1) I doubt in many cases a paramedic even knows. #2) Why would this be the case? An organ donor needs to be on life support to be useful in most cases. #3) Keeping you on life support longer for being a organ donor seems to make it more likely that you might survive not less.
This is plain old FUD. Name one good reason that a doctor, paramedic, etc.. would try to hasten the death of an organ donor or not work as hard to save someone who is an organ donor. The only logically reason I can think of is bribes but this would be both highly unethical and illegal and is an accusation that warrants some proof that it's actually happening.
Remember, they joined airbnb to make a quick buck, not to have dirty disaster victims for days, weeks, or months on end for free or at discounted rates..
I don't think this is targetted at the typical "airbnb" provider. I think the idea is that airbnb already has all the infrustructure in place so in the event of a disaster they can run ads on the radio that say something like:
"If you have a spare room and are willing to take a displaced family then please go to airbnb.com/disaster and register your room".
Airbnb already has the ability to register arbitrary rooms in an organized manner which is something that redcross, etc. doesn't have. It would be very possible that a majority of the "free rooms" would be provided by people who are not normal airbnb providers but just concerned people trying to help that wouldn't typically rent out their spare room.
As a side note, this would greatly increase airbnb's exposure and would most likely cause a huge influx of people and some of these people will probably stick around and sell their rooms later so it's very advantageous for airbnb to participate in something like this.
The fiction that our second amendment rights are "under assault" is a kind of strange delusion bordering on mass hysteria that has no relationship to reality. Across the country gun rights are soundly trumping any attempt at sensible gun safety regulation.
That's your perspective. You openly admitted that they are "attempting" to regulate guns though. The "pro-gun" people on the other end see any attempts to regulate as a form of attack. The more regulations there are on guns then the less useful the second amendment is. The second amendment is not there so people can kill a squirrel. The second amendment is there so people can defend themself if the government starts violating all their other rights. Honestly, I don't know how useful it is anymore though. From tanks to missiles to drones, there are plenty of weapons that are reserved exclusively for government use. I'm not saying that it's necessarily a good idea to allow the average person to own a tank just that the people who wrote the second admendment and the philosophy behind it is a little outdated at this point. When the 2nd amendment was written the founding fathers were highly against a standing army and no massive weapons even existed so an armed populous was on a much more level playing field with an oppressive government. Mandatory 2 year conscription where everyone is trained with the high tech weapons even if they don't have immediate access to them might be one way to help level the playing field. It's somewhat strange to ask "how can the government give it's citizens the ability to overthrow the government if needed?" but that's really what needs to be asked if you want to restore the essence of the 2nd amendment.
And what would you define something that didn't ingest, metabolize, excrete, reproduce and have some sort of system of heredity? Other chemical processes; like fire and crystallization, might hit some of these marks, but we don't call them living systems. So while the precise chemical processes, heck maybe even many of the chemical elements involved may be different (silicon-based life on Titan or something like that), I think at the end of the day if it going to be called life, it has to have the same basic features as terrestrial life.
Why does life have to ingest, excrete, etc?? That's a way too narrow of definition. Heck, you've almost managed to exclude plants. I'm not even sure something needs to reproduce to be considered life. If we found something moving and/or growing on the moon and that can respond to it's environment in a semintelligent way like bacteria then it would be hard to argue that it's not some form of life. We don't consider robots alive but finding the equivalent of a robot on mars would mean that it's either life or was produced by something that was intelligent even if we don't yet know how.
But the data was improperly restricted to people with experience with both slideout keyboards and virtual keyboards. You can't say anything about the general phone population with this restriction in place.
Why is this a big deal? Saying 20% of people who have tried both prefer pepsi over coke makes alot more sense that saying 95% of people who have tried pepsi like it.
I would assume that most people have had experience with more than one phone and probably most people have considered a physical keyboard at some point. The ones who have actually bought them are probably more likely to be heavy typers/texters so that biases it a little bit but if 30% of the population has owned a physical keyboard at some point and 50% prefer a physical keyboard that is still a 15% market share that is being ignored.
A non-conspiracy answer is that the majority of people who are heavy typers/texters are teenagers that buy cheap phones and therefore that is the reason all the keyboard phones are cheap. There might just be too small of market for people who type/text alot and also are willing to pay for an expensive phone (i.e. geeks)
Same here. I replaced my nokia n900 with the mytouch 4g slide. It's been a decent phone and when I broke it, I went to buy a replacement and rather than settle for the terrible choices currently available I ended up buying a another mytouch 4g slide on ebay for a fraction of the cost. I'm hoping my new one will last until there is reasonable replacement device. Currently there is not much in the physical keyboard department for highend phones. I'm even willing to SWITCH CARRIERS if I can get a decent high end phone with a physical keyboard.
Oh, gimme a freakin' break. Appendectomy, really? Polio victims are crippled and won't pass the qualifying rounds. Or did you just come up with ridiculous examples for some unclear end?
The point of these "ridiculous examples" is to show that very few people now days are "unmodified". Where do you draw the line? Olympic bicyclists have one leg larger than the other. Many other professionals like weight lifters, etc... are similiarly deformed. Weird protein shakes and specialized diets are the norm. Reinjecting your own blood right before game time is pretty common in some sports. It's not a drug or enhancement but clearly is not something that should be allowed. How do you regulate these things? What about someone who has a medical condition and needs to take steroids or some other drug like an antidepressant that has a side effect of enhanced performance. Professional sports for the most part are already twisted into a sport for only accidental freaks of nature who in addition to having some lucky physical trait also train round the clock 24/7 with specialized diets and specialized exercise routines. We all might be better off if we just say anything goes and see exactly how far we can push technology and the human body instead of pretending that all athletes are normal human beings that just walked in off the street.
he doesn't even have to deal with blisters on one of his feet.
I doubt this. From what I know of prosthetics the attachment point is prone to all kinds of problems with blisters, rubbing, chaffing, etc...
This is more of an extended shoe that still connects to the leg which brings up an interesting point. If you ban this do you also ban someone who has one leg longer than the other and needs a 2 inch sole? What about an 8 inch sole? What about someone who has corrective surgery to fix the length of their leg or someone who has elective surgery to increase the length of both legs?
Currently we seem to not care until they actually come in 1st place then we start asking questions. Regardless of the outcome, this is good news for the advancement of prosthetics and people who need them.
I am updating your outward facing mail server, the update fails, where is your god/email now?
If at least some part of your paging and monitoring system isn't independent from your servers then you're doing it wrong. We use multiple third party companies to monitor our website. It's highlevel checks but one of the checks is to check that our internal monitoring software is working. You can purchase third party monitoring software or spin up an instance somewhere like amazon or digital ocean for a few dollars a month. Depending on how critical your systems are you could spin up a few dozen. The point is that you should be monitoring your servers from outside your network for multiple reasons. The first being that it doesn't really matter if everything is up if the outside world can't connect to it and the second being that you still want to be paged if your entire datacenter goes up in smoke.
Researchers confirmed through DNA sequencing that the infection in the child is not a new infection, but was the one passed from the mother.
If the reinfection is also from the mother (which is what is most likely) then how can they tell whether it is the original infection or a reinfection from the mother as presumably it's still the same strain in the mother.
Jetpacks and flying cars are already completely possible. It's only cost and practicality that keeps them at bay. Implantable memory even if VERY expensive would be very useful. Why go to college when you can pay $40k and have a college degree without also having to give up 4 years of earning potential to get it.
Slashdot Mirror
Why is this so surprising? This is the watch list. Kindof like a tornado watch. A tornado has not been spotted yet but the conditions are
right. They have strong ties and/or other reasons to be suspected. If they were a known terrorist then they should be arrested so almost
by definition the watch list and even the "cannot fly" list should be primarily suspected terrorists not actual terrorists.
A list like this is probably natural in any investigation but just like any suspect list it's what you do with the list that matters. It's common
in a murder investigation to tell the lead suspect to not leave town and sometimes even to take away their passport but not arrest them
because there is not enough evidence yet. One difference though with the terrorist list is that it's ongoing and neverending so there probably
needs to be a time limit where someone can only be on there for 6 months or some way to get off it. Either that or that the list is just a
reference for police to refer to and it means nothing. So it really comes down to what the list is used for. Even in a murder case when a
lead goes cold the police will decide that person X is no longer a person of interest and removed from the list of suspects. I would hope the
same thing is happening with this list.
Same here. I've had multiple disputes on paypal and they all were decided in my favor.
My dad had several thousand dollars stolen from his account and paypal gave him all his money back.
I never leave money in my account so there is really nothing they can seize from me and their
arbitration leaves an extra layer of protection against fraud.
A larger portion of the cost of developing a drug is the 30% profit margin the corporations with their draconian patent-protected monopolies demand be paid to their shareholders.
30%. Let that sink in for a minute.
That's 3 times better than companies that extract liquid gold from the ground for pennies on the dollar of its worth and sell it.
That might seem high but 9 out of 10 drugs fail at the human trial phase so for every drug with a 30% markup there
are 9 drugs with no profit at all so using your number of 30% and averaged together these drugs only have a 3% markup.
Individual drugs actually have a much higher markup than 30%. That 30% is company profit but it basically
works out to the same thing. It's not the corporations that are demanding 30% to be paid but rather the shareholders
demanding it be paid. If you think that 30% is without risk then feel free to invest in these companies yourself.
Drug development companies go bust all the time. In a high risk industry like drug development you have to make a
fairly high profit on the drugs and companies that are actually successful to cover the cost of all the failed experiments.
A large part of the cost of developing a drug is getting it approved as safe for human use. For instance you can buy a vaccine for
lyme disease for both your dog and your horse but there is no such legal vaccine for humans. The beginning stages of testing are
relatively cheap and you can afford to have several of them in the works if for no other reason than to pad your patent portfolio.
Many of the very early beginning stages also tend to cost nothing (i.e. A researcher happened to notice that drug X had this
side effect while working on something else) It doesn't mean it's effective, it really doesn't mean anything but if you
(or one of your coworkers) is faced with almost certain death then you will try it on the off chance that it might work.
So, people knowingly paying to watch children being raped have no responsibility whatsoever.
Another option to reduce demand for child porn would be first to legalize child porn where there is no victim (i.e. artificially generated, etc..)
A second much more controversial option would be to provide a government sponsored website where people could watch child porn for free.
No more demand for child porn so no more people being paid to rape children. This same website could also have advertisement where
people could go and get help, etc... I don't know why some people are attracted to children. I also don't know why some people are
attracted to the same sex but attempts to deprogram gays hasn't worked very well so my guess is that it won't work very well on paedophiles
either so it might be better to give them a safe, legal, outlet to prevent them from victimizing more children because unlike homosexuality
which can be consentual there will never be a way to have consentual sex with a child so your 3 options are: throw them all in prison before
they commit a crime, figure out some way to deprogram them (hasn't worked well for homosexuals), or give them some morally acceptable
way of relieving that desire.
As a society, we need to stop trying to prosecute both sides of the crime. This creates an incentive for the sides to work together to conceal.
It has been shown that it's more effective to only prosecute the person receiving the bribe than it is to prosecute both sides. If you only
prosecute the receiver then the receiver never knows whether it is entrapment or not.
I think the same could be done for child porn and drugs. Stop going after the users but instead give a $10k reward if they report
someone and it results in a successful prosecution. Now instead of the users working with the dealers every single user becomes
a potential double crosser either now or any time in the future.
Both are making assumptions but the later is the correct assumption.
Unless you have a rational reason for WHY testosterone levels fell then it makes alot more sense to
say that "the rise of civilization caused testosterone to fall" than it does to say that some unknown
force caused testosterone to fall which caused civilization to rise so the correct headline should read:
Ancient Skulls Show Testosterone Fell as Civilization Rose
"When I log into someone's email I always ask them for permission and then ask them for their username and password. ALWAYS. "
I assume you mean you ask them to type in their password to the keyboard right?
No IT policy should endorse users giving passwords to anyone, including IT staff. Otherwise social engineering becomes trivial.
Great post, btw.
So when someone calls IT and asks for you to make a change to their account then you just make it?
Of course you need to ask for their password and/or other information to verify that they are truly who
they say they are before changing their account or you make social engineering of IT just as trivial.
When I call my bank I fully expect them to ask me for my password, my account number, and/or my
social security number before they start talking to me. IT is no different.
Social engineering education is very similiar to educating kids. You tell kids "an adult should never
ask you for help". You tell your users the same thing. IT should never ask you for help. If YOU
need help and call them then expect them to ask you for personal information to verify your account
before they help you but never give out information to anyone that calls you and asks you for the
information.
When it's the discussion about budgets that affect your department, including laying off staff, you're a complete fool if you don't get your resume out there.
When as IT should you ever be reading a "discussion"? You might see a subject or two about budget or even layoffs but
you shouldn't be reading the actual emails and without violating your position and reading the emails you are usually just
guessing at what is really going on. If you find yourself constantly curious and want to read other people's emails because
of some snippet you saw then you might want to think of changing to a career where you are not constantly being
tempted to do something illegal/immoral.
The being said, I did once discover someone in the office was pregnant before it was announced after seeing a subject of
"What to expect your 9th week". I kept my mouth shut and didn't say anything and she soon announced it but it could
have had a different outcome. She might have been tracking her sister's pregnancy, she might have decided to have an
abortion, or I could have misinterpretted the snippet that I saw. Either way, NOONE, not even your boss wants to know
or think about the fact that you have access to their emails. When I log into someone's email I always ask them for
permission and then ask them for their username and password. ALWAYS. I don't need their username and password
to access their email but I don't need to draw attention to that fact as most people routinely treat their email as private
and although if they think about it they probably realize that you have access to everything they would rather pretend that
you don't. We run a web based service and our phone support actually do the same thing with our customers. They
always ask for their username and password. Again, they don't need the password and amusingly enough they can't
even easily verify that the password is correct but it seems to calm people when they voluntarily give you their username
and password before you start messing with their "private" data.
The way we find information has changed.
Why shouldn't laws change to reflect how we want to interact with the new reality?
Because that's just it, it's the way we find information, it's not the information itself.
This is the equivalent of making google maps and/or rand mcnally not list strip clubs on their maps.
The strip club is still there. It's still operating, it's just slightly harder to find.
If you don't like strip clubs then go after the strip club not the map maker.
thats what i thought. the guy sounds like a dick. probably even tried to leverage the threat of the tweet to get what he wanted.
This and there is probably alot more to the story. It was probably either because he was making a scene or the flight attendant
was also being a dick.
I flew southwest less than a week ago (July 26th to be exact) with chidren the exact same age (6 and 8).
A flight attendant saw me queueing up to wait my turn and freely offered to let me board early so I could sit with my kids.
They announce free pre-boarding for parents with children under 4 but this isn't the first time they unofficially also allowed me
to board early with kids older than that. I didn't even have to ask. They just happened to notice me.
As a side note, it seems strange that they don't just have a computer quickly assign seats 5 seconds before boarding.
A simple algorithm would be alot more efficient at keeping groups together than the free-for-all they currently have.
Even as a free app it doesn't seem that useful to me. Youtube already has queue. It even has publicly browsable queues.
If I really wanted to watch 2 hours of cute kittens then I'm sure there is probably a queue that I could hit play on and sit back
and watch. It's fairly simple to queue up a bunch of videos and tell them to play in sequence without interruption.
What exactly did Qplay do that ANYONE would fine useful? It seems like a solution looking for a problem.
Obviously they weren't attempting to save this patient when they are already trying to put his organs up for match.
Yes, they obviously weren't attempting to save this patient but that doesn't mean that "organ donation" was the reason.
They thought him a goner and were beginning to discuss the "next step". If he wasn't an organ donor they probably
would have been discussing cremation, etc... Who's to say that they wouldn't have already removed life support and
moved him to end-of-life care if he wasn't an organ donor. Being on the organ donor list might have very well saved his
life as it probably delayed them pronouncing him dead and kept him in the actively monitored section of the hospital.
This is a case of poor bedside manner. Nothing more. The doctors were discussing the
possibility of organ donation in case the patient didn't pull through. They made the mistake
of having this discussion both too soon and in front of the patient but there doesn't appear
to be any discussion of hastening his death.
This would be the equivalent of discussing the possibility of "pulling the plug" regardless of
the status of organ donation. Organ donation happens AFTER someone is declared dead
and/or declared unlikely to survive. At this point, if someone is not an organ donor, they
are shipped off to the morge to be cremated and/or embalmed. At this point your chances
of survival are probably higher as an organ donor connected to life support than as a corpse
being carried away in hearse.
there have been paramedics who have outright announced that they don't work as hard to save donors.
#1) I doubt in many cases a paramedic even knows.
#2) Why would this be the case? An organ donor needs to be on life support to be useful in most cases.
#3) Keeping you on life support longer for being a organ donor seems to make it more likely that you might survive not less.
This is plain old FUD. Name one good reason that a doctor, paramedic, etc.. would try to hasten the death of an organ donor
or not work as hard to save someone who is an organ donor. The only logically reason I can think of is bribes but this would
be both highly unethical and illegal and is an accusation that warrants some proof that it's actually happening.
Remember, they joined airbnb to make a quick buck, not to have dirty disaster victims for days, weeks, or months on end for free or at discounted rates..
I don't think this is targetted at the typical "airbnb" provider. I think the idea is that airbnb already has all the infrustructure in
place so in the event of a disaster they can run ads on the radio that say something like:
"If you have a spare room and are willing to take a displaced family then please go to airbnb.com/disaster and register your room".
Airbnb already has the ability to register arbitrary rooms in an organized manner which is something that redcross, etc.
doesn't have. It would be very possible that a majority of the "free rooms" would be provided by people who are not normal
airbnb providers but just concerned people trying to help that wouldn't typically rent out their spare room.
As a side note, this would greatly increase airbnb's exposure and would most likely cause a huge influx of people and some of
these people will probably stick around and sell their rooms later so it's very advantageous for airbnb to participate in something like this.
The fiction that our second amendment rights are "under assault" is a kind of strange delusion bordering on mass hysteria that has no relationship to reality. Across the country gun rights are soundly trumping any attempt at sensible gun safety regulation.
That's your perspective. You openly admitted that they are "attempting" to regulate guns though. The "pro-gun" people on the other end see any attempts to regulate as a form of attack. The more regulations there are on guns then the less useful the second amendment is. The second amendment is not there so people can kill a squirrel. The second amendment is there so people can defend themself if the government starts violating all their other rights. Honestly, I don't know how useful it is anymore though. From tanks to missiles to drones, there are plenty of weapons that are reserved exclusively for government use. I'm not saying that it's necessarily a good idea to allow the average person to own a tank just that the people who wrote the second admendment and the philosophy behind it is a little outdated at this point. When the 2nd amendment was written the founding fathers were highly against a standing army and no massive weapons even existed so an armed populous was on a much more level playing field with an oppressive government. Mandatory 2 year conscription where everyone is trained with the high tech weapons even if they don't have immediate access to them might be one way to help level the playing field. It's somewhat strange to ask "how can the government give it's citizens the ability to overthrow the government if needed?" but that's really what needs to be asked if you want to restore the essence of the 2nd amendment.
And what would you define something that didn't ingest, metabolize, excrete, reproduce and have some sort of system of heredity? Other chemical processes; like fire and crystallization, might hit some of these marks, but we don't call them living systems. So while the precise chemical processes, heck maybe even many of the chemical elements involved may be different (silicon-based life on Titan or something like that), I think at the end of the day if it going to be called life, it has to have the same basic features as terrestrial life.
Why does life have to ingest, excrete, etc?? That's a way too narrow of definition. Heck, you've almost managed to exclude
plants. I'm not even sure something needs to reproduce to be considered life. If we found something moving and/or growing
on the moon and that can respond to it's environment in a semintelligent way like bacteria then it would be hard to argue that
it's not some form of life. We don't consider robots alive but finding the equivalent of a robot on mars would mean that it's
either life or was produced by something that was intelligent even if we don't yet know how.
But the data was improperly restricted to people with experience with both slideout keyboards and virtual keyboards. You can't say anything about the general phone population with this restriction in place.
Why is this a big deal? Saying 20% of people who have tried both prefer pepsi over coke makes alot
more sense that saying 95% of people who have tried pepsi like it.
I would assume that most people have had experience with more than one phone and probably most people
have considered a physical keyboard at some point. The ones who have actually bought them are probably
more likely to be heavy typers/texters so that biases it a little bit but if 30% of the population has owned a
physical keyboard at some point and 50% prefer a physical keyboard that is still a 15% market share that
is being ignored.
A non-conspiracy answer is that the majority of people who are heavy typers/texters are teenagers that
buy cheap phones and therefore that is the reason all the keyboard phones are cheap.
There might just be too small of market for people who type/text alot and also are willing to pay for an
expensive phone (i.e. geeks)
Same here. I replaced my nokia n900 with the mytouch 4g slide. It's been a decent phone and when I broke it, I
went to buy a replacement and rather than settle for the terrible choices currently available I ended up buying a
another mytouch 4g slide on ebay for a fraction of the cost. I'm hoping my new one will last until there is reasonable
replacement device. Currently there is not much in the physical keyboard department for highend phones.
I'm even willing to SWITCH CARRIERS if I can get a decent high end phone with a physical keyboard.
Oh, gimme a freakin' break. Appendectomy, really? Polio victims are crippled and won't pass the qualifying rounds. Or did you just come up with ridiculous examples for some unclear end?
The point of these "ridiculous examples" is to show that very few people now days are "unmodified".
Where do you draw the line? Olympic bicyclists have one leg larger than the other. Many other
professionals like weight lifters, etc... are similiarly deformed. Weird protein shakes and specialized
diets are the norm. Reinjecting your own blood right before game time is pretty common in some sports.
It's not a drug or enhancement but clearly is not something that should be allowed. How do you
regulate these things? What about someone who has a medical condition and needs to take steroids
or some other drug like an antidepressant that has a side effect of enhanced performance.
Professional sports for the most part are already twisted into a sport for only accidental freaks of nature
who in addition to having some lucky physical trait also train round the clock 24/7 with specialized diets
and specialized exercise routines. We all might be better off if we just say anything goes and see exactly
how far we can push technology and the human body instead of pretending that all athletes are normal
human beings that just walked in off the street.
he doesn't even have to deal with blisters on one of his feet.
I doubt this. From what I know of prosthetics the attachment point is prone to all kinds of problems with blisters, rubbing, chaffing, etc...
This is more of an extended shoe that still connects to the leg which brings up an interesting point.
If you ban this do you also ban someone who has one leg longer than the other and needs a 2 inch sole? What about an 8 inch sole?
What about someone who has corrective surgery to fix the length of their leg or someone who has elective surgery to increase the
length of both legs?
Currently we seem to not care until they actually come in 1st place then we start asking questions.
Regardless of the outcome, this is good news for the advancement of prosthetics and people who need them.
I am updating your outward facing mail server, the update fails, where is your god/email now?
If at least some part of your paging and monitoring system isn't independent from your servers then you're doing it wrong.
We use multiple third party companies to monitor our website. It's highlevel checks but one of the checks is to check
that our internal monitoring software is working. You can purchase third party monitoring software or spin up an instance
somewhere like amazon or digital ocean for a few dollars a month. Depending on how critical your systems are you
could spin up a few dozen. The point is that you should be monitoring your servers from outside your network for
multiple reasons. The first being that it doesn't really matter if everything is up if the outside world can't connect to it
and the second being that you still want to be paged if your entire datacenter goes up in smoke.
The Washington Post story states:
Researchers confirmed through DNA sequencing that the infection in the child is not a new infection, but was the one passed from the mother.
If the reinfection is also from the mother (which is what is most likely) then how can they tell whether it is the original infection or a reinfection
from the mother as presumably it's still the same strain in the mother.
Jetpacks and flying cars are already completely possible. It's only cost and practicality that keeps them at bay.
Implantable memory even if VERY expensive would be very useful. Why go to college when you can pay $40k
and have a college degree without also having to give up 4 years of earning potential to get it.