Ummm...no. Free market means I kick your sorry ass out of the house and call a real doctor. Someone pulling that game in a small town will find himself run right out of town on a rail.
You also clearly have very little experience in medicine. People don't go into primary care for the money (obviously, because it doesn't pay enough to cover your loans). Small-town doctors are going to be using the free-market economy to help their patients find the cheapest tests and cheapest treatments possible.
That's how it works. Free market does not necessarily mean "predatory." Most people aren't like that, particularly in smaller or more rural communities. Your vague apprehensions about the risk of vulnerable families are given foundation only by systematic distortions of the free market. These distortions limit the supply of both doctors and medicines, forcing families to accept substandard and/or overpriced care. A free market gives these families choices, choices that the current system does not give them.
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that you were looking at the database structure itself and did not take the time to learn MUMPS well enough to really work with it.
I've never worked with MUMPS, but your aggravation is quite familiar. It's what happens when you try to take apart a schema that is designed as an object store, without using the object accessing framework.
I'm not defending MUMPS in any way, but you should be aware of this if you ever attempt data conversion in the future. Often (not always!) it is best to become properly familiar with the original system of accessing the schema, and use that model to inspect and interact with the data store. It's frustrating as shit to have to learn a whole new (often proprietary) system in order to get at the data cleanly, but it will likely save you quite a bit of time and frustration. Plus you can put it on your resume, so there's that.
Are you one of those people who would have ridiculed anyone claiming the Government can "listen to all of our phone calls any time they want" as a conspiracy theorist?
If you were actually knowledgeable about the topic, you would know that vaccination rates in the US are extremely high -- among the highest in the world -- and are not dropping. There is zero danger of polio making a comeback.
Most "anti-vaxxers" (all?) I know have their kids vaccinated against polio. If you decline the flu shot (which, by the way, does not undergo the safety assurances that most vaccines must. It can't: there's not enough time to get it on the market before it's needed) then you are an "anti-vaxxer" even if all the rest are administered on schedule. I call bullshit. Strawman fallacy.
Probably no-one will get chickenpox or pertussis and nobody is going to change their minds of vaccinations. Those facilities had perfectly normal vaccination rates last year, and probably will this year as well once the records are fully updated.
You have hit the nail upon the head. For people who believe this, California is probably second only to New York in places to stay away from. It certainly is to me, for this reason.
I don't know, but if want I'd be happy to talk with you about the experience.:)
I started off doing part-time classes at a local community college, finished it off with 2 years at a 4-year school, and went directly into med school.
It's a lot of work and way way more stress than I ever imagined it would be, but it wasn't hard to get in. Lots of medical schools, especially osteopathic schools, welcome nontraditional students, and frankly if you do the prep work the MCAT isn't that bad.
If you have an eye on med school, start accumulating experience in the medical field early on. EMT training isn't hard to get and a couple of years doing EMT work (heck, you can do EMT training and work in the evenings and not interfere with a full-time job) will prepare you tremendously. I didn't do that, and it would have helped during admissions and would help a lot with the educational experience.
If I'm not mistaken, you just compared a community of homeschoolers to a community of self-mutilators. That's amazing.
There's really nothing that separates reddit from any other online forum, except that it brings so many disparate viewpoints under a single login and domain. Slashdot is no less of an echo chamber lined with groupthink and foolishness.
1) Mum and dad don't have to be teachers. 1-on-1 instruction is so much superior to classroom education that there is really no comparison.
2) Trying to emulate a school environment at home is a recipe for disaster. That's not how it works, and that's not how it should work.
3) All of those are quickly learned upon entrance to college, or during the large quantities of socialization that homeschooled families tend to be very careful to procure for their children. Homeschoolers actually tend to be considerably better socialized than their public school peers. However, dropping a homeschooled child into the wolfpack of public school is a recipe for disaster.
4) Exactly right. Thus, unschooling. http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/nature/Unschooling-The-Case-for-Setting-Your-Kids-Into-the-Wild.html It works very well, if the parents can get their head around that kind of freedom.
5) I don't know what your experience was but forced separation from parents is traumatic. Of course, once children hit puberty, they tend to break free on their own, thus handling the overly-attached problem.
Sorry your experience was bad. Most are not like that.
Slashdot is a rough place to post this. Check out reddit.com/r/homeschooling for a more knowledgeable community, but there are a TON of resources to help you figure this out if it is something you are interested in.
I don't know of anyone doing statistical work on homeschoolers. It would be helpful, but the fact is that homeschoolers tend to integrate very well in society. It's not as if there is a magical 3 percent that stand out all the time for you to notice.
I only know of anecdotal material. I am one of those. I was homeschooled K-12 and am now in medical school (as a nontraditional student, after having worked as a programmer for 10 years). My homeschooling experience was actually very difficult, but it did prepare me for working hard in the world.
I do want to address the point of socialization, however. By and large, homeschoolers are VASTLY better socialized than public schooled children. The reason for this is simple. Unlike public school, where children largely interact with teachers and same-aged peers, homeschooled children interact with a great swath of society from a young age. (There are occasional shut-in familes, but they are rare and you obviously would not be one of them.) Homeschooling is absolutely not a question of academics vs. socialization. Homeschoolers get both.
However, there is a different balance to strike. Your time. Homeschooling is a very serious commitment, particularly in time. This is the part that will get you.
As for your wife letting go, both boys and girls grow up more emotionally mature and resilient if they remain close to their parents until puberty. This translates to better socialization, better mental health, and better emotional capacities through life. So it might not be a bad thing.
Chocolate consumption is correlated with a nice range of positive clinical effects. It doesn't matter if someone figures out one proposed mechanism is invalid, because the stuff still works. Just because we might still be learning *why* something works does not invalidate the effect at all.
How about a metal/plastic hybrid? Metal chamber, metal barrel, plastic frame and mechanism? Because that has already been made.
Even if we assume that firearms need to be made of metal, 3D-printing of metal is coming down in price. It'll be a while, but it will happen eventually.
As for your statement about enabling the next Continental Army...that's not the point. The point of plastic guns is to enable someone to obtain a higher quality firearm with a reasonable degree of success. (Also to defeat the idea of "gun free zones.")
If you look around, there are doctors who will let you take home your original patient record. Just because you haven't tried to do this doesn't mean it is impossible.
How can I say this? Because my doctor will do this for any cash-paying patient who asks.
It may be unscientific to come to that kind of conclusion based on an n=16 study.
However, what this study DOES show is that the existing paradigm of saturated fat == heart disease ought to be questioned and thoroughly re-examined. Frankly, if I had metabolic syndrome, I'd be experimenting on myself the moment I heard about this.
According to Dr. Paul, the bill didn't go far enough (I agree). It also extended the PATRIOT act. Are you really led around that easily, to think that helping to kill this bill somehow makes him an authoritarian stooge?
Failure to pass this bill means we'll get another chance. The pressure is on. Once they pass a bill, nobody is going to want to pass another one for a while, so the first one has to get it right. The ACA is an example of a bill that was slammed through, and got a lot of things wrong. Let's not do the same thing with limiting the NSA.
Also, Rand Paul does not claim to be a libertarian, and if you actually knew anything about libertarians you should have known that libertarians tend to give him a giant stink-eye.
Well, there are a couple of reasons. For one, it tells criminals where the guns are. But that is pretty lightweight compared to the real problems with publicly listing concealed weapons permit holders. Think about these people;
Undercover officers
Detectives
Women hiding from stalkers
Prison guards
Cash carriers
The implications of revealing peoples' names and home addresses as weapons holders are actually quite profound, and most people don't really think it through. When it comes to firearms, you really need to think about every step very carefully. Gun rights are very sensitive -- as they should be -- and when you tinker with those rights, you will inevitably meddle with some of the most sensitive and/or fragile parts of our society.
You have quite a few presumptions in that. First, employers don't necessarily need to know if their dancers are licensed. Perhaps it is simply a small misdemeanor + fine with penalties limited to the dancer. In that case, employers don't need to know anything. I haven't looked it up, but there are plenty of reasons why an employer might not care.
Furthermore, the government need not provide any more information than "yes-licensed" or "not-licensed." There certainly does not need to be a directory of dancers, for sure, nor should there be (hello stalker heaven).
One of the major problems for strippers is stalkers. Men get attached, and sometimes it can be become a real problem. You can say that it goes with the territory, but it isn't a problem if the government isn't keeping a publicly-visible directory of dancers, and I say the problem lies there.
I disagree, emphatically. There are all kinds of government-owned information which should never be publicly visible. Individuals in witness protection programs, tattoo identification experts, certain expert witnesses, concealed weapons permit holders, gun ownership records in general, undercover officer identities, and so on.
Mind you, I consider myself to be an extremist libertarian bordering on anarchist, and I still think there is lots of information which (if it exists in the first place) should never be publicly revealed.
In the US, FOIA requests can be denied on the basis of privacy violations (exemption 6), and law enforcement information (which this qualifies, I think) can be denied if its release could endanger the life or physical safety of any individual. http://www.foia.gov/faq.html#exemptions
All of what you said is interesting and concerning, but brains are actually quite plastic. Patterns change. New patterns form. Old patterns fade. The shift from liberal to conservative with age is well-documented. A single encounter with psilocybin can create permanent personality changes.
Do we put them through a chimney, or invite them to have a cup of mushroom tea?
Or just marvel at the biological diversity that characterizes our brains, and treasure every twisted piece of it, because when cataclysms strike, diversity is the only way for a species to survive?
You are putting too much into the study. This study shows that there IS a biological basis for SOME political beliefs. This flies directly in the face of a great deal of currently-accepted knowledge, and is very important. This study shows that there is room for more research to explore all the questions you describe.
If you come away with more questions than answers, it's probably good research.
Slashdot Mirror
Ummm...no. Free market means I kick your sorry ass out of the house and call a real doctor. Someone pulling that game in a small town will find himself run right out of town on a rail.
You also clearly have very little experience in medicine. People don't go into primary care for the money (obviously, because it doesn't pay enough to cover your loans). Small-town doctors are going to be using the free-market economy to help their patients find the cheapest tests and cheapest treatments possible.
That's how it works. Free market does not necessarily mean "predatory." Most people aren't like that, particularly in smaller or more rural communities. Your vague apprehensions about the risk of vulnerable families are given foundation only by systematic distortions of the free market. These distortions limit the supply of both doctors and medicines, forcing families to accept substandard and/or overpriced care. A free market gives these families choices, choices that the current system does not give them.
It's worth keeping in mind that science (and medicine!) still have "we didn't know!" moments today.
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that you were looking at the database structure itself and did not take the time to learn MUMPS well enough to really work with it.
I've never worked with MUMPS, but your aggravation is quite familiar. It's what happens when you try to take apart a schema that is designed as an object store, without using the object accessing framework.
I'm not defending MUMPS in any way, but you should be aware of this if you ever attempt data conversion in the future. Often (not always!) it is best to become properly familiar with the original system of accessing the schema, and use that model to inspect and interact with the data store. It's frustrating as shit to have to learn a whole new (often proprietary) system in order to get at the data cleanly, but it will likely save you quite a bit of time and frustration. Plus you can put it on your resume, so there's that.
Are you one of those people who would have ridiculed anyone claiming the Government can "listen to all of our phone calls any time they want" as a conspiracy theorist?
If you were actually knowledgeable about the topic, you would know that vaccination rates in the US are extremely high -- among the highest in the world -- and are not dropping. There is zero danger of polio making a comeback.
Most "anti-vaxxers" (all?) I know have their kids vaccinated against polio. If you decline the flu shot (which, by the way, does not undergo the safety assurances that most vaccines must. It can't: there's not enough time to get it on the market before it's needed) then you are an "anti-vaxxer" even if all the rest are administered on schedule. I call bullshit. Strawman fallacy.
Probably no-one will get chickenpox or pertussis and nobody is going to change their minds of vaccinations. Those facilities had perfectly normal vaccination rates last year, and probably will this year as well once the records are fully updated.
You have hit the nail upon the head. For people who believe this, California is probably second only to New York in places to stay away from. It certainly is to me, for this reason.
I don't know, but if want I'd be happy to talk with you about the experience. :)
I started off doing part-time classes at a local community college, finished it off with 2 years at a 4-year school, and went directly into med school.
It's a lot of work and way way more stress than I ever imagined it would be, but it wasn't hard to get in. Lots of medical schools, especially osteopathic schools, welcome nontraditional students, and frankly if you do the prep work the MCAT isn't that bad.
If you have an eye on med school, start accumulating experience in the medical field early on. EMT training isn't hard to get and a couple of years doing EMT work (heck, you can do EMT training and work in the evenings and not interfere with a full-time job) will prepare you tremendously. I didn't do that, and it would have helped during admissions and would help a lot with the educational experience.
If I'm not mistaken, you just compared a community of homeschoolers to a community of self-mutilators. That's amazing.
There's really nothing that separates reddit from any other online forum, except that it brings so many disparate viewpoints under a single login and domain. Slashdot is no less of an echo chamber lined with groupthink and foolishness.
1) Mum and dad don't have to be teachers. 1-on-1 instruction is so much superior to classroom education that there is really no comparison.
2) Trying to emulate a school environment at home is a recipe for disaster. That's not how it works, and that's not how it should work.
3) All of those are quickly learned upon entrance to college, or during the large quantities of socialization that homeschooled families tend to be very careful to procure for their children. Homeschoolers actually tend to be considerably better socialized than their public school peers. However, dropping a homeschooled child into the wolfpack of public school is a recipe for disaster.
4) Exactly right. Thus, unschooling. http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/nature/Unschooling-The-Case-for-Setting-Your-Kids-Into-the-Wild.html It works very well, if the parents can get their head around that kind of freedom.
5) I don't know what your experience was but forced separation from parents is traumatic. Of course, once children hit puberty, they tend to break free on their own, thus handling the overly-attached problem.
Sorry your experience was bad. Most are not like that.
Slashdot is a rough place to post this. Check out reddit.com/r/homeschooling for a more knowledgeable community, but there are a TON of resources to help you figure this out if it is something you are interested in.
I don't know of anyone doing statistical work on homeschoolers. It would be helpful, but the fact is that homeschoolers tend to integrate very well in society. It's not as if there is a magical 3 percent that stand out all the time for you to notice.
I only know of anecdotal material. I am one of those. I was homeschooled K-12 and am now in medical school (as a nontraditional student, after having worked as a programmer for 10 years). My homeschooling experience was actually very difficult, but it did prepare me for working hard in the world.
I do want to address the point of socialization, however. By and large, homeschoolers are VASTLY better socialized than public schooled children. The reason for this is simple. Unlike public school, where children largely interact with teachers and same-aged peers, homeschooled children interact with a great swath of society from a young age. (There are occasional shut-in familes, but they are rare and you obviously would not be one of them.) Homeschooling is absolutely not a question of academics vs. socialization. Homeschoolers get both.
However, there is a different balance to strike. Your time. Homeschooling is a very serious commitment, particularly in time. This is the part that will get you.
As for your wife letting go, both boys and girls grow up more emotionally mature and resilient if they remain close to their parents until puberty. This translates to better socialization, better mental health, and better emotional capacities through life. So it might not be a bad thing.
...considering that Android -- at its core -- is a form of Linux.
Chocolate consumption is correlated with a nice range of positive clinical effects. It doesn't matter if someone figures out one proposed mechanism is invalid, because the stuff still works. Just because we might still be learning *why* something works does not invalidate the effect at all.
How about a metal/plastic hybrid? Metal chamber, metal barrel, plastic frame and mechanism? Because that has already been made.
Even if we assume that firearms need to be made of metal, 3D-printing of metal is coming down in price. It'll be a while, but it will happen eventually.
As for your statement about enabling the next Continental Army...that's not the point. The point of plastic guns is to enable someone to obtain a higher quality firearm with a reasonable degree of success. (Also to defeat the idea of "gun free zones.")
Yes but anyone (literally, anyone) can order an upper from the Internet and have it shipped to their door.
If you look around, there are doctors who will let you take home your original patient record. Just because you haven't tried to do this doesn't mean it is impossible.
How can I say this? Because my doctor will do this for any cash-paying patient who asks.
It may be unscientific to come to that kind of conclusion based on an n=16 study.
However, what this study DOES show is that the existing paradigm of saturated fat == heart disease ought to be questioned and thoroughly re-examined. Frankly, if I had metabolic syndrome, I'd be experimenting on myself the moment I heard about this.
According to Dr. Paul, the bill didn't go far enough (I agree). It also extended the PATRIOT act. Are you really led around that easily, to think that helping to kill this bill somehow makes him an authoritarian stooge?
Failure to pass this bill means we'll get another chance. The pressure is on. Once they pass a bill, nobody is going to want to pass another one for a while, so the first one has to get it right. The ACA is an example of a bill that was slammed through, and got a lot of things wrong. Let's not do the same thing with limiting the NSA.
Also, Rand Paul does not claim to be a libertarian, and if you actually knew anything about libertarians you should have known that libertarians tend to give him a giant stink-eye.
...and become anarchists?
Well, there are a couple of reasons. For one, it tells criminals where the guns are. But that is pretty lightweight compared to the real problems with publicly listing concealed weapons permit holders. Think about these people;
Undercover officers
Detectives
Women hiding from stalkers
Prison guards
Cash carriers
The implications of revealing peoples' names and home addresses as weapons holders are actually quite profound, and most people don't really think it through. When it comes to firearms, you really need to think about every step very carefully. Gun rights are very sensitive -- as they should be -- and when you tinker with those rights, you will inevitably meddle with some of the most sensitive and/or fragile parts of our society.
You have quite a few presumptions in that. First, employers don't necessarily need to know if their dancers are licensed. Perhaps it is simply a small misdemeanor + fine with penalties limited to the dancer. In that case, employers don't need to know anything. I haven't looked it up, but there are plenty of reasons why an employer might not care.
Furthermore, the government need not provide any more information than "yes-licensed" or "not-licensed." There certainly does not need to be a directory of dancers, for sure, nor should there be (hello stalker heaven).
One of the major problems for strippers is stalkers. Men get attached, and sometimes it can be become a real problem. You can say that it goes with the territory, but it isn't a problem if the government isn't keeping a publicly-visible directory of dancers, and I say the problem lies there.
I disagree, emphatically. There are all kinds of government-owned information which should never be publicly visible. Individuals in witness protection programs, tattoo identification experts, certain expert witnesses, concealed weapons permit holders, gun ownership records in general, undercover officer identities, and so on.
Mind you, I consider myself to be an extremist libertarian bordering on anarchist, and I still think there is lots of information which (if it exists in the first place) should never be publicly revealed.
In the US, FOIA requests can be denied on the basis of privacy violations (exemption 6), and law enforcement information (which this qualifies, I think) can be denied if its release could endanger the life or physical safety of any individual. http://www.foia.gov/faq.html#exemptions
All of what you said is interesting and concerning, but brains are actually quite plastic. Patterns change. New patterns form. Old patterns fade. The shift from liberal to conservative with age is well-documented. A single encounter with psilocybin can create permanent personality changes.
Do we put them through a chimney, or invite them to have a cup of mushroom tea?
Or just marvel at the biological diversity that characterizes our brains, and treasure every twisted piece of it, because when cataclysms strike, diversity is the only way for a species to survive?
You are putting too much into the study. This study shows that there IS a biological basis for SOME political beliefs. This flies directly in the face of a great deal of currently-accepted knowledge, and is very important. This study shows that there is room for more research to explore all the questions you describe.
If you come away with more questions than answers, it's probably good research.