shhhhh.. the armchair democrats didn't want to know this then, and don't want to know this now.
I've seen videos of Barney in congressional hearings calling private lenders (ie, not freddie or fannie) racists, to their face, as they faced an inquisition led by the democrats as to why poor people were not getting enough home loans.
Fast forward through those Clinton years while those same banks solved the problem. Give out the loans, and then package up that obviously bad debt creatively. No longer were they called racists by the democrats for this issue.
Thanks Democrats, and a special thank you to Barney Frank..
1. Drug companies can charge high premiums for products in the United States.
Thats because of insurance. A simple example of this is is a case where two different drugs have both proven effective against a specific medical problem. Lets use antibiotics. One antibiotic might be just slightly more effective than another at the specific infection, so the doctor always prescribes that one regardless of the cost differential between them because he is covering his own ass.
Its not his dime and its not your dime.. its a corporations dime.. probably located in Connecticut.. and that corporation spreads the inefficiency out over all of its customers.. a tragedy of the commons.
3. If it weren't profitable, why would insurance companies choose to operate now?
Its profitable, but not nearly as profitable as most other industries. Aetna's profits on its health insurance division are 3% of revenue. Thats it. Three fucking percent. If it was 20% they would be mandated/forced by State Boards to reduce their rates.
They are simply not allowed to charge arbitrary rates and havent been allowed to do so for the entirety of either of our lifetimes.
I wouldn't classify TATA or L3 as "some other network that's connected to them." Both TATA and L3 are Comcasts INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS. They are Comcasts ISP's!
In the case of L3, they are more than willing to increase the link capacity between them and not charge Comcast any extra. Comcast response is "No sir! We will allow a little more, but if you want a lot more then you have to lower our bill!"
Imagine that Comcast wanted to give its customers twice the bandwidth for no extra charge, but the customers complained and said "no! we will not accept twice the bandwidth unless you lower our monthly bill!"
That is what comcast is doing, but they have sold it quite well as "a peering dispute"
The Comcast argument is that they have a peering agreement with L3 (and TATA too) but that is simply not the case. Both L3 and TATA are providers for Comcast.
TFP (The Fucking Post) points out that Comcast runs its terminations with TATA at full capacity for most of the day and concludes that they do so on purpose to force services like Netflix to co-locate with them (= $$$ for Comcast.)
So L3 says to Netflix.. "Hey.. you dont need to be a slave to the Comcast overlord" and Comcasts reponse is to re-brand its business relationship with L3 as a "Peering Agreement."
Many slashdotters bought this bullshit hook, line, and sinker on the last Comcast vs L3 article. They did so because they learned about peering relationships at some point in other slashdot stories and took their 1:1 free peering knowledge and incorrectly applied it to the L3 and Comcast relationship.
L3 is Comcast's internet provider. Comcast's claim is like you claiming that you can charge your ISP because more stuff comes downstream to your LAN than goes upstream from it.
If you get cancer that shouldn't bankrupt you and your whole family just so they can post bigger profits. That's why you bought insurance in the first place right?
You do know that insurance companies currently post single-digit profit margins, right?
Why is it that all you people that support this shit dont understand that the insurance companies are NOT the ones soaking up all the money. They are publicly traded companies.. their financial statements arent a secret.
Aetna is one of the largest U.S. health insurance providers and made a whopping 3% on revenue last year. Remove Aetna from the equation of the people they provide insurance for, and you've cut costs by.. maybe 10% if they are a severely inefficient operation that wastes literally billions?
The problem is *not* the insurance companies. They are not even allowed to make obscene profits as a matter of law. We passed laws against it a long assed time ago.
The problem is insurance itself. I go to the doctor.. I dont ask how much it costs.. I only ask how much it costs me, because I paid my premiums and goddamnit I'm not shopping around for lower costs when my co-pay is going to be exactly the same regardless of who I go to. Another test? Sure why the fuck not. Hey.. my elbow has also been bothering me.. can you take a look? Then I head off to the pharmacy and against I dont bother generic vs non-generic.. my co-pay is the same.. gimme the name brand..
Then I get my teeth cleaned 3 times a year when clearly even once per year is probably obsessive.. although a dentist surely wont tell me that.. hey why not.. small co-pay.. I pay my premiums goddamn it. I'm gonna get my monies worth!
Is it any wonder that health insurance rates are so high? Its because the average person spends just a bit below those rates in health care costs.. thats why...
The problem is not the insurance companies taking a large cut of the pie, for their profit margins are actually quite reasonable..
..the problem is that there is no incentive for a person to shop around when they face the same co-pay regardless of how much the service costs.
..so health care providers can charge just about anything...
When insurance companies tried to do something about it (via HMO's, etc..) the legislators had a field day and re-classified HMO's as something other than insurance (HMO's can't get an Insurance License.. instead they have to get a Certificate of Authority)
We must remove the disconnect between those requesting service and those paying for it.
It should be pointed out that California did this "deregulation" because their large energy companies were facing bankruptcy and needed to be bailed out with an absurd amount of money from the tax payers.
Those price caps were there both before and after the "deregulation" and were ultimately the cause of both the first and second California Energy Crisis.
California was screwed over by the California politicians that promised the people an energy utopia, while in actuality they rigging the game on paper so that the people of that State were inevitably going to get fucked over *again* due to that very promise.
Also, why wasnt this done near the ISS so that *it* could have had a good look at what was going on, with maybe even a possible spacewalk to retrieve and examine a failure.
I've read your post, and the replies to your post, and then your idiotic asshat replies to those responses...
You seem to equate Free Speech with Equal Media Power. Nobody can discuss things rationally with you because your idea of free speech isnt anyone elses, because while they have brains, you only have brainwash.
Anything it "throws up for the ISS to catch" would be moving at Mach 20 or relative to the ISS. Which would make "catching it" a lot like "catching a bullet".
The great velocity of the ISS actually makes this *easier*, not harder, because the station sweeps such a large volume per second. The projectile at its apex will be in a quite a small area for many seconds.
Bringing the object up to the same velocity as the station is just a technical issue. One could imagine the ISS having a high powered electromagnet "trap" to catch it (it was launched with magnetism, after all)
At a deceleration of a constant 10m/s^2, it would still take 270 seconds to stop going up (the deceleration would actually decrease the higher it goes, but I'm not accounting for drag.. so its a tradeoff) it will have an average speed of 1.35km/s.
Thats 270s * 1.35km/s = a height of 364.5km, so it could conceivably enter into the region we call 'low earth orbit' which is between 160km to 2000km.
I dont know where to begin to calculate the drag as it rises, so I wont bother to calculate the decreasing deceleration either.
Might be able to shoot down satellites.. or throw some stuff up for the International Space Station to catch (347km altitude at perigee)
I doubt that this iron eating bug will find much food in a WWII graveyard of Japanese ships, although termites might have a field day if the sea level ever dropped low enough...
Re:That's one heck of a "long goodbye"
on
Goodbye, VGA
·
· Score: 1
..and just to be clear, there are several different types of DVI sockets you will typically find on consumer parts.br>
DVI-I is mainly found on video cards.
DVI-A (analog) and DVI-D (digital) are both common to LCD panels.
DVI-I is a superset of both of them, so that either an analog or digital input monitor can be plugged into them.
The DVI-A standard was designed to be trivially converted to VGA.
2. Some simple maths. First scientists estimate was +2C, first denier estimate was +0C (or negative change in some cases). This paper makes the case for a +1.6C change over sea and a +1.3C change over land, so the scientists were clearly more right than the deniers in the first place
How can either "the denier" or "the scientist" be declared "more right" when an observation of the occurrence of CO2 doubling hasn't happened yet?
Why do you hate opposing viewpoints so much that you have to lead off with disparaging labels?
Climate models != Weather models.
Speaking of fallacies... did I mention weather models, or did you just use them as a distraction away from the fact that the climate models are not showing skill at prediction?
The simple fact is climate models have not existed long enough for them to be checked with any great statistical significance, and they are at a huge disadvantage from human nature because people use weather fallacies to discredit climate all the time.
It could be a statistical anomaly that they dont show skill, because of a short sample size, so that you can cling to your hope that the numbers will eventually turn around..
..or it could be because its like trying to simulate poker with a 1 card deck. The models are so simplified compared to the real thing that they just dont bare resemblance to reality.
As someone else already noted to you (with citation), the models dont even show skill at hindcasting let alone forecasting.
The obviousness of the problems seem to be lost on most people. We don't even have 100 years of decent direct observation of the climate yet.. is that not obvious enough hurdle to make you say "woah.. wait a minute.. you lead off with 100 year predictions? hold on a second there"
All of those previous models are crap, but so too is this one most likely crap.
None of the climate models have shown skill at prediction, which is the only objective measure by which to conclude that a model is not crap.
Until they can do that, its crazy to formulate policy based on model results. You wouldnt get in an airplane designed by model results as crappy as these.
Well, I've just always programmed in languages that are case sensitive... C, C++, C#, Java... the few I've bumped into that are case insensitive are scripting languages.
Pascal, Delphi, Basic,...
And, from experience, I'd rather have camel case than that whole "Hungarian Notation" which more or less made variables pointlessly hard to read.
I am aware of no language that either requires or forebodes hungarian notation. Thats something completely different. The closest thing to requiring it would have to be early basics that used type warts (% suffix to mean integer and $ suffix to mean string.)
Some languages use case to mean specific things by requirement, such as Haskel (types always begin with an upper case character, variable never have an upper case character)
My biggest objection to pirating movies/television is the toil of hunting around for it.
Hulu essentially delivers my subscriptions to me without me having to hunt for them.
The pirate alternative is to hit the torrent sites or (gasp) IRC and hunt down the latest episodes... then start downloading them with the hopes that the download will complete at some point convenient..
I subscribe to 8 or 9 shows on Hulu, so the pirate method is performing a hunt 8 or 9 times per week.. vs streaming immediately with hulu whenever I have some free time.
Well, many people feel that the tokens camelCase and CamelCase should never be allowed to refer to different symbols...
...many others feel different.
The problem is of course that its all-or-nothing. A language that only restricts on that specific case-sensitivity would be even more bizarre than a language that is completely insensitive.
Never buy cheap motherboards. My rule of thumb is two-fold.
First, the cost of MoBo should never be cheaper than the RAM that is going onto it. Yes this means that all those sub-$100 MoBo's are out of the question if you are going 6+ GB DDR3.
Secondly, for its SATA and USB feature set, it should not be within 20% of the cheapest board you can find with that same feature set, and never the cheapest of that feature set from that specific manufacturer.
The first part is more common-sense than anything else, while the second part is avoiding even a hint of warning signs.
Slashdot Mirror
shhhhh.. the armchair democrats didn't want to know this then, and don't want to know this now.
I've seen videos of Barney in congressional hearings calling private lenders (ie, not freddie or fannie) racists, to their face, as they faced an inquisition led by the democrats as to why poor people were not getting enough home loans.
Fast forward through those Clinton years while those same banks solved the problem. Give out the loans, and then package up that obviously bad debt creatively. No longer were they called racists by the democrats for this issue.
Thanks Democrats, and a special thank you to Barney Frank..
I actually found Comcasts extensive Q&A's on this subject very informative - and its surprising how much you sound like a Level 3 shill...
Translation: Comcast says that they are a saint and you believe them.
1. Drug companies can charge high premiums for products in the United States.
Thats because of insurance. A simple example of this is is a case where two different drugs have both proven effective against a specific medical problem. Lets use antibiotics. One antibiotic might be just slightly more effective than another at the specific infection, so the doctor always prescribes that one regardless of the cost differential between them because he is covering his own ass.
Its not his dime and its not your dime.. its a corporations dime.. probably located in Connecticut.. and that corporation spreads the inefficiency out over all of its customers.. a tragedy of the commons.
3. If it weren't profitable, why would insurance companies choose to operate now?
Its profitable, but not nearly as profitable as most other industries. Aetna's profits on its health insurance division are 3% of revenue. Thats it. Three fucking percent. If it was 20% they would be mandated/forced by State Boards to reduce their rates.
They are simply not allowed to charge arbitrary rates and havent been allowed to do so for the entirety of either of our lifetimes.
I wouldn't classify TATA or L3 as "some other network that's connected to them." Both TATA and L3 are Comcasts INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS. They are Comcasts ISP's!
In the case of L3, they are more than willing to increase the link capacity between them and not charge Comcast any extra. Comcast response is "No sir! We will allow a little more, but if you want a lot more then you have to lower our bill!"
Imagine that Comcast wanted to give its customers twice the bandwidth for no extra charge, but the customers complained and said "no! we will not accept twice the bandwidth unless you lower our monthly bill!"
That is what comcast is doing, but they have sold it quite well as "a peering dispute"
The Comcast argument is that they have a peering agreement with L3 (and TATA too) but that is simply not the case. Both L3 and TATA are providers for Comcast.
TFP (The Fucking Post) points out that Comcast runs its terminations with TATA at full capacity for most of the day and concludes that they do so on purpose to force services like Netflix to co-locate with them (= $$$ for Comcast.)
So L3 says to Netflix.. "Hey.. you dont need to be a slave to the Comcast overlord" and Comcasts reponse is to re-brand its business relationship with L3 as a "Peering Agreement."
Many slashdotters bought this bullshit hook, line, and sinker on the last Comcast vs L3 article. They did so because they learned about peering relationships at some point in other slashdot stories and took their 1:1 free peering knowledge and incorrectly applied it to the L3 and Comcast relationship.
L3 is Comcast's internet provider. Comcast's claim is like you claiming that you can charge your ISP because more stuff comes downstream to your LAN than goes upstream from it.
If you get cancer that shouldn't bankrupt you and your whole family just so they can post bigger profits. That's why you bought insurance in the first place right?
You do know that insurance companies currently post single-digit profit margins, right?
.. my co-pay is the same.. gimme the name brand..
Why is it that all you people that support this shit dont understand that the insurance companies are NOT the ones soaking up all the money. They are publicly traded companies.. their financial statements arent a secret.
Aetna is one of the largest U.S. health insurance providers and made a whopping 3% on revenue last year. Remove Aetna from the equation of the people they provide insurance for, and you've cut costs by.. maybe 10% if they are a severely inefficient operation that wastes literally billions?
The problem is *not* the insurance companies. They are not even allowed to make obscene profits as a matter of law. We passed laws against it a long assed time ago.
The problem is insurance itself. I go to the doctor.. I dont ask how much it costs.. I only ask how much it costs me, because I paid my premiums and goddamnit I'm not shopping around for lower costs when my co-pay is going to be exactly the same regardless of who I go to. Another test? Sure why the fuck not. Hey.. my elbow has also been bothering me.. can you take a look? Then I head off to the pharmacy and against I dont bother generic vs non-generic
Then I get my teeth cleaned 3 times a year when clearly even once per year is probably obsessive.. although a dentist surely wont tell me that.. hey why not.. small co-pay.. I pay my premiums goddamn it. I'm gonna get my monies worth!
Is it any wonder that health insurance rates are so high? Its because the average person spends just a bit below those rates in health care costs.. thats why...
If it is true that 50% of the population pay taxes, that's because most of them are children, or retired, or disabled. So what?
You dont know if its true or not, but somehow know the demographics "if" it is true? Speak out your ass much?
The people who should pay taxes are the top 40% who make 75% of the income.
60% of the people should be able to soak 40% of the people? Really?
60% should get a FREE RIDE? really?
100% agree.
..the problem is that there is no incentive for a person to shop around when they face the same co-pay regardless of how much the service costs.
..so health care providers can charge just about anything...
The problem is not the insurance companies taking a large cut of the pie, for their profit margins are actually quite reasonable..
When insurance companies tried to do something about it (via HMO's, etc..) the legislators had a field day and re-classified HMO's as something other than insurance (HMO's can't get an Insurance License.. instead they have to get a Certificate of Authority)
We must remove the disconnect between those requesting service and those paying for it.
It should be pointed out that California did this "deregulation" because their large energy companies were facing bankruptcy and needed to be bailed out with an absurd amount of money from the tax payers.
Those price caps were there both before and after the "deregulation" and were ultimately the cause of both the first and second California Energy Crisis.
California was screwed over by the California politicians that promised the people an energy utopia, while in actuality they rigging the game on paper so that the people of that State were inevitably going to get fucked over *again* due to that very promise.
I was going to post this same thing.
Also, why wasnt this done near the ISS so that *it* could have had a good look at what was going on, with maybe even a possible spacewalk to retrieve and examine a failure.
I've read your post, and the replies to your post, and then your idiotic asshat replies to those responses...
You seem to equate Free Speech with Equal Media Power. Nobody can discuss things rationally with you because your idea of free speech isnt anyone elses, because while they have brains, you only have brainwash.
Anything it "throws up for the ISS to catch" would be moving at Mach 20 or relative to the ISS. Which would make "catching it" a lot like "catching a bullet".
The great velocity of the ISS actually makes this *easier*, not harder, because the station sweeps such a large volume per second. The projectile at its apex will be in a quite a small area for many seconds.
Bringing the object up to the same velocity as the station is just a technical issue. One could imagine the ISS having a high powered electromagnet "trap" to catch it (it was launched with magnetism, after all)
At a deceleration of a constant 10m/s^2, it would still take 270 seconds to stop going up (the deceleration would actually decrease the higher it goes, but I'm not accounting for drag.. so its a tradeoff) it will have an average speed of 1.35km/s.
.. or throw some stuff up for the International Space Station to catch (347km altitude at perigee)
Thats 270s * 1.35km/s = a height of 364.5km, so it could conceivably enter into the region we call 'low earth orbit' which is between 160km to 2000km.
I dont know where to begin to calculate the drag as it rises, so I wont bother to calculate the decreasing deceleration either.
Might be able to shoot down satellites
Security through obscurity.
I doubt that this iron eating bug will find much food in a WWII graveyard of Japanese ships, although termites might have a field day if the sea level ever dropped low enough...
..and just to be clear, there are several different types of DVI sockets you will typically find on consumer parts.br>
DVI-I is mainly found on video cards.
DVI-A (analog) and DVI-D (digital) are both common to LCD panels.
DVI-I is a superset of both of them, so that either an analog or digital input monitor can be plugged into them.
The DVI-A standard was designed to be trivially converted to VGA.
2. Some simple maths. First scientists estimate was +2C, first denier estimate was +0C (or negative change in some cases). This paper makes the case for a +1.6C change over sea and a +1.3C change over land, so the scientists were clearly more right than the deniers in the first place
How can either "the denier" or "the scientist" be declared "more right" when an observation of the occurrence of CO2 doubling hasn't happened yet?
Why do you hate opposing viewpoints so much that you have to lead off with disparaging labels?
Climate models != Weather models.
Speaking of fallacies... did I mention weather models, or did you just use them as a distraction away from the fact that the climate models are not showing skill at prediction?
The simple fact is climate models have not existed long enough for them to be checked with any great statistical significance, and they are at a huge disadvantage from human nature because people use weather fallacies to discredit climate all the time.
It could be a statistical anomaly that they dont show skill, because of a short sample size, so that you can cling to your hope that the numbers will eventually turn around..
..or it could be because its like trying to simulate poker with a 1 card deck. The models are so simplified compared to the real thing that they just dont bare resemblance to reality.
As someone else already noted to you (with citation), the models dont even show skill at hindcasting let alone forecasting.
The obviousness of the problems seem to be lost on most people. We don't even have 100 years of decent direct observation of the climate yet.. is that not obvious enough hurdle to make you say "woah.. wait a minute.. you lead off with 100 year predictions? hold on a second there"
All of those previous models are crap, but so too is this one most likely crap.
None of the climate models have shown skill at prediction, which is the only objective measure by which to conclude that a model is not crap.
Until they can do that, its crazy to formulate policy based on model results. You wouldnt get in an airplane designed by model results as crappy as these.
Well, I've just always programmed in languages that are case sensitive ... C, C++, C#, Java ... the few I've bumped into that are case insensitive are scripting languages.
Pascal, Delphi, Basic, ...
And, from experience, I'd rather have camel case than that whole "Hungarian Notation" which more or less made variables pointlessly hard to read.
I am aware of no language that either requires or forebodes hungarian notation. Thats something completely different. The closest thing to requiring it would have to be early basics that used type warts (% suffix to mean integer and $ suffix to mean string.)
Some languages use case to mean specific things by requirement, such as Haskel (types always begin with an upper case character, variable never have an upper case character)
My biggest objection to pirating movies/television is the toil of hunting around for it.
Hulu essentially delivers my subscriptions to me without me having to hunt for them.
The pirate alternative is to hit the torrent sites or (gasp) IRC and hunt down the latest episodes... then start downloading them with the hopes that the download will complete at some point convenient..
I subscribe to 8 or 9 shows on Hulu, so the pirate method is performing a hunt 8 or 9 times per week.. vs streaming immediately with hulu whenever I have some free time.
Nope. Not in America anyways...
This is some big assed fallacy or some shit and I still havent figured out how the fuck it became the subject.
I hear this a lot, but it doesnt seem to jive with my observations.
I am observing regulations that prevent entry into the market. If it was too expensive to enter the market, why the regulation?
Well, many people feel that the tokens camelCase and CamelCase should never be allowed to refer to different symbols...
...many others feel different.
The problem is of course that its all-or-nothing. A language that only restricts on that specific case-sensitivity would be even more bizarre than a language that is completely insensitive.
Never buy cheap motherboards. My rule of thumb is two-fold.
First, the cost of MoBo should never be cheaper than the RAM that is going onto it. Yes this means that all those sub-$100 MoBo's are out of the question if you are going 6+ GB DDR3.
Secondly, for its SATA and USB feature set, it should not be within 20% of the cheapest board you can find with that same feature set, and never the cheapest of that feature set from that specific manufacturer.
The first part is more common-sense than anything else, while the second part is avoiding even a hint of warning signs.