"We wanted to balance the value and the affordability concerns with a responsible price that would ensure access to patients," said CEO Jeffrey Marrazzo
That's comedy gold, right there!
Unless, of course, you happen to have this form of blindness without being a multimillionaire. Then, it's just an insult.
Pai is a liar, so what he says means little. This is a case in point -- he says this like it's a good reason to get rid of NN rules, even though he could easily keep them in place until such legislation is passed.
He doesn't give a shit about process or what's best for the American people. What he cares about is giving a huge gift to the major telecoms.
90% of butts in seat not the folks who see a movie once in a while.
The majority of butts-in-seats may very well be those who see a movie once per month or less. I couldn't find numbers about that specifically, but the numbers that are readily available seem to indicate this is a strong possibility.
There is nothing really wrong with electronic voting systems that wasn't wrong with the old mechanical ones, punch cards or even the old paper ballots.
Well, the punch cards were always a terrible idea and remain so. And you're right that there is no perfectly secure method. That said, there are two things that make the electronic systems worse: they're easier to subvert (more points of potential failure), and if subverted, it's easier to make it unnoticeable and/or impossible to prove tampering.
even though there are two main parties, there are a lot of other parties
Yes, they exist. No, they have almost no chance of ever winning (no matter how qualified their candidates). This because of institutional rules that the two main parties maintain for this reason.
First you say you have no voice because there is nobody you want to vote for, now it is you have no voice because the one you voted for didn't win.
You misunderstood what I wrote. I said that it wasn't because the one I voted for didn't win.
there were many more than just two parties on the ballot.
True, they are there. But they may as well not be, as I said before. Their technical presence is required to maintain the illusion of choice, but it's just an illusion.
That leaves us back at having a "no" option and leaving the office vacant if enough people vote "no".
No, it leads us back to changing the system to make third (and fourth, and fifth, etc.) parties actually viable.
Although, since you keep saying this, I should point out -- a "none of the above" option is something to consider. It wouldn't address the issue I have with US elections, but it would be at least something. But if "none of the above" wins, that doesn't mean the office remains vacant. It means that the election needs to be held again.
If I understand your point, you want every election for a public office to have a "no" option, and if enough people vote "no" then nobody is elected and the office sits vacant until the next election?
That's not my point. My point is simply that a two-party system is deeply flawed, in that you must choose between option A and option B even when neither option is acceptable.
Take the last election, for instance. I had no voice not because my preferred candidate didn't win, but because there was no viable candidate that I was OK with. That's the two-party system in action.
"managerial differences" means you had disagreements with the way the company was run.
"Managerial differences", like "wanting to spend more time with family", are the "acceptable" reasons to give for leaving when the real reason is extremely unflattering to someone (usually, but not always, the employer).
I have little hope for 2018. Tech advances aren't going to solve the major issues we have, and the increasing prevalence of things like Big Data are likely to make them even worse.
It depends on how its done. If an employer is really terrible, that's something that people should know. If nobody ever says anything, how would people find out?
So we should believe everything some random pissed off person of unknown mental stability writes on the internet with no context or rebuttal?
Nope, just like we shouldn't believe a single positive review. Individual reviews mean nothing. What you want to see is what the gist of all the reviews are.
One of the things I consider when deciding whether or not to do business with a company is how they treat their employees. This is valuable information to me.
I had much more fun with a 6MHz Z80B and 64kB of RAM, CP/M, and a C compiler than I've ever had playing with anything since my first XT clone.
Me too.
But electronics in general has also become much less 'fun' because all the new and hot hardware requires you to spin a whole multi-layer PCB just to get it up and running in the most basic ways.
This isn't even remotely accurate. What is true is that you have to learn a new soldering technique to solder SMDs -- but once you learn it, it's easy.
You really can't go very far with perfboard and a soldering iron anymore, not like you used to.
Yes, you really can. Honestly, I do it all the time.
Also the days of surplus stores is long gone, and much of my materials came from such places.
Yes, true, and that's a very sad thing. However, there are heaping piles of discarded electronics to be had for cheap, and you can cannibalize. And what you can't cannibalize, you can buy new for cheap online.
There seems to be little to discover, and the younger generation seems to turn their nose up at anything that isn't strictly digital.
This is also not true. The hobbyist electronics world looked like it was dead for a while there, but it's come back in spades -- and most of that new energy is coming from the younger generation. It's us old farts that have largely given up on it. The kids are off and running with it.
Slashdot Mirror
You left off the largest component of the cost of medications: marketing.
"We wanted to balance the value and the affordability concerns with a responsible price that would ensure access to patients," said CEO Jeffrey Marrazzo
That's comedy gold, right there!
Unless, of course, you happen to have this form of blindness without being a multimillionaire. Then, it's just an insult.
That's not "fixing it" so much as "breaking it" unless you have some sort of actual proof that the FCC acted illegally.
what chairman Pai has been saying.
Pai is a liar, so what he says means little. This is a case in point -- he says this like it's a good reason to get rid of NN rules, even though he could easily keep them in place until such legislation is passed.
He doesn't give a shit about process or what's best for the American people. What he cares about is giving a huge gift to the major telecoms.
90% of butts in seat not the folks who see a movie once in a while.
The majority of butts-in-seats may very well be those who see a movie once per month or less. I couldn't find numbers about that specifically, but the numbers that are readily available seem to indicate this is a strong possibility.
There is nothing really wrong with electronic voting systems that wasn't wrong with the old mechanical ones, punch cards or even the old paper ballots.
Well, the punch cards were always a terrible idea and remain so. And you're right that there is no perfectly secure method. That said, there are two things that make the electronic systems worse: they're easier to subvert (more points of potential failure), and if subverted, it's easier to make it unnoticeable and/or impossible to prove tampering.
Yes, that's still a point of potential failure. But at least paper ballots reduce the number of points of potential failure.
I don't see how having people manually count ballots could possibly be more reliable than having it done by a machine.
It makes election tampering more difficult to pull off.
Electronic voting systems guarantee that it's impossible to actually trust the results of elections.
even though there are two main parties, there are a lot of other parties
Yes, they exist. No, they have almost no chance of ever winning (no matter how qualified their candidates). This because of institutional rules that the two main parties maintain for this reason.
First you say you have no voice because there is nobody you want to vote for, now it is you have no voice because the one you voted for didn't win.
You misunderstood what I wrote. I said that it wasn't because the one I voted for didn't win.
there were many more than just two parties on the ballot.
True, they are there. But they may as well not be, as I said before. Their technical presence is required to maintain the illusion of choice, but it's just an illusion.
That leaves us back at having a "no" option and leaving the office vacant if enough people vote "no".
No, it leads us back to changing the system to make third (and fourth, and fifth, etc.) parties actually viable.
Although, since you keep saying this, I should point out -- a "none of the above" option is something to consider. It wouldn't address the issue I have with US elections, but it would be at least something. But if "none of the above" wins, that doesn't mean the office remains vacant. It means that the election needs to be held again.
If I understand your point, you want every election for a public office to have a "no" option, and if enough people vote "no" then nobody is elected and the office sits vacant until the next election?
That's not my point. My point is simply that a two-party system is deeply flawed, in that you must choose between option A and option B even when neither option is acceptable.
Take the last election, for instance. I had no voice not because my preferred candidate didn't win, but because there was no viable candidate that I was OK with. That's the two-party system in action.
Yes, swatting should be a felony (I'm surprised that it's not!)
However, in the case of SWauTistic, the charge should be negligent homicide.
"managerial differences" means you had disagreements with the way the company was run.
"Managerial differences", like "wanting to spend more time with family", are the "acceptable" reasons to give for leaving when the real reason is extremely unflattering to someone (usually, but not always, the employer).
They are code phrases, nothing more.
I have little hope for 2018. Tech advances aren't going to solve the major issues we have, and the increasing prevalence of things like Big Data are likely to make them even worse.
The Las Vegas monorail is largely pointless. Most people on the strip want to walk on the strip, not bypass it on a stupid train.
I'd like to encourage separation of the idea of "ethical" from "professional".
The business world has already separated the two concepts to a dangerous degree.
Personally, I think you can't act professionally without also acting ethically.
job seekers hardly look for a workplace review on Google Maps, do they?
True, but potential customers do. As a potential customer, I want to know these things as well.
Your bad review isn't saving anyone
If it's one of a number of other similar bad reviews, then it's saving me from patronizing a business I'd rather not support.
BTW, contrary to popular opinion, Google is a pretty crappy place to work.
That's contrary to popular opinion? I thought it was well-known that Google is a terrible place to work.
Companies are also on legal safe ground stating whether or not the ex-employee is eligible for rehire.
It depends on how its done. If an employer is really terrible, that's something that people should know. If nobody ever says anything, how would people find out?
So we should believe everything some random pissed off person of unknown mental stability writes on the internet with no context or rebuttal?
Nope, just like we shouldn't believe a single positive review. Individual reviews mean nothing. What you want to see is what the gist of all the reviews are.
One of the things I consider when deciding whether or not to do business with a company is how they treat their employees. This is valuable information to me.
"Your voice" is the voice expressing which candidate you want elected.
My point is that when you don't want any of the candidates to be elected, you have no voice.
I had much more fun with a 6MHz Z80B and 64kB of RAM, CP/M, and a C compiler than I've ever had playing with anything since my first XT clone.
Me too.
But electronics in general has also become much less 'fun' because all the new and hot hardware requires you to spin a whole multi-layer PCB just to get it up and running in the most basic ways.
This isn't even remotely accurate. What is true is that you have to learn a new soldering technique to solder SMDs -- but once you learn it, it's easy.
You really can't go very far with perfboard and a soldering iron anymore, not like you used to.
Yes, you really can. Honestly, I do it all the time.
Also the days of surplus stores is long gone, and much of my materials came from such places.
Yes, true, and that's a very sad thing. However, there are heaping piles of discarded electronics to be had for cheap, and you can cannibalize. And what you can't cannibalize, you can buy new for cheap online.
There seems to be little to discover, and the younger generation seems to turn their nose up at anything that isn't strictly digital.
This is also not true. The hobbyist electronics world looked like it was dead for a while there, but it's come back in spades -- and most of that new energy is coming from the younger generation. It's us old farts that have largely given up on it. The kids are off and running with it.