Perhaps prioritizing based on when a person registered themselves to be a DONOR would be helpful too. This would encourage people to be donors and eliminate some of the issues for matches because there would be many more people who were donating.
E.g. Someone registered to be a donor when they were 18 and needed something at 60, would be placed ahead of someone who registered at 59.5 (or not at all) and needed one at 60. This would encourage many, many people to donate, alleviating the shortage and finding many more matches. It would likely result in the time of registration rarely or never coming in to play.
Not to mention the difference between a military/government contract and a private one. One has a lot more cost and design controls, the other has a lot more political input for spreading the work around.
If you are a prostate cancer patient increasing blood flow to the area for up to 3 years will improve healing - for nerve damage and the like. They are only "optional" in the sense that physical therapy is optional or that statins are optional. You want healing for both continence and potency among other things.
A little knowledge goes a long way, but to claim that it is completely optional ignores the studies showing the benefits for at least prostatectomy patients.
The example still holds though: if Doctors and patients are not aware of the benefits of a drug, they won't prescribe it.
The slightly different option is to default to only installing through the App store with an option for users to turn that off, perhaps in the Accounts section of System Preferences. This gives a compromise where people on Slashdot can use whatever method they want and naive users will be much more protected.
Remember that 99% of the users out there know very little about computers. They think a Computer Science degree or Computer Engineering degree means you "know how to fix computers." Kind of like an "electrical engineer" can come and wire your house or a "mechanical engineer" knows how to fix your car.
The question here is: how much do you protect users from their own naivety/stupidity/credulity (depending upon how you want to phrase it)?
I believe that in the long term, like it or not, the trend will be that the operating system will be closer to the walled garden approach for just this reason.
Or heaven forbid an extra bit of blood is drawn for the PSA test. Sure, PSA can be elevated due to other causes, but NO one has a prostatectomy or radiation without DREs, and biopsies to confirm cancer. And if the DRE finds something it is probably at a worse stage (e.g. metastasis) vs first detection due to an elevated PSA.
No one has "radical life altering procedures" without a positive diagnosis. DREs and PSA are safe and easy. Even the biopsies, while uncomfortable, are safe.
The medical establishment should OFFER the PSA and DRE beginning at 35 (40 at the latest). The American Cancer Society and government agencies advocating no PSAs until 50 is practically criminal.
Let each person decide for themselves, it is their life - let the Doctors bring it up.
Essentially they seem to be saying that if the odds are less than 1 in 1000 of finding something, don't do the test. Most things occur at less than 1 in 1000, but it makes a difference to that 1. Insane.
It does not take into account 3rd party callers either. For example, I'm driving along and see a horrible accident right in front of me.
I call in, calmly describe the detached body part in the road, the 5 cars involved, and the blood on the pavement. Then compare it to the guy who lost the blood or the finger or whatever calling in completely hysterical.
Same situation, one person much calmer than the other. It is a common occurrence. Ditto friend vs spouse or parent or child.
Definitely cool technology, but assuming the article is accurate, not a good usage.
(I know the original was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but the power-hungry politicians will find ways to get around it): The politicians will just try to (a) tax it to death (either the companies or the subscribers), (b) regulate it "in order to make sure it is free and non-discriminatory," or (c) have "voluntary" codes that ensure that access by children (and other protected classes) aren't shown "inappropriate content."
The power to tax is the power to destroy and the power to regulate is the power to control. You don't need to shut down the Internet to have control over it. You just have to be the ONE to define "inappropriate" or the ONE to decide what the "voluntary" codes are or the ONE to set the tax rates. Or give "tax breaks" to companies that comply with the "suggestions" - kind of like the Federal Highway funds used to be tied to speed limits.
I guess unicode didn't make it. The five letter word in quotations (looks like an upside-down "g" then "ypah" is Buran. (5th line, 4th word in the first photo caption) Then the "cobetckNN" (backwards NN) is essentially "Soviet" (right before Buran).
There are a few other words about it being in the outskirts of Moscow.
I did take a year of Russian in college, and it is a bit (well, very, very rusty), but it seems to say that it is Buran and it has been "sacrificed" and it laments the fact that it was once a symbol of the Soviet power in space but is now junk. That is no where near an exact translation, but a rough translation of parts of the caption.
"" is buran "" is essentially "Soviet" (some variation)
(Slashdot seems to be having issues at the moment with pages failing to load and not submitting so hopefully it does not submit multiple times)
I did take a year of Russian in college, and it is a bit (well, very, very rusty), but it seems to say that it is Buran and it has been "sacrificed" and it laments the fact that it was once a symbol of the Soviet power in space but is now junk. That is no where near an exact translation, but a rough translation of parts of the caption.
"" is buran "" is essentially "Soviet" (some variation)
I did take a year of Russian in college, and it is a bit (well, very, very rusty), but it seems to say that it is Buran and it has been "sacrificed" and it laments the fact that it was once a symbol of the Soviet power in space but is now junk. That is no where near an exact translation, but a rough translation of parts of the caption.
"" is buran in Russian "" is essentially "Soviet" (some variation)
This is not just limited to Europe, governments want control of you and the internet and everything they else they can. And when you have lost Constitutional protections (US) all you need is 51% of the people to say it is a good idea:
My understanding of laches is NOT that it requires an affirmative action on the patent owners part. It could be a different defense in patent law, but if so I am not aware of it. And IAAA (I am an attorney) who took a number of IP law classes but does not practice in that area. My understanding is that in US Federal Courts submarine patents may have a good laches defense. As I said though, this is not an area of expertise.
Campaign contributions are small potatoes compared to the power of disbursing trillions of tax dollars taken from one group to another group. This gives the politician power over both the group they are taking from (some minority of voters, typically some small minority of 'the rich') by hitting them up to get the burden reduced and power over the group getting the money for fear of cutting them off. Dependence on the largess of politicians and government makes everyone beholden to them which is the goal.
This is not about money alone or even primarily, it is about the power that control over tax dollars brings. You could eliminate all private funding of elections and you would be in no better shape because campaign contributions are only a very limited part of the problem.
Until people realize that this is about power, the wrong issues will be tackled. Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely. - Acton
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps prioritizing based on when a person registered themselves to be a DONOR would be helpful too. This would encourage people to be donors and eliminate some of the issues for matches because there would be many more people who were donating.
E.g. Someone registered to be a donor when they were 18 and needed something at 60, would be placed ahead of someone who registered at 59.5 (or not at all) and needed one at 60. This would encourage many, many people to donate, alleviating the shortage and finding many more matches. It would likely result in the time of registration rarely or never coming in to play.
And then you'd get part way done and the government would want it an ounce lighter, 1.23 inches shorter, and .08 inches narrower.
You see, this was not COTS, but custom.
Joshua: Shall we play a game?
He knows because the poster says near the very bottom of the post: "this free citizen living in Hancock, Michigan" :-)
And if you have not used Java in 30 days, Apple disables it in the browser. (At least Java 6 and I believe any Java version). :-)
e.g., see http://www.christopherprice.net/making-sense-of-oracle-java-7-for-os-x-2119.html
Not to mention the difference between a military/government contract and a private one. One has a lot more cost and design controls, the other has a lot more political input for spreading the work around.
Viagra and Cialis are NOT "COMPLETELY OPTIONAL."
If you are a prostate cancer patient increasing blood flow to the area for up to 3 years will improve healing - for nerve damage and the like. They are only "optional" in the sense that physical therapy is optional or that statins are optional. You want healing for both continence and potency among other things.
A little knowledge goes a long way, but to claim that it is completely optional ignores the studies showing the benefits for at least prostatectomy patients.
The example still holds though: if Doctors and patients are not aware of the benefits of a drug, they won't prescribe it.
The slightly different option is to default to only installing through the App store with an option for users to turn that off, perhaps in the Accounts section of System Preferences. This gives a compromise where people on Slashdot can use whatever method they want and naive users will be much more protected.
Remember that 99% of the users out there know very little about computers. They think a Computer Science degree or Computer Engineering degree means you "know how to fix computers." Kind of like an "electrical engineer" can come and wire your house or a "mechanical engineer" knows how to fix your car.
The question here is: how much do you protect users from their own naivety/stupidity/credulity (depending upon how you want to phrase it)?
I believe that in the long term, like it or not, the trend will be that the operating system will be closer to the walled garden approach for just this reason.
Or heaven forbid an extra bit of blood is drawn for the PSA test. Sure, PSA can be elevated due to other causes, but NO one has a prostatectomy or radiation without DREs, and biopsies to confirm cancer. And if the DRE finds something it is probably at a worse stage (e.g. metastasis) vs first detection due to an elevated PSA.
No one has "radical life altering procedures" without a positive diagnosis. DREs and PSA are safe and easy. Even the biopsies, while uncomfortable, are safe.
The medical establishment should OFFER the PSA and DRE beginning at 35 (40 at the latest). The American Cancer Society and government agencies advocating no PSAs until 50 is practically criminal.
Let each person decide for themselves, it is their life - let the Doctors bring it up.
Essentially they seem to be saying that if the odds are less than 1 in 1000 of finding something, don't do the test. Most things occur at less than 1 in 1000, but it makes a difference to that 1. Insane.
You asked: :-)
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/babes/
It does not take into account 3rd party callers either. For example, I'm driving along and see a horrible accident right in front of me.
I call in, calmly describe the detached body part in the road, the 5 cars involved, and the blood on the pavement. Then compare it to the guy who lost the blood or the finger or whatever calling in completely hysterical.
Same situation, one person much calmer than the other. It is a common occurrence. Ditto friend vs spouse or parent or child.
Definitely cool technology, but assuming the article is accurate, not a good usage.
(I know the original was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but the power-hungry politicians will find ways to get around it):
The politicians will just try to (a) tax it to death (either the companies or the subscribers), (b) regulate it "in order to make sure it is free and non-discriminatory," or (c) have "voluntary" codes that ensure that access by children (and other protected classes) aren't shown "inappropriate content."
The power to tax is the power to destroy and the power to regulate is the power to control. You don't need to shut down the Internet to have control over it. You just have to be the ONE to define "inappropriate" or the ONE to decide what the "voluntary" codes are or the ONE to set the tax rates. Or give "tax breaks" to companies that comply with the "suggestions" - kind of like the Federal Highway funds used to be tied to speed limits.
I guess unicode didn't make it.
The five letter word in quotations (looks like an upside-down "g" then "ypah" is Buran. (5th line, 4th word in the first photo caption)
Then the "cobetckNN" (backwards NN) is essentially "Soviet" (right before Buran).
There are a few other words about it being in the outskirts of Moscow.
I did take a year of Russian in college, and it is a bit (well, very, very rusty), but it seems to say that it is Buran and it has been "sacrificed" and it laments the fact that it was once a symbol of the Soviet power in space but is now junk. That is no where near an exact translation, but a rough translation of parts of the caption.
"" is buran
"" is essentially "Soviet" (some variation)
(Slashdot seems to be having issues at the moment with pages failing to load and not submitting so hopefully it does not submit multiple times)
I did take a year of Russian in college, and it is a bit (well, very, very rusty), but it seems to say that it is Buran and it has been "sacrificed" and it laments the fact that it was once a symbol of the Soviet power in space but is now junk. That is no where near an exact translation, but a rough translation of parts of the caption.
"" is buran
"" is essentially "Soviet" (some variation)
I did take a year of Russian in college, and it is a bit (well, very, very rusty), but it seems to say that it is Buran and it has been "sacrificed" and it laments the fact that it was once a symbol of the Soviet power in space but is now junk. That is no where near an exact translation, but a rough translation of parts of the caption.
"" is buran in Russian
"" is essentially "Soviet" (some variation)
This original complaint is here in pdf format:
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/kentucky/kyedce/2:2009cv00219/62639/1/0.pdf
It is pretty funny to see them talking about "TheDirt.com" all through it when it isn't even the right website.
This is not just limited to Europe, governments want control of you and the internet and everything they else they can. And when you have lost Constitutional protections (US) all you need is 51% of the people to say it is a good idea:
US last week:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jun/15/epidemic-growth-of-net-porn-cited/
http://www.prisonplanet.com/new-bill-gives-obama-kill-switch-to-shut-down-the-internet.html
Indonesia, June 15, 2010:
http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-49317620100615
YouTube link to the irate caller who didn't like them to interrupt the season finale with a tornado warning:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZJdhmsfbPg&feature=player_embedded/
My understanding of laches is NOT that it requires an affirmative action on the patent owners part. It could be a different defense in patent law, but if so I am not aware of it.
And IAAA (I am an attorney) who took a number of IP law classes but does not practice in that area. My understanding is that in US Federal Courts submarine patents may have a good laches defense. As I said though, this is not an area of expertise.
Campaign contributions are small potatoes compared to the power of disbursing trillions of tax dollars taken from one group to another group. This gives the politician power over both the group they are taking from (some minority of voters, typically some small minority of 'the rich') by hitting them up to get the burden reduced and power over the group getting the money for fear of cutting them off. Dependence on the largess of politicians and government makes everyone beholden to them which is the goal.
This is not about money alone or even primarily, it is about the power that control over tax dollars brings. You could eliminate all private funding of elections and you would be in no better shape because campaign contributions are only a very limited part of the problem.
Until people realize that this is about power, the wrong issues will be tackled. Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely. - Acton
UCSD, APM, Scripps, Black's Beach etc. :-)
The obvious answer is - Christmas is coming and the ribbon has to come from somewhere!
I had mod points yesterday, but not today. The post above was a very informative post. Nice contribution.
Personal preference.