Please grow up sydb. You speak of the GPL like it is the constitution, it's not. It is not even a definitive example of "free" software. There are many different notions of what makes software "free", the GPL is but one of those. Some would argue that the BSDL is more "free", because it allows anyone (including corporations) the same and complete freedoms. I agree with this, you don't. Tough.
They can do whatever they want with their code, when you're the one writing the software, you can decide to GPL it and make nothing off it. Meanwhile, those of us that live in the real world and realize that people can't work for nothing, and that money is required to survive, will buy the product because it's a quality product. It's the bigots like you that keep holding Linux back and driving companies away from it. They aren't using GPL'd code and refusing to release the modifications, they aren't violating the GPL, just because they intend to make money off their hard work doesn't make them evil.
I use GANDI for all of my domains now, they meet your 5 requirements and have very reasonable pricing. What I liked the most is that, unlike NetSol, their policies clearly state that YOU own your domain name. Their web management systems are great, and so is their support. I've got nothing but great things to say about them.:)
Actually, you DO have to worry about dying or being injured by over the counter medications. Just look at the problems they have had with medications that contain PPA, and how there have been cases where people have died from taking one tylenol and having one beer with it.
Well, I'm afraid you are taking a valid position and twisting it in a way that suits you. I suppose that's what I get for replying to a troll:)
Do I *like* the GPL? Yes, I think it serves a strong purpose in OSS, and I can totally understand why a programmer would want to release under it.
Would I release under the GPL? No, I use the BSDL because I believe that free is free, and that means for the corporations too.
Now, this does not mean that I do not respect the GPL, I do. It's a personal matter of choice. This is the damned problem, why is there even an issue of GPL vs. BSDL? It's about time the two camps stop whining and respect each other. If someone has GPL'd their code, RESPECT IT. If someone has BSDL'd their code, RESPECT IT ALSO.
Is this really so hard? It's simply a matter of recognizing that these are two DIFFERENT, yet TOTALLY VALID viewpoints.
of course now i don't care - i live in a country that has "socialised medicine" (shock! horror!) and all my health care needs are taken care of
Well, I'm glad you don't care. As someone living in Canada who has actual medical issues, this system is horrible. Sure, it's all fine and nice if you go to the doctor once a year and never have any real problems, but when it's all said and done, the rest of us get hurt by this system badly.
I don't know about you, but I'm tired of waiting 6+ months for a simple MRI and a neurology consult. Fortunately, for the time being, I can opt to pay the money and get the MRI privately (which I do), but the good old federal government is trying to take that away from us too by threatening to kill federal health care funding if the provinces (most notably Quebec and Alberta) allow private clinics to do procedures covered under medicare.
Now, this is not to say that there are not countries with wonderful socialized systems, there are. From my limited knowledge based on conversations with friends, some of these places actually care about the health of the person and not just the money. Go figure!
I'm so tired of people hailing the socialized health care system as the holy grail to all our problems. Until the government decides to give it some real funding so people aren't waiting half a year or more for critical tests, and so that the hospitals actually have recent equipment and appropriate staffing, Canada's health care system will remain as horrible as it is now.
I don't know about you, but I'd rather be forced to pay for medical treatment than having to waste critical time waiting for _BASIC_ tests to be done. In the end, expensive and good treatment is better than free and low quality treatment, if you can even call it treatment.
Well, as a recently ex-teen, I've seen friends of mine end up in both of those situations before. So why haven't more of the people I've known (including myself) ended up that way? Quite simple, our families were very open about sex. My parents never lectured me that "sex is bad, don't do it!" -- they taught me from a young age the consequences of those actions, and how to do it safely. This is the key to the whole thing. I can say with reasonable certainty that the kids ending up pregnant and sick are the ones who were never taught about sex in an appropriate manner.
Young teens are NOT incapable of understanding the consequences and acting responsibly. It is simply a matter of trust within the family. I knew growing up that I could always talk to my family about sex, it was never a taboo subject with us. I firmly believe that is what makes all the difference, and when I have children, that is how I'll handle it.
Killing people might actually have a useful purpose once in a while. But I still like the idea of keeping it illegal.
Except for the fact that "killing" is not illegal. murder (and manslaughter, etc) is illegal. You only need to look at the fact that killing in self defense (or during war, whatever) is legal to see how bogus your statement is. So yes, the act of killing, in and of itself, is not illegal. This is why it's called murder (et al) instead of killing.
1. (Law) The act of stealing; specifically, the felonious taking and removing of personal property, with an intent to deprive the rightful owner of the same; larceny.
Since Canadians watching directv in this manner are not depriving them of anything, it's not theft, don't call it stealing. It would be theft if they sold their services in Canada since I would be depriving them of a lost sale, but this is not the case. Directv cannot legally operate in Canada due to our broadcast laws, it's not my problem that their satellite signal penetrates my private property. The courts seem to agree, as they have lost most every court case they've ever brought to Canada.
Actually sir, you are quite misinformed. There is one big difference: You do not own a directv smart card. It is clearly marked as the property of NDS, thus they can do whatever the hell they want to it. This is why you cannot sell a card unless it is sold *with* a receiver.
Furthermore, as one of those "H card hackers", I resent your "cheap assholes" statement. I live in Canada, directv does not sell its services in Canada, thus I am *not* stealing from directv by way of a lost sale. The supreme court of Canada agrees with me, and this "hacking" is LEGAL in Canada.
Verify your facts before you make yourself look like an ass.
Matt
Disclosure: I do not own a TiVo, and have no interests in the company.
Yes, I realize that.. and I should have worded it more carefully. So okay, lets look at that. Your hypothetical ISP leases bandwidth from above.net. They are above.net's customer. Thus, the above.net customer should have asked/known (which they do, since above advertises it) that they block things. Thus, since they knowingly leased from a backbone that blocks. You as their customer should have been informed of their decision to go with a backbone that blocks.
Well, as an employee of Macromedia, I don't thin this is being blown out of proportion.
Why is that sir? The way I see it, no one is forcing anyone to use MAPS/RBL/etc. I use it on my mail server because I *choose* to. They are, after all, my machines and my network. It doesn't change for above.net either. They can block whomever they so desire. If their customers don't like it, they can be exempt from the block, or they can find an ISP that doesn't do any blocking.
This is not *forced* censorship, this is consensual censorship. I choose to censor myself, my network, my machines. If a user doesn't like it, they can find someone else to buy from. Nothing is forcing you to use an ISP that blocks via MAPS, and nothing is forcing you to use MAPS yourself.
Now, if you ask an ISP if they block via MAPS/RBL and they lie to you and say no, that's a whole differnt matter. However, above.net doesn't hide the fact that they use MAPS/RBL. Live with it.
Yes, headlines are that way. It's an unfortunate evil in society:) I knew what you meant though, I was just nitpicking. I had a long argument last week with a friend who stated that there was no way in this universe any negative could be proved. *sigh*:)
On the topic of prior art though, one would think that the USPTO would at least attempt to speak with experts in the field.. A lot of these patents wouldn't exist if there was more extensive[1] peer review before granting a patent, but I digress.
Nice speaking with your sir.
Matt
[1] Ironically enough, I caught in the preview that instead of extensive, I had written "expensive". Unfortunately that's probably the more accurate one of the two words.
I hate to nitpick, but it really bothers me when people say that you cannot prove a negative. You can in fact prove negatives by proving an associated positive.
For example:
"Prove that Mr. X was not at this location at 22:00"
Ok, I can prove this negative by proving the positive of Mr. X being in another location verified by witnesses, etc. [No, a person cannot be in two places at once, yet]
Now, I understand completely what you meant, but saying "You can't prove a negative" is definately not the most accurate way to express it.
Disclaimer: The above statements may be totally false.
A good response to security issues is very important yes, however you can't use that against DJB for the simple reason that Qmail has never had any security issues to respond to! Some of us use what we feel is best for the job. If the best piece of software to use is GPL, I'll use it. The same goes for anything else out there. I won't stop using GOOD software because of licensing that has little to no effect on me as an end user.:)
Okay, I think we got some wires crossed. I do agree that private clinics should be available. I also think that a completely privatized system is inferior to a pratially socialized one though.
I agree completely. Purely privatized systems really screw a lot of the population. You see this in places where they'll leave you bleeding on the sidewalk if you don't have health insurance. The problem in Canada is that the government is trying to ban private clinics, which Alberta and Quebec have specifically allowed, using basic extortion tactics saying they'll withhold medicare funding.
I think private clinics co-existing with the socalized system would be great. It's too bad the federal government thinks otherwise. I don't see why it should be illegal to charge for medical care (scans, etc) that are covered under medicare. Some people are willing to shell out the grand to save themselves 6 months. Anyone who has been seriously ill can understand this, 6 months is a long time.
Sometimes, as is my case, these sort of things encourage doctors to look at a purely pharmacological "solution" - ask anyone who has spent 5+ years on pain killers how enjoyable that particular piece of medical (il)logic is.
Ah well, perhaps in the time the federal government will smarten up to the wishes of many patients and allow private clinics to co-exist.
And in the US they'd have the choice between paying the $700 or not having the scan at all.
Yes, I realize that. The difference is, they're trying to take the choice away from us. I've nothing against a socalized healthcare system, it can, and does, work great in certain countries. So, someone can't afford the scan, Medicare covers it. That is still not an excuse to *forbid* those of us who can afford the scan from getting it privately.
It's a complex issue, however the federal government has no chance at solving it this way. If they want the private clinics to go away, they need to elmininate the problem that gave way to their rise in popularity: Medicare funding keeps being cut, hospitals are short on staff and equipment, etc.
My DSL (UUnet in Montreal) sees 2560 kb/s down, 768 kb/s up. This is along with a/28 of statics, 20 pop3 accounts, free dns hosting, etc. Most of the time I hit top speeds, UUnet keeps a low (10:1) contention ratio here. Only time I've been down for longer than a couple minutes was when an ATM died at the telco.
This sure beats the cable here, where you can't have statics, can't run any servers (inc. sshd, etc) and are capped at 15 kB/s upload.
I am actually a US citizen (and Canadian for that matter), I was born in the US and lived there (Indiana) till I was 9. I'd love to combine the best of each country, but that's another issue:)
As for health care, I first have to admit that, for anyone who has no medical needs beyond going to the doctor twice a year for a checkup and the rare ER visit every couple of years, a Canadian style health care system works great. It does, at least in my opinion, leave the rest of us who actually need real and constant medical care high and dry.
While we do benefit some from the fact that we aren't paying for every single visit, but the way I see it, if we could get the high level treatment without so many arugments. For an example, I had to go private to get a simple CBC. The reason? "Your last was only a year and a half ago." Some doctors are better about this than others though. The above occured with a hospital team, who seem to be under more restrictions by the hospital administration. My current doctor is more flexible though.
So I did a bit of digging to find an issue I read about in the Montreal Gazette.. Since they don't archive, this is from an Edmonton paper, but outlines the problem very well:
Alberta patients are faced with a difficult choice: wait an agonizing six months for a free MRI scan at a public hospital or pay more than $700 for an immediate scan at a private clinic
As someone in Quebec who has been in this exact same position before, I can tell you that it's much more worthwhile to just pay for the damn thing. The MRI situation applies to just about anything that's high level. Right down to actual consults. Took over 6 months for me to get a neurology consult when it should have been one of the first things.
Well, that's certaintly enough ranting for this particular post. My karma is going to pay for this with a -1, Offtopic at some point:) If you want to talk more about this fun though, feel free to email me privately (matt@lucida.ca)
Then you've obviously never had to spend a lot of time under the care of the medical system. As a Canadian whose been in the medical system constantly since I was 12, let me flat out tell you that it's horrible. I could write page after page about the fights I've had with doctors and hospitals over certain tests that are "too expensive", certain treatments refused due to cost, etc. Now, I can afford to do all this privately, but now the lovely federal government is doing its best to hold back health care funding to any province that doesn't, in effect, ban private clinics.
I'm not against a government provided health care system, but for god's sake, don't force those of us who CAN afford better to use the damn thing. I'm tired of waiting 6-9 months to see neuro.
Godwin's Law prov. [Usenet] "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." There is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. Godwin's Law thus practically guarantees the existence of an upper bound on thread length in those groups. However there is also a widely- recognized codicil that any _intentional_ triggering of Godwin's Law in order to invoke its thread-ending effects will be unsuccessful.
Actually, I believe that entrapment only involves getting someone to "commit a crime they would not have commited otherwise", the law enforcement agency need not commit a crime itself.
Do you also believe that a woman deserves to get raped because she wore a miniskirt thus should just suck it up and deal with it because "that's the way it is" ?
Nothing, and I mean NOTHING, justifies what these kids go through. I don't care of they're every damn "minority" group in the world combined, that is no excuse for physical and mental abuse.
As a Canadian, I must state that our health care system is in shambles. It's a great setup for anyone who does not have any real medical needs aside from checkups and the infrequent hospital visit. However, for someone like me, who will probably be stuck in the medical system for the rest of my life, it flat out sucks. The federal government holds back health care funds if the province allows private clinics, yet hospitals refuse to do vital tests (MRIs, etc) because they are too expensive.
So, with the lack of private clinics, I'm not *allowed* to opt to pay for the test just because some can't afford it. I'm to the point now where I will probably have no choice but to go to the US for treatment since our health care system won't allow me to pay for it here. It's a nice idea in theory, but in practice it flat out fails.
Slashdot Mirror
Please grow up sydb. You speak of the GPL like it is the constitution, it's not. It is not even a definitive example of "free" software. There are many different notions of what makes software "free", the GPL is but one of those. Some would argue that the BSDL is more "free", because it allows anyone (including corporations) the same and complete freedoms. I agree with this, you don't. Tough.
They can do whatever they want with their code, when you're the one writing the software, you can decide to GPL it and make nothing off it. Meanwhile, those of us that live in the real world and realize that people can't work for nothing, and that money is required to survive, will buy the product because it's a quality product. It's the bigots like you that keep holding Linux back and driving companies away from it. They aren't using GPL'd code and refusing to release the modifications, they aren't violating the GPL, just because they intend to make money off their hard work doesn't make them evil.
It's amazing to me that you cannot see this.
Matt
I use GANDI for all of my domains now, they meet your 5 requirements and have very reasonable pricing. What I liked the most is that, unlike NetSol, their policies clearly state that YOU own your domain name. Their web management systems are great, and so is their support. I've got nothing but great things to say about them. :)
Matt
Actually, you DO have to worry about dying or being injured by over the counter medications. Just look at the problems they have had with medications that contain PPA, and how there have been cases where people have died from taking one tylenol and having one beer with it.
Matt
Well, I'm afraid you are taking a valid position and twisting it in a way that suits you. I suppose that's what I get for replying to a troll :)
Do I *like* the GPL? Yes, I think it serves a strong purpose in OSS, and I can totally understand why a programmer would want to release under it.
Would I release under the GPL? No, I use the BSDL because I believe that free is free, and that means for the corporations too.
Now, this does not mean that I do not respect the GPL, I do. It's a personal matter of choice. This is the damned problem, why is there even an issue of GPL vs. BSDL? It's about time the two camps stop whining and respect each other. If someone has GPL'd their code, RESPECT IT. If someone has BSDL'd their code, RESPECT IT ALSO.
Is this really so hard? It's simply a matter of recognizing that these are two DIFFERENT, yet TOTALLY VALID viewpoints.
of course now i don't care - i live in a country that has "socialised medicine" (shock! horror!) and all my health care needs are taken care of
Well, I'm glad you don't care. As someone living in Canada who has actual medical issues, this system is horrible. Sure, it's all fine and nice if you go to the doctor once a year and never have any real problems, but when it's all said and done, the rest of us get hurt by this system badly.
I don't know about you, but I'm tired of waiting 6+ months for a simple MRI and a neurology consult. Fortunately, for the time being, I can opt to pay the money and get the MRI privately (which I do), but the good old federal government is trying to take that away from us too by threatening to kill federal health care funding if the provinces (most notably Quebec and Alberta) allow private clinics to do procedures covered under medicare.
Now, this is not to say that there are not countries with wonderful socialized systems, there are. From my limited knowledge based on conversations with friends, some of these places actually care about the health of the person and not just the money. Go figure!
I'm so tired of people hailing the socialized health care system as the holy grail to all our problems. Until the government decides to give it some real funding so people aren't waiting half a year or more for critical tests, and so that the hospitals actually have recent equipment and appropriate staffing, Canada's health care system will remain as horrible as it is now.
I don't know about you, but I'd rather be forced to pay for medical treatment than having to waste critical time waiting for _BASIC_ tests to be done. In the end, expensive and good treatment is better than free and low quality treatment, if you can even call it treatment.
Matt
Well, as a recently ex-teen, I've seen friends of mine end up in both of those situations before. So why haven't more of the people I've known (including myself) ended up that way? Quite simple, our families were very open about sex. My parents never lectured me that "sex is bad, don't do it!" -- they taught me from a young age the consequences of those actions, and how to do it safely. This is the key to the whole thing. I can say with reasonable certainty that the kids ending up pregnant and sick are the ones who were never taught about sex in an appropriate manner.
Young teens are NOT incapable of understanding the consequences and acting responsibly. It is simply a matter of trust within the family. I knew growing up that I could always talk to my family about sex, it was never a taboo subject with us. I firmly believe that is what makes all the difference, and when I have children, that is how I'll handle it.
Matt
Killing people might actually have a useful purpose once in a while. But I still like the idea of keeping it illegal.
Except for the fact that "killing" is not illegal. murder (and manslaughter, etc) is illegal. You only need to look at the fact that killing in self defense (or during war, whatever) is legal to see how bogus your statement is. So yes, the act of killing, in and of itself, is not illegal. This is why it's called murder (et al) instead of killing.
Matt
PS: Look up the defination of "theft":
1. (Law) The act of stealing; specifically, the felonious taking and removing of personal property, with an intent to deprive the rightful owner of the same; larceny.
Since Canadians watching directv in this manner are not depriving them of anything, it's not theft, don't call it stealing. It would be theft if they sold their services in Canada since I would be depriving them of a lost sale, but this is not the case. Directv cannot legally operate in Canada due to our broadcast laws, it's not my problem that their satellite signal penetrates my private property. The courts seem to agree, as they have lost most every court case they've ever brought to Canada.
Actually sir, you are quite misinformed. There is one big difference: You do not own a directv smart card. It is clearly marked as the property of NDS, thus they can do whatever the hell they want to it. This is why you cannot sell a card unless it is sold *with* a receiver.
Furthermore, as one of those "H card hackers", I resent your "cheap assholes" statement. I live in Canada, directv does not sell its services in Canada, thus I am *not* stealing from directv by way of a lost sale. The supreme court of Canada agrees with me, and this "hacking" is LEGAL in Canada.
Verify your facts before you make yourself look like an ass.
Matt
Disclosure: I do not own a TiVo, and have no interests in the company.
Yes, I realize that.. and I should have worded it more carefully. So okay, lets look at that. Your hypothetical ISP leases bandwidth from above.net. They are above.net's customer. Thus, the above.net customer should have asked/known (which they do, since above advertises it) that they block things. Thus, since they knowingly leased from a backbone that blocks. You as their customer should have been informed of their decision to go with a backbone that blocks.
In an ideal world.
Matt
Well, as an employee of Macromedia, I don't thin this is being blown out of proportion.
Why is that sir? The way I see it, no one is forcing anyone to use MAPS/RBL/etc. I use it on my mail server because I *choose* to. They are, after all, my machines and my network. It doesn't change for above.net either. They can block whomever they so desire. If their customers don't like it, they can be exempt from the block, or they can find an ISP that doesn't do any blocking.
This is not *forced* censorship, this is consensual censorship. I choose to censor myself, my network, my machines. If a user doesn't like it, they can find someone else to buy from. Nothing is forcing you to use an ISP that blocks via MAPS, and nothing is forcing you to use MAPS yourself.
Now, if you ask an ISP if they block via MAPS/RBL and they lie to you and say no, that's a whole differnt matter. However, above.net doesn't hide the fact that they use MAPS/RBL. Live with it.
Matt
Yes, headlines are that way. It's an unfortunate evil in society :) I knew what you meant though, I was just nitpicking. I had a long argument last week with a friend who stated that there was no way in this universe any negative could be proved. *sigh* :)
On the topic of prior art though, one would think that the USPTO would at least attempt to speak with experts in the field.. A lot of these patents wouldn't exist if there was more extensive[1] peer review before granting a patent, but I digress.
Nice speaking with your sir.
Matt
[1] Ironically enough, I caught in the preview that instead of extensive, I had written "expensive". Unfortunately that's probably the more accurate one of the two words.
I hate to nitpick, but it really bothers me when people say that you cannot prove a negative. You can in fact prove negatives by proving an associated positive.
For example:
"Prove that Mr. X was not at this location at 22:00"
Ok, I can prove this negative by proving the positive of Mr. X being in another location verified by witnesses, etc. [No, a person cannot be in two places at once, yet]
Now, I understand completely what you meant, but saying "You can't prove a negative" is definately not the most accurate way to express it.
Disclaimer: The above statements may be totally false.
A good response to security issues is very important yes, however you can't use that against DJB for the simple reason that Qmail has never had any security issues to respond to! Some of us use what we feel is best for the job. If the best piece of software to use is GPL, I'll use it. The same goes for anything else out there. I won't stop using GOOD software because of licensing that has little to no effect on me as an end user. :)
Matt
Okay, I think we got some wires crossed. I do agree that private clinics should be available. I also think that a completely privatized system is inferior to a pratially socialized one though.
I agree completely. Purely privatized systems really screw a lot of the population. You see this in places where they'll leave you bleeding on the sidewalk if you don't have health insurance. The problem in Canada is that the government is trying to ban private clinics, which Alberta and Quebec have specifically allowed, using basic extortion tactics saying they'll withhold medicare funding.
I think private clinics co-existing with the socalized system would be great. It's too bad the federal government thinks otherwise. I don't see why it should be illegal to charge for medical care (scans, etc) that are covered under medicare. Some people are willing to shell out the grand to save themselves 6 months. Anyone who has been seriously ill can understand this, 6 months is a long time.
Sometimes, as is my case, these sort of things encourage doctors to look at a purely pharmacological "solution" - ask anyone who has spent 5+ years on pain killers how enjoyable that particular piece of medical (il)logic is.
Ah well, perhaps in the time the federal government will smarten up to the wishes of many patients and allow private clinics to co-exist.
Matt
And in the US they'd have the choice between paying the $700 or not having the scan at all.
Yes, I realize that. The difference is, they're trying to take the choice away from us. I've nothing against a socalized healthcare system, it can, and does, work great in certain countries. So, someone can't afford the scan, Medicare covers it. That is still not an excuse to *forbid* those of us who can afford the scan from getting it privately.
It's a complex issue, however the federal government has no chance at solving it this way. If they want the private clinics to go away, they need to elmininate the problem that gave way to their rise in popularity: Medicare funding keeps being cut, hospitals are short on staff and equipment, etc.
Cheers,
Matt
My DSL (UUnet in Montreal) sees 2560 kb/s down, 768 kb/s up. This is along with a /28 of statics, 20 pop3 accounts, free dns hosting, etc. Most of the time I hit top speeds, UUnet keeps a low (10:1) contention ratio here. Only time I've been down for longer than a couple minutes was when an ATM died at the telco.
This sure beats the cable here, where you can't have statics, can't run any servers (inc. sshd, etc) and are capped at 15 kB/s upload.
HTH.
Matt
This puts a whole new meaning to "Time To Live (TTL)"
Matt
Lovely.
:)
.. Since they don't archive, this is from an Edmonton paper, but outlines the problem very well:
4 86 7799.html
:) If you want to talk more about this fun though, feel free to email me privately (matt@lucida.ca)
I am actually a US citizen (and Canadian for that matter), I was born in the US and lived there (Indiana) till I was 9. I'd love to combine the best of each country, but that's another issue
As for health care, I first have to admit that, for anyone who has no medical needs beyond going to the doctor twice a year for a checkup and the rare ER visit every couple of years, a Canadian style health care system works great. It does, at least in my opinion, leave the rest of us who actually need real and constant medical care high and dry.
While we do benefit some from the fact that we aren't paying for every single visit, but the way I see it, if we could get the high level treatment without so many arugments. For an example, I had to go private to get a simple CBC. The reason? "Your last was only a year and a half ago." Some doctors are better about this than others though. The above occured with a hospital team, who seem to be under more restrictions by the hospital administration. My current doctor is more flexible though.
So I did a bit of digging to find an issue I read about in the Montreal Gazette
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/stories1/001114/
The most quote-worthy thing is this:
Alberta patients are faced with a difficult choice: wait an agonizing six months for a free MRI scan at a public hospital or pay more than $700 for an immediate scan at a private clinic
As someone in Quebec who has been in this exact same position before, I can tell you that it's much more worthwhile to just pay for the damn thing. The MRI situation applies to just about anything that's high level. Right down to actual consults. Took over 6 months for me to get a neurology consult when it should have been one of the first things.
Well, that's certaintly enough ranting for this particular post. My karma is going to pay for this with a -1, Offtopic at some point
Cheers,
Matt
Then you've obviously never had to spend a lot of time under the care of the medical system. As a Canadian whose been in the medical system constantly since I was 12, let me flat out tell you that it's horrible. I could write page after page about the fights I've had with doctors and hospitals over certain tests that are "too expensive", certain treatments refused due to cost, etc. Now, I can afford to do all this privately, but now the lovely federal government is doing its best to hold back health care funding to any province that doesn't, in effect, ban private clinics.
I'm not against a government provided health care system, but for god's sake, don't force those of us who CAN afford better to use the damn thing. I'm tired of waiting 6-9 months to see neuro.
Matt
From Jargon File (4.2.3, 23 NOV 2000) [jargon]:
Godwin's Law prov. [Usenet] "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." There is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. Godwin's Law thus practically guarantees the existence of an upper bound on thread length in those groups. However there is also a widely- recognized codicil that any _intentional_ triggering of Godwin's Law in order to invoke its thread-ending effects will be unsuccessful.
Actually, I believe that entrapment only involves getting someone to "commit a crime they would not have commited otherwise", the law enforcement agency need not commit a crime itself.
Do you also believe that a woman deserves to get raped because she wore a miniskirt thus should just suck it up and deal with it because "that's the way it is" ?
Nothing, and I mean NOTHING, justifies what these kids go through. I don't care of they're every damn "minority" group in the world combined, that is no excuse for physical and mental abuse.
As a Canadian, I must state that our health care system is in shambles. It's a great setup for anyone who does not have any real medical needs aside from checkups and the infrequent hospital visit. However, for someone like me, who will probably be stuck in the medical system for the rest of my life, it flat out sucks. The federal government holds back health care funds if the province allows private clinics, yet hospitals refuse to do vital tests (MRIs, etc) because they are too expensive.
So, with the lack of private clinics, I'm not *allowed* to opt to pay for the test just because some can't afford it. I'm to the point now where I will probably have no choice but to go to the US for treatment since our health care system won't allow me to pay for it here. It's a nice idea in theory, but in practice it flat out fails.
Matt
Do you realize that you post this *EXACT* post every single time there is a BSD article? Crawl back under your rock and stop spreading FUD.
Matt