hehe That reminds me of Tommy, the 1975 rock opera thingy by The Who. When his evil cousin was playing with him he ironed his clothes while he was wearing them. -
Where this goal interferes with society's obligation to protect its weakest members, government intervention is necessary. An insurance that only accepts people who don't really need an insurance is little more than a PR trick. Yes, insurance is supposed to be a sort of welfare, distributing money where it is needed.
So I guess banks should give loans to people that have almost no chance of paying it back, since that is compatible with societies goal "of protecting its weakest members".
Yeah, I would like to see my APY go down because the bank fancies itself as some sort of charity.
Because it undermines the whole purpose of insurance in the first place. Which - btw - has been perverted from its original concept.
Insurance has always only had one goal, to make money. They are just gamblers, betting against you about some future event in your life. The odds are always in favor of the house, and if you don't like that, then don't bet.
Don't try to get stupid laws passed that would cause insurance companies to assume more risk than they want to, it costs everyone else through higher rates, and turns insurance into a sort of welfare.
-
But when the difficulty is language understanding, you can get around it by learning the language.
Well, considering that about 50% of the population has an IQ under 100, should we design all sites dumbed down so that these borderline retards can read it?
Depending on your view of intelligence, most people say that it is a fixed factor, after childhood, therefore, these people must be in the same situation as disabled people. Your logic kind of breaks down.
-
However, each one of these pages alone represents a true barrier to the handicapped. For example, if a visually impaired user heard the fire alarm, and navigated to the Jlab web site in order to find their way out
When it involves the government, why must people always used the most screwed up logic?
I for one, always run to the nearest web browser when I hear a fire alarm. RIIIIGGGHHHTT. Come on... all public buildings already have fire safety measures for disabled people, modern ones include rescue areas for each floor for people in wheelchairs, and braille/big red signs, guiding you to them. -
Complete and total OXDUNG. In Canada, the cornerstone of the public health-care system is the ability of the public to
choose your doctor.
But can you choose how much you want to pay for health care? No, I didn't think so. You have no choice, you pay the same thing no matter what, there is no free market, no competition, no choice. -
Greatest nation on Earth? Maybe when you stop letting people die because they're too poor to afford treatment.
Thats part of what makes it great. I'm not rich, and I could very well die because I can't afford a treatment I need, and I don't have health insurance. But I take responsibility for my self and my life. I don't feel like the government owes me anything, and I don't feel like I should pay for anything that I don't want to. Thats what freedom means, and if it costs me my life, or the life of someone I love, then I think its all worth it.
-
But if a large part of the populace had no access to affordable medical care, simply because they may develop a disease in the future - the Medical community would lose a LOT of business.
I agree completely. Involving the government denies people the right to seek affordable health care of their choice, because government subsidies make private health care prices sky high. Same thing happened with Universities.
-
Uh, genetic testing is a new development in the insurance industry. What you really mean is "the insurance companies will continue paying out more to these high-risk individuals, and your insurance rates will remain the same."
Insurance company!=charity organization
Their goal is to make money by winning bets placed about someone's future. You don't like their game, you shouldn't have to play. With insurance companies letting doctors charge huge amounts, its impossible to NOT play their game. The insurance companies collectively have forced you to use one of their products.
Sure its monopolistic, but people are too stupid to see the forest for the trees on insurance issues. They want to involve the government, making things even worse. -
The parent post seemed slightly offtopic after I re-read it, so here it my point. To say that insurance companies can't use any means that they want to, to assess risk, involves government interference, and thus, creates inefficiencies, these may be for the favor of the insured, but in the end everyone loses as a society. -
You got it, insurance is not a right. Insurance happens when a company wants to place a bet with you regarding some future event. The odds are of course always in their favor, or they would not be able to stay in business. Insurance is a suckers game from the start.
When the government gets involved in insurance, it destroys the competition, and hence, prices go up, the house can charge people (through taxes) as much money as it needs, and can assume any risk it wants, even if it knows its going to lose out. Inefficiency is created.
If you selected a hospital and doctor like you selected a car, rather than not being able to comparison shop because of insurance issues, the free market goes out the window. The insured also has the moral hazard in that they don't care how many times they pointlessly go to the doctor, they are not paying for it. This is especially a problem with government health insurance, where there is no co-payment.
The result? People who don't want to play the insurance gambling game are forced to, because the industry is not market driven anymore, its mostly subsidized, and prices are sky high. -
If you were one of the boats waiting to cross under the bridge for 4 hours, losing money all the time, I bet you and your lawyers wouldn't be laughing so much. -
I remember some work that some researchers were doing years ago in this area. It was in Dicover magazine, I have no idea which issue, but the idea was to fill the barrel with an explosive gas mixture that would burn/explode all along the length of the barrel right behind the projectile. I seem to remember they were lobbing several pounds of metal through thick steel plates with it, but it was far from portable.
It kind of rememded me of the Nazi gun that had multiple chambers along the length of the barrel. That gun could shell the UK from german held territory. The allies bombed it all the hell before they could do too much damage with it. It was also huge and fixed in position, making it very easy to bomb once we knew it existed. -
Also, I disagree with the common-GUI is easier theory, and I think the Web provides decent proof for that. I rarely have to help a newbie navigate a web page, even though web pages all use completely different widget sets and look-and-feels.
But, no matter how different the HCI of the web page, you're still going to be able to highlight something and hit Ctrl-C to copy it in Windows; You're still going to have a file menu with filey-stuff on it, and an edit menu with edity-stuff on it.
The web page HCI is only layered on top of the familiar HCI of whatever desktop you are running, and I think the author has a valid point. -
Only because that 31337 sub-culture will not "train" the script kiddies (be they ham radio jammers, or real script kiddies) from knowing right from wrong.
Well, you are right about ham, in some ways. I would argue that harder tests, (not really CW) require higher intelligence, and thus, filter out the idiots that would do stupid disrespectful stuff like jamming. Intelligence aside, at least it filters out the people who don't care enough about the hobby to put the work into it, to learn the basics.
I know the older elitists hams look down on 5wpm extras, but put yourself in their place, they had to work hard for their license, and now it's a lot easier to get, regardless of whether their work was really necessary or not.
I am not arguing for elitism, I am just making an observation. Maybe ham isn't a perfect analogy of the security issue at hand, but there are parallels, it became easier to become a part of an elite subculture (the internet, and unix in general, or ham radio), and the respect for fellow members went down. -
what happened to the Internet where users used to care, not mindlessly destroy each other's networks...
Elite subculture turns more mainstream. Same thing happened to Ham Radio. On Ham Bands we have constant jammers, harassment, our version of script kiddies.
When it becomes easier to become a member of an elite subculture, it results in a breakdown of the basic respect of other members of the subculture.
-
I think this isn't an OS thing as much as it is hardware design. No intel platform that I know of can do this, and I venture to say, most Linux boxes are Intel.
Now that SGI is offering Linux support, that kind of changes everything. I find it hard to believe that SGI hasn't written their own linux utils to deal with this, since it would be a waste to load Linux on an Origin 2000 or similar computer, if you don't get the benefits of being able to control the hardware the way it is designed to be controlled. -
Slashdot Mirror
hehe That reminds me of Tommy, the 1975 rock opera thingy by The Who. When his evil cousin was playing with him he ironed his clothes while he was wearing them.
-
Solid state, eh? I can FINALLY get rid of that vacuum tube ram... man my power bill will go so far down.
-
So I guess banks should give loans to people that have almost no chance of paying it back, since that is compatible with societies goal "of protecting its weakest members".
Yeah, I would like to see my APY go down because the bank fancies itself as some sort of charity.
It's the same thing.
-
Insurance has always only had one goal, to make money. They are just gamblers, betting against you about some future event in your life. The odds are always in favor of the house, and if you don't like that, then don't bet.
Don't try to get stupid laws passed that would cause insurance companies to assume more risk than they want to, it costs everyone else through higher rates, and turns insurance into a sort of welfare.
-
Well, considering that about 50% of the population has an IQ under 100, should we design all sites dumbed down so that these borderline retards can read it?
Depending on your view of intelligence, most people say that it is a fixed factor, after childhood, therefore, these people must be in the same situation as disabled people. Your logic kind of breaks down.
-
Note to self: Reading the last paragraph in messages BEFORE you reply to them helps avoid such foot in mouth syndrome. hehehe
-
When it involves the government, why must people always used the most screwed up logic?
I for one, always run to the nearest web browser when I hear a fire alarm. RIIIIGGGHHHTT. Come on... all public buildings already have fire safety measures for disabled people, modern ones include rescue areas for each floor for people in wheelchairs, and braille/big red signs, guiding you to them.
-
Had you read the story, you would know the whole site is a joke. No kittens were harmed, only photoshop images.
-
But can you choose how much you want to pay for health care? No, I didn't think so. You have no choice, you pay the same thing no matter what, there is no free market, no competition, no choice.
-
Thats part of what makes it great. I'm not rich, and I could very well die because I can't afford a treatment I need, and I don't have health insurance. But I take responsibility for my self and my life. I don't feel like the government owes me anything, and I don't feel like I should pay for anything that I don't want to. Thats what freedom means, and if it costs me my life, or the life of someone I love, then I think its all worth it.
-
I agree completely. Involving the government denies people the right to seek affordable health care of their choice, because government subsidies make private health care prices sky high. Same thing happened with Universities.
-
Their goal is to make money by winning bets placed about someone's future. You don't like their game, you shouldn't have to play. With insurance companies letting doctors charge huge amounts, its impossible to NOT play their game. The insurance companies collectively have forced you to use one of their products.
Sure its monopolistic, but people are too stupid to see the forest for the trees on insurance issues. They want to involve the government, making things even worse.
-
The parent post seemed slightly offtopic after I re-read it, so here it my point. To say that insurance companies can't use any means that they want to, to assess risk, involves government interference, and thus, creates inefficiencies, these may be for the favor of the insured, but in the end everyone loses as a society.
-
When the government gets involved in insurance, it destroys the competition, and hence, prices go up, the house can charge people (through taxes) as much money as it needs, and can assume any risk it wants, even if it knows its going to lose out. Inefficiency is created.
If you selected a hospital and doctor like you selected a car, rather than not being able to comparison shop because of insurance issues, the free market goes out the window. The insured also has the moral hazard in that they don't care how many times they pointlessly go to the doctor, they are not paying for it. This is especially a problem with government health insurance, where there is no co-payment.
The result? People who don't want to play the insurance gambling game are forced to, because the industry is not market driven anymore, its mostly subsidized, and prices are sky high.
-
Where exactly did I mention either AIX or Nazis?
-
If you were one of the boats waiting to cross under the bridge for 4 hours, losing money all the time, I bet you and your lawyers wouldn't be laughing so much.
-
But shooting it straight up into the air makes the muzzle velocity calculations so much easier. :)
-
It kind of rememded me of the Nazi gun that had multiple chambers along the length of the barrel. That gun could shell the UK from german held territory. The allies bombed it all the hell before they could do too much damage with it. It was also huge and fixed in position, making it very easy to bomb once we knew it existed.
-
I know how slashdotters love big brother and all, but really.
-
Really, no shit sherlock. Every windows browser I have seen has them though, and that is what we were talking about.
-
But, no matter how different the HCI of the web page, you're still going to be able to highlight something and hit Ctrl-C to copy it in Windows; You're still going to have a file menu with filey-stuff on it, and an edit menu with edity-stuff on it.
The web page HCI is only layered on top of the familiar HCI of whatever desktop you are running, and I think the author has a valid point.
-
Well, you are right about ham, in some ways. I would argue that harder tests, (not really CW) require higher intelligence, and thus, filter out the idiots that would do stupid disrespectful stuff like jamming. Intelligence aside, at least it filters out the people who don't care enough about the hobby to put the work into it, to learn the basics.
I know the older elitists hams look down on 5wpm extras, but put yourself in their place, they had to work hard for their license, and now it's a lot easier to get, regardless of whether their work was really necessary or not.
I am not arguing for elitism, I am just making an observation. Maybe ham isn't a perfect analogy of the security issue at hand, but there are parallels, it became easier to become a part of an elite subculture (the internet, and unix in general, or ham radio), and the respect for fellow members went down.
-
Elite subculture turns more mainstream. Same thing happened to Ham Radio. On Ham Bands we have constant jammers, harassment, our version of script kiddies.
When it becomes easier to become a member of an elite subculture, it results in a breakdown of the basic respect of other members of the subculture.
-
If I agree to give you something out of the blue, with no consideration (money, stuff, services) from you, then there is no binding contract.
-
Now that SGI is offering Linux support, that kind of changes everything. I find it hard to believe that SGI hasn't written their own linux utils to deal with this, since it would be a waste to load Linux on an Origin 2000 or similar computer, if you don't get the benefits of being able to control the hardware the way it is designed to be controlled.
-