Up to you, I have no moral qualms with contraception and have paid for and used it myself, so whatever "volumes" you feel spoken are in your head, not mine. The fact remains that the choice to have sex and not children isn't a medical one, it's a voluntary lifestyle choice and requiring medical insurance to fund such a lifestyle choice is wrong. I've decided to have sex and not children myself from time to time. I don't expect a group policy to be forced by the government to cover that personal choice.
Also, I'm unaware of anyone explicitly refusing to cover the prescription of "the pill" for non-contraceptive use, but any citation that clearly and explicitly says so would be interesting.
The fact that the only on-label use for this product is recreational is not germane to the discussion. If people want it (or any thing else) to be included as a covered treatment for medical conditions do the work to get those medical uses on label.
Medications have effects, some desired and some undesired. Which is which depends on what is being treated. It's perfectly OK and logical to refuse to cover birth control and still prescribe treatment for some medical condition that may also as a so called "side effect" prevent fertility. This is not the same as providing birth control.
In those cases they are not birth control. I can't expect my health insurance to foot the bill for poisoning my rat infestation just because Warfarin is used to treat high blood pressure.
Birth control is not medical treatment, it's part of a lifestyle choice. I enjoy racing motorcycles, shall my medical insurance cover fuel and tires? I can get really hurt if my tires are not fresh enough....
Another good use for incandescent lamps - the typical storage closet where the light needs to instant on, and is only used for 3 minutes 3-4 times a month.
Some people use incandescents for the combination of heat and light intentionally. Winter light in the pump house, for instance, or many other uses that a city slicker apartment dweller (or lawmaker) might not think of.
So cute. NT 6.3 is measurably faster (fact) at several things such as hibernation/resume, and boot times, as well as feeling snappier to me (opinion) for most other things. I don't understand where you get so much rage over my simply pointing this out, to the point of making false and nasty accusation WRT my motives, but it is immensely amusing. Don't ever change.
It's a consistent result across many recent tests, since the re-engineering effort a few years back. NAV/NIS seems very low impact on systems, and is routinely first place for performance and among the top for detection.
It used to be pretty decent, at one point MS was trying to recruit me to work on that since I had a lot of AV development experience; I eventually declined and fed them a few resumes who they did hire, but to get to the point, they have done this in the past at least once before. Maintaining AV is an ongoing and expensive endeavor, and MS just doesn't seem to learn that lesson. It's not something they can develop and then tweak for year after year, they need to have developers and AV researchers on it 24/7, every week of the year. That's not cheap and apparently not their model.
Lotta impotent-rumplstiltskin-esqe rage there, over me saying that Windows 8.1 works for me and is a little snappier at a few things. I'm laughing my ass off and picturing tiny little feet stomping, tiny hands waving and tiny flecks of foam from a tiny thin-lipped mouth. Thanks for that.
Well Microsoft actually seems to be doing OK, and *I* don't personally care how Windows does in the long term, all *I* care about is that NT 6.3 (AKA Windows 8.1) works better for me than NT 6.2, 6.1, or any previous versions have. I don't see massive shifts in the PC landscape over any of those releases. What I *DO* see is alternative form factors (phones tablets, etc) making plays for consumer dollars. Great! I develop on Android as well, so that works for me. One thing I won't be doing? Crying over a missing Start Menu. Have fun with that.
Interestingly for the first time in my career this year I *do* get to prepare ISV software for OEMs from tiny little manufacturers like Samsung, HP, Toshiba, Acer, and so on, and while these niche market brands might not be familiar, I can say that they never complain about Windows 8, or 8.1, or the upcoming 8.1 Update, but they DO make a fuss about being sure we are ready for the next version so we can ship on their hardware. Also, individual people did the same thing with Windows 7, complained, asked for XP, some walked. As I said, history. Repeating. In a couple years people will be crying over 9 and saying they love 8.x soooo veryyyy much and they will walk if they can't get 8.x, so predictable.
That's just silly. I dislike RT and I have no use for Windows Phone in it's current form, but for PC use the NT family has been my go-to for decades, and the minor version bumps from 6.x to 6.x+y are not going to change that. Some people cried when Program Manager went away in 4.0, more cried about the 5.0 changes in 2k, even more about XP, because NT was pushed into the mainstream at that point, and every revision since it's the same song and dance. History repeats.
OK have fun. This happens EVERY time a new version of Windows comes along. People complained about 2K a bit, they howled about XP (too cartoonish!), sniveled about Vista and whined about 7. Now it's crying about Win 8.x - nothing new.
Slashdot Mirror
I hate it when the military can't have sporty cars. Or fancy dishes, not sure which.
Up to you, I have no moral qualms with contraception and have paid for and used it myself, so whatever "volumes" you feel spoken are in your head, not mine. The fact remains that the choice to have sex and not children isn't a medical one, it's a voluntary lifestyle choice and requiring medical insurance to fund such a lifestyle choice is wrong. I've decided to have sex and not children myself from time to time. I don't expect a group policy to be forced by the government to cover that personal choice.
Also, I'm unaware of anyone explicitly refusing to cover the prescription of "the pill" for non-contraceptive use, but any citation that clearly and explicitly says so would be interesting.
The fact that the only on-label use for this product is recreational is not germane to the discussion. If people want it (or any thing else) to be included as a covered treatment for medical conditions do the work to get those medical uses on label.
Medications have effects, some desired and some undesired. Which is which depends on what is being treated. It's perfectly OK and logical to refuse to cover birth control and still prescribe treatment for some medical condition that may also as a so called "side effect" prevent fertility. This is not the same as providing birth control.
In those cases they are not birth control. I can't expect my health insurance to foot the bill for poisoning my rat infestation just because Warfarin is used to treat high blood pressure.
Birth control is not medical treatment, it's part of a lifestyle choice. I enjoy racing motorcycles, shall my medical insurance cover fuel and tires? I can get really hurt if my tires are not fresh enough ....
I just want my 2003 Scarlet Johansen domestic duty robot.
Depends on the definition of piracy I reckon; plenty of people acquire and view pirated content without an internet connection.
One place I go for scuba diving charges at the terminal (cash pls) for foreign visitors to exit.
Another good use for incandescent lamps - the typical storage closet where the light needs to instant on, and is only used for 3 minutes 3-4 times a month.
Some people use incandescents for the combination of heat and light intentionally. Winter light in the pump house, for instance, or many other uses that a city slicker apartment dweller (or lawmaker) might not think of.
So cute. NT 6.3 is measurably faster (fact) at several things such as hibernation/resume, and boot times, as well as feeling snappier to me (opinion) for most other things. I don't understand where you get so much rage over my simply pointing this out, to the point of making false and nasty accusation WRT my motives, but it is immensely amusing. Don't ever change.
True, and most of the misses tend to be malware that's not in circulation much at the moment.
It's a consistent result across many recent tests, since the re-engineering effort a few years back. NAV/NIS seems very low impact on systems, and is routinely first place for performance and among the top for detection.
It used to be pretty decent, at one point MS was trying to recruit me to work on that since I had a lot of AV development experience; I eventually declined and fed them a few resumes who they did hire, but to get to the point, they have done this in the past at least once before. Maintaining AV is an ongoing and expensive endeavor, and MS just doesn't seem to learn that lesson. It's not something they can develop and then tweak for year after year, they need to have developers and AV researchers on it 24/7, every week of the year. That's not cheap and apparently not their model.
Lotta impotent-rumplstiltskin-esqe rage there, over me saying that Windows 8.1 works for me and is a little snappier at a few things. I'm laughing my ass off and picturing tiny little feet stomping, tiny hands waving and tiny flecks of foam from a tiny thin-lipped mouth. Thanks for that.
Well Microsoft actually seems to be doing OK, and *I* don't personally care how Windows does in the long term, all *I* care about is that NT 6.3 (AKA Windows 8.1) works better for me than NT 6.2, 6.1, or any previous versions have. I don't see massive shifts in the PC landscape over any of those releases. What I *DO* see is alternative form factors (phones tablets, etc) making plays for consumer dollars. Great! I develop on Android as well, so that works for me. One thing I won't be doing? Crying over a missing Start Menu. Have fun with that.
Interestingly for the first time in my career this year I *do* get to prepare ISV software for OEMs from tiny little manufacturers like Samsung, HP, Toshiba, Acer, and so on, and while these niche market brands might not be familiar, I can say that they never complain about Windows 8, or 8.1, or the upcoming 8.1 Update, but they DO make a fuss about being sure we are ready for the next version so we can ship on their hardware. Also, individual people did the same thing with Windows 7, complained, asked for XP, some walked. As I said, history. Repeating. In a couple years people will be crying over 9 and saying they love 8.x soooo veryyyy much and they will walk if they can't get 8.x, so predictable.
That's just silly. I dislike RT and I have no use for Windows Phone in it's current form, but for PC use the NT family has been my go-to for decades, and the minor version bumps from 6.x to 6.x+y are not going to change that. Some people cried when Program Manager went away in 4.0, more cried about the 5.0 changes in 2k, even more about XP, because NT was pushed into the mainstream at that point, and every revision since it's the same song and dance. History repeats.
1949 wasn't so long ago.
OK have fun. This happens EVERY time a new version of Windows comes along. People complained about 2K a bit, they howled about XP (too cartoonish!), sniveled about Vista and whined about 7. Now it's crying about Win 8.x - nothing new.
This comment is me not watching a video while waiting for a damn transcript.
Actually, 8.1. I call 7 vs 8 a draw. You'll be crying about 9 when it comes out too.
Can it make the sound of one robot hand clapping?