Unfortunately, government is the only entity with deep enough pockets and no mandate to make a profit. I'm in no way bashing industry but with the amount of dollars (since we are talking US), its only the government that can fund it. I'm a 'small government' person but when it comes to basic research, and not just limited to space but oceanography, climatology, etc., I'll gladly pay more in taxes if I know that it will keeps things going.
And CMS (aka Medicare). They're just as bad as the insurance companies. They make the same kinds of decisions. Absolute refusal to pay for tests based on diagnostic code (even though the family doctor may know that person since their birth and knows the medical history).
Or the McMartin pre-school trials (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial).
And I know what you mean. I'm a single, white, 50+ male. Heck, I might as well be wearing a sign that says 'possible pedophile' around my neck even if I'm in the vicinity of kids (which makes it hard considering I live next to a grade school).
How about a new version of NIMBY? I've thought about it. In that case, it's "Fine you want to build wind turbines. Then senior staff and major investors have to live in houses right next to them like people already do for 5 - 10 years."
They just put 50+ near where I live. So much for looking at nice hills with trees. Now I see nice hills with trees and god-awful 400' towers.
And I'm not being a luddite, either. I'd rather see 'salt' reactors and natural gas.
They've just taken market segmentation and added a process to focus it to not just a demographic or geographic area but to the individual. Don't any of you remember looking through Christmas catalogs and seeing "Executive chess sets" or pens or whatever? It was a bloody chess set with the price jacked up and the word "Executive" added to the name. In other words, they figured out how to sell X number of chess sets at Y price to Z number of users.
So how is that illegal? Not that I'm a fan of it but I just don't see how it violates any anti-trust. However, it would be nice to see that news spread far and wide so people are aware of it.
I really doubt that. Once it gets rolled out to all new vehicles, it will probably be illegal for a licensed mechanic to disable the device. They do that with ABS brakes now. As to the owner, that may be different.
Aw, c'mon. We're just teasing you just a bit. ("Homer Simpson on why he won't take a vacation in Canada: 'Why do I want to visit America Junior?'") Actually, I have a few connections to Canada: 1. I live in Michigan so you're like next door neighbors; 2. At work, we use a software product whose company is in Canada; 3. One of my best friends step-father is Canadian; and 4. I'm part Canadian as my great-grandmother on my Dad's side was Canadian.
So, it's all in fun and I consider Canadians to be my brothers and sisters. And we in the US, really did appreciate the bravery shown by Canadian diplomats when they helped to smuggle a few Americans out of Iran way back when.
Declaration of Independence. If you are referring to the US Declaration, it doesn't apply. Free speech is in the first amendment to the US Constitution.
My Cobalt (5 sp manual) gets 35+ on the freeway. Who in heck (who knows how to drive a manual properly) would ever try flooring it in 5th; that's just for cruising. On the freeway, or 2 lane highway, I've dropped from 5th to 4th when I'm passing someone.
I agree about the automatics, though. I don't know why the trend in the US is to the auto. Definitely not as much fun as a stick shift.
Interesting generational change (just a guess on my part of what generation you belong to): My generation would use the "They can land a man on the moon..."
Agreed. I heard this a couple of weeks ago: "The definition of a politician is one, who seeing which way the crowd is headed, gets out in front and says 'Follow me!'"
I don't know if the size of the government lends people to 'bribe it.' Will Rogers said, way back in the early part of the 20th century, "We have the best congress money can buy."
I'm not sure if it would make a difference if Einstein lived much longer. Most of his 'miraculous' accomplishments happened before he was 40 and he spent the rest of his life trying to find a unified field theory. I remember reading an article that said most scientific breakthroughs were done by people younger than 40. Assuming that if someone lives to be does not necessarily mean they will create or think up any more breakthroughs.
As to the new law, remember reading about Godwin's law? Where, no matter the discussion, someone finally relates it to Nazi's? I think we need a new one concerning this debate between atheists and religious people. I suppose in this article one could make a reason for the relevancy of an afterlife (and rebuttals) but I've read some articles on/. where my reaction to a "Jesus is a myth" or "Jesus Saves" is a "WTF, does this have to do with the article?"
Slightly OT, but if you think this is bad, just do a search on all the hassles people who like to take pictures go through. Legally, you can pretty much take a picture of anything with certain obvious exclusions (federal buildings, nuke plant interiors, etc). Yet, there are numerous occasions where a person taking a picture is harassed: threatened with physical harm*, arrest, seizure of the phone.
*In a suburb of Grand Rapids, MI, a man was seen taking a picture of a water tower. Apparently, this tower had some interesting designs on it. Anyway, a few construction workers noticed and came over to him an demanded to know what in hell he was doing, where he was from, his name. The gentleman protested that he did not have to answer their questions and walked away to a diner. The men followed him there and then called the police. Police came, checked the man out and decided there was no cause for alarm or justification for them to do anything other than take his name down. The next day, after it was reported in the local news, the mayor of Wyoming, let me repeat that the MAYOR said those men had done nothing wrong. I don't know if the man ever sued but I would have. I would have sued those construction workers and thrown in the mayor as one condoning intimidation and possibly assault.
It is not required at this time to be certified and I'm not sure what cert would be required. Obviously, we have never brought anybody into the department (on the tech side) that didn't know what they were doing. But, as of now, no governmental body requires a specific certification to work in IT in healthcare.
I think the OP is referring more to apps that providers may use. Things such as Airstrip Technologies cardio app or Eppocrates' app. Also some of the radiology vendors have their own apps. (But in fairness to them, the radiology vendors, most state that the app is not to be used for diagnostic purposes.)
On a similar note, I'm sure there will come a day when we in IT are forced to be certified to work on any server\computer that contains patient data or EMR software.
"No scientist of any repute will tell you what to think, or tell you they can prove God does / doesn't exist.
It's a shame that the religious people *don't* just ignore the people who go against their beliefs. The world would be a much quieter place."
For the most part, I agree with what you wrote. People can believe what they want but they shouldn't shove it down anyone's throat unless they can back it up with proof (and a bloody good theory).
However, of the two sentences above, I assume you mean the Richard Dawkins is not a reputable scientist?
Also, I am religious but am also very much into science; strictly from a layman's viewpoint unfortunately. I find quantum mechanics (and entanglement especially) fascinating and have quite a few science books in my library. So, please be careful when making comments that apply "globally" (for want of a better word).
Er, um. Did you really expect anything else? I mean, c'mon Catholic School. (not to bash Catholic schools or anything but if you go to a religious school, I think you should expect that kind of a reply.)
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately, government is the only entity with deep enough pockets and no mandate to make a profit. I'm in no way bashing industry but with the amount of dollars (since we are talking US), its only the government that can fund it. I'm a 'small government' person but when it comes to basic research, and not just limited to space but oceanography, climatology, etc., I'll gladly pay more in taxes if I know that it will keeps things going.
Forget it. Name the most unpolitical or apolitical subject and in this election year, someone will blame either Romney or Obama or Rep or Dem.
Actually, capitalism on the whole, has been pretty darn good for the world.
And CMS (aka Medicare). They're just as bad as the insurance companies. They make the same kinds of decisions. Absolute refusal to pay for tests based on diagnostic code (even though the family doctor may know that person since their birth and knows the medical history).
Or the McMartin pre-school trials (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial). And I know what you mean. I'm a single, white, 50+ male. Heck, I might as well be wearing a sign that says 'possible pedophile' around my neck even if I'm in the vicinity of kids (which makes it hard considering I live next to a grade school).
IIRC, that was a bad McAfee update.
True but it would make me feel better. And lest I forget, XKCD reference: http://xkcd.com/556/
How about a new version of NIMBY? I've thought about it. In that case, it's "Fine you want to build wind turbines. Then senior staff and major investors have to live in houses right next to them like people already do for 5 - 10 years." They just put 50+ near where I live. So much for looking at nice hills with trees. Now I see nice hills with trees and god-awful 400' towers. And I'm not being a luddite, either. I'd rather see 'salt' reactors and natural gas.
They've just taken market segmentation and added a process to focus it to not just a demographic or geographic area but to the individual. Don't any of you remember looking through Christmas catalogs and seeing "Executive chess sets" or pens or whatever? It was a bloody chess set with the price jacked up and the word "Executive" added to the name. In other words, they figured out how to sell X number of chess sets at Y price to Z number of users. So how is that illegal? Not that I'm a fan of it but I just don't see how it violates any anti-trust. However, it would be nice to see that news spread far and wide so people are aware of it.
I really doubt that. Once it gets rolled out to all new vehicles, it will probably be illegal for a licensed mechanic to disable the device. They do that with ABS brakes now. As to the owner, that may be different.
Aw, c'mon. We're just teasing you just a bit. ("Homer Simpson on why he won't take a vacation in Canada: 'Why do I want to visit America Junior?'") Actually, I have a few connections to Canada: 1. I live in Michigan so you're like next door neighbors; 2. At work, we use a software product whose company is in Canada; 3. One of my best friends step-father is Canadian; and 4. I'm part Canadian as my great-grandmother on my Dad's side was Canadian. So, it's all in fun and I consider Canadians to be my brothers and sisters. And we in the US, really did appreciate the bravery shown by Canadian diplomats when they helped to smuggle a few Americans out of Iran way back when.
Declaration of Independence. If you are referring to the US Declaration, it doesn't apply. Free speech is in the first amendment to the US Constitution.
What have you seen or heard about that would lead you to believe that?
My Cobalt (5 sp manual) gets 35+ on the freeway. Who in heck (who knows how to drive a manual properly) would ever try flooring it in 5th; that's just for cruising. On the freeway, or 2 lane highway, I've dropped from 5th to 4th when I'm passing someone. I agree about the automatics, though. I don't know why the trend in the US is to the auto. Definitely not as much fun as a stick shift.
Interesting generational change (just a guess on my part of what generation you belong to): My generation would use the "They can land a man on the moon..."
Agreed. I heard this a couple of weeks ago: "The definition of a politician is one, who seeing which way the crowd is headed, gets out in front and says 'Follow me!'"
I don't know if the size of the government lends people to 'bribe it.' Will Rogers said, way back in the early part of the 20th century, "We have the best congress money can buy."
I'm not sure if it would make a difference if Einstein lived much longer. Most of his 'miraculous' accomplishments happened before he was 40 and he spent the rest of his life trying to find a unified field theory. I remember reading an article that said most scientific breakthroughs were done by people younger than 40. Assuming that if someone lives to be does not necessarily mean they will create or think up any more breakthroughs. As to the new law, remember reading about Godwin's law? Where, no matter the discussion, someone finally relates it to Nazi's? I think we need a new one concerning this debate between atheists and religious people. I suppose in this article one could make a reason for the relevancy of an afterlife (and rebuttals) but I've read some articles on /. where my reaction to a "Jesus is a myth" or "Jesus Saves" is a "WTF, does this have to do with the article?"
No. It does not. Perhaps certain benefits are lost but we don't have fences forcing anyone to stay in one place (well, other than convicts).
Slightly OT, but if you think this is bad, just do a search on all the hassles people who like to take pictures go through. Legally, you can pretty much take a picture of anything with certain obvious exclusions (federal buildings, nuke plant interiors, etc). Yet, there are numerous occasions where a person taking a picture is harassed: threatened with physical harm*, arrest, seizure of the phone. *In a suburb of Grand Rapids, MI, a man was seen taking a picture of a water tower. Apparently, this tower had some interesting designs on it. Anyway, a few construction workers noticed and came over to him an demanded to know what in hell he was doing, where he was from, his name. The gentleman protested that he did not have to answer their questions and walked away to a diner. The men followed him there and then called the police. Police came, checked the man out and decided there was no cause for alarm or justification for them to do anything other than take his name down. The next day, after it was reported in the local news, the mayor of Wyoming, let me repeat that the MAYOR said those men had done nothing wrong. I don't know if the man ever sued but I would have. I would have sued those construction workers and thrown in the mayor as one condoning intimidation and possibly assault.
Stuck on a reservation? Can you elaborate? I do not know of anywhere in the US where you are forced to live in one place.
It is not required at this time to be certified and I'm not sure what cert would be required. Obviously, we have never brought anybody into the department (on the tech side) that didn't know what they were doing. But, as of now, no governmental body requires a specific certification to work in IT in healthcare.
I think the OP is referring more to apps that providers may use. Things such as Airstrip Technologies cardio app or Eppocrates' app. Also some of the radiology vendors have their own apps. (But in fairness to them, the radiology vendors, most state that the app is not to be used for diagnostic purposes.) On a similar note, I'm sure there will come a day when we in IT are forced to be certified to work on any server\computer that contains patient data or EMR software.
"No scientist of any repute will tell you what to think, or tell you they can prove God does / doesn't exist. It's a shame that the religious people *don't* just ignore the people who go against their beliefs. The world would be a much quieter place." For the most part, I agree with what you wrote. People can believe what they want but they shouldn't shove it down anyone's throat unless they can back it up with proof (and a bloody good theory). However, of the two sentences above, I assume you mean the Richard Dawkins is not a reputable scientist? Also, I am religious but am also very much into science; strictly from a layman's viewpoint unfortunately. I find quantum mechanics (and entanglement especially) fascinating and have quite a few science books in my library. So, please be careful when making comments that apply "globally" (for want of a better word).
Er, um. Did you really expect anything else? I mean, c'mon Catholic School. (not to bash Catholic schools or anything but if you go to a religious school, I think you should expect that kind of a reply.)