That is why you're not having a problem. If you have employer-provided healthcare, you don't have to worry about preexisting conditions. And now, under Albatrosscare, you don't have to worry about them on the private insurance market either.
Somebody will manage to explain to me why this is bad someday, I suppose, but I sure haven't figured it out yet.
...or we could spread the (assumedly small) risk that any particular person would contract Nuclear Cancer or whatever, and everybody pays a small fraction of the price proportional to their share of the risk pool.
Good point. And, for my money, I prefer Apple's approach to Android's. We may get to the point where screens are high enough resolution I don't care about pixel accuracy, but we're not there quite yet.
Isn't it cool that there are several competing options in the market? I think that's a win, don't you?
I'm sure they built it that huge just for funsies. Surely it didn't occur to them to use smaller rotors, you know, like every single helicopter ever built on Earth. They probably just didn't think of it.
Man, people who do things that have never been done before are so dumb...
Re:New technology makes old technology obsolete.
on
The Price of Amazon
·
· Score: 1
"Can i bring my reader to their store and walk out with an ebook loaded?"
I don't really disagree with what you've said, but I have no idea why you would want to go to a specific place to get an ebook. That's a use case I don't understand. Why would that be good?
Slashdot Mirror
Iâ(TM)d love for you to make that argument for Windows Mobile. Thatâ(TM)d be pretty funny.
You say "caring", I say "having integrity". But hey, you've got the only correct value system, right?
Uh. You don't know how to spell "weird". I don't think we should take you very seriously.
Whoops! Sentences are hard! That invitiation must have been lost in the mail, that is.
Uh, I'm sorry, the invitation to the club meeting where we let "them" into "our ranks".
(hint: Collective accountability is a bullshit philosophy.)
"at any employer."
That is why you're not having a problem. If you have employer-provided healthcare, you don't have to worry about preexisting conditions. And now, under Albatrosscare, you don't have to worry about them on the private insurance market either.
Somebody will manage to explain to me why this is bad someday, I suppose, but I sure haven't figured it out yet.
Please tell me you don't think that's a good idea...
By inserting the step of "declaring bankruptcy", it magically changes from "fraud" to "a viable business model".
No, but it is the function of health insurance companies to spread cost (risk) across a large pool. That's sort of what the word "insurance" means...
...or we could spread the (assumedly small) risk that any particular person would contract Nuclear Cancer or whatever, and everybody pays a small fraction of the price proportional to their share of the risk pool.
Gosh, what would that be called?
Oh, you thought any of that was going to stop? You're adorable.
No, the only things that are going to stop are the ones Republicans don't like.
Go home. You're drunk.
No.
Not application backwards compatibility. Apple does not control that.
I'm talking about upgrading handsets to new OSes. Who does better than Apple?
"A lot of small publishing/design houses got burned in the transition from OS9 to OSX."
Kay. From my perspective as a user, it was pretty awesome.
Why is this so important to you? Seriously. Why do you care?
Good point. And, for my money, I prefer Apple's approach to Android's. We may get to the point where screens are high enough resolution I don't care about pixel accuracy, but we're not there quite yet.
Isn't it cool that there are several competing options in the market? I think that's a win, don't you?
Which is the phone manufacturer that has a better record of backwards OS compatibility than Apple?
I'm curious.
"it means China and other countries not covered improve their own standard of living (by emitting GHGs like there's no tomorrow) at our expense"
What do you propose to do about that?
I'm sure they built it that huge just for funsies. Surely it didn't occur to them to use smaller rotors, you know, like every single helicopter ever built on Earth. They probably just didn't think of it.
Man, people who do things that have never been done before are so dumb...
"Can i bring my reader to their store and walk out with an ebook loaded?"
I don't really disagree with what you've said, but I have no idea why you would want to go to a specific place to get an ebook. That's a use case I don't understand. Why would that be good?
True...absent monopoly interference.
That's a business decision by one business (who happens to be going out of business). So, yeah, not the same.
Don't forget about the landing fuel you have to tote with you along your whole trip. That is not trivial weight.
You just described the nature of the problem, and tried to say "See? No problem! As designed!" Good jorb?
You know that more than one person expressing different opinions is not, in fact, hypocrisy, right?
And the "intrepid imaginaut" can't imagine a world where people, I don't know, have a different experience?