In addition, under Federal Law, the proceeds of the forfeiture go directly to the agency that seized them, the goods are charged with a crime, and the owner must go to trial against the Federal FSKING Governent to prove the goods innocent in order to get them back.
For extra credit, can anyone spot the perverse incentive here?
Not to mention that a) defibrillation alone without medication and oxygen has a very low success rate and b) not all cardiac dysrhythmias respond to defibrillation. And not all pulseless patients are having a heart attack. Try defibrillating a brain aneurysm or a pulmonary embolism and see what you get. Just like the defibrillators in airports - how many have been used successfully to date? This is good news only for companies that sell defibrillators.
I am an Emergency Room RN, with 8+ years of experience, including Advanced Cardiac Life Support.
Most of the research of which I'm aware shows that early defibrillation is second only to good CPR in the vast majority of cases. Studies from Japan have showed that the most common medication, epinephrine, actually does nothing more than allow a body to get to the hospital with a non-functioning brain, but it has been used for so long by out of hospital providers that it is a very difficult thing to remove from the protocols ("but, we have to do something!") Oxygen is also being stressed less, as research shows that it can cause vasoconstriction of the coronary arteries.
Out of hospital survival rates for cardiac arrest are lower than most people think (as are in-hospital rates, though they are higher. See http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/... for U.S. statistics). The reason for higher survival rates in the hospital setting are varied, but the biggest reason is that you have trained people nearby, and quick access to the one thing that makes a real difference - early defibrillation of an appropriate arrhythmia.
Early AED delivery in the field could be of great assistance in the right circumstances.
BTW, an AEDs do not recommend defibrillation unless it senses a "Shockable Rhythm," i.e. Ventricular Tachycardia or Fibrillation. OP is correct that there are other rhythms which do not respond to defibrillation, but a) AEDs are good at recognizing them, and b) rates of survival to neurologically-intact discharge are much lower, on the order of a full order of magnitude. A patient with Pulmonary Embolus or Aneurysm (or Seizure for that matter) would not have either of these rhythms.
This is a partial answer, and misleading, at best. A significant portion of the value of a given property is due to the services provided by the governemt - not just streets, but education, law enforcement, fire protection, etc... The same size house in Mississippi is worth orders of magnitude less that the same building in San Francisco. The owner derives benefit proportional to that value, and therefore has the social burden of paying for that benefit.
This is a gross isrepresentation -- Ellsberg states in the article that his trial was not fair:
As I know from my own case, even Snowden's own testimony on the stand would be gagged by government objections and the (arguably unconstitutional) nature of his charges. That was my own experience in court, as the first American to be prosecuted under the Espionage Act – or any other statute – for giving information to the American people.
I had looked forward to offering a fuller account in my trial than I had given previously to any journalist – any Glenn Greenwald or Brian Williams of my time – as to the considerations that led me to copy and distribute thousands of pages of top-secret documents. I had saved many details until I could present them on the stand, under oath, just as a young John Kerry had delivered his strongest lines in sworn testimony.
But when I finally heard my lawyer ask the prearranged question in direct examination – Why did you copy the Pentagon Papers? – I was silenced before I could begin to answer. The government prosecutor objected – irrelevant – and the judge sustained. My lawyer, exasperated, said he "had never heard of a case where a defendant was not permitted to tell the jury why he did what he did." The judge responded: well, you're hearing one now.
And so it has been with every subsequent whistleblower under indictment, and so it would be if Edward Snowden was on trial in an American courtroom now.
In addition, Ellsberg never got a "fair trial"; the charges against him were dismissed for gross misconduct on the part of the government -- see http://www.washingtonpost.com/... for a summary.
The methodology used to come up with that 35% figure counts only the FEDERAL INCOME TAX, leaving out sales taxes, licenses, payroll taxes, local income taxes, state income taxes, property taxes, fees, tolls, energy taxes, etc... According to Citizens for Tax Justice, ( http://www.ctj.org/pdf/taxday2009.pdf), when you take all of these taxes and fees into account, that 1% pays 23% of ALL taxes on 22.2% of ALL income -- not exactly representative of a progressive tax system.
In addition, that same 1% controls 40% of the wealth in this country, which they supplement by raking in that 22.2% of income, along with returns on the investment of that wealth, which are taxed at a far lower rate. And don't get me started on carried interest!
Now, we can argue about whether or not the tax system is fair, or working to advance the goals which we agree on. But to continue to trot out the trope that the poor wealthy are overburdened compared to the moochers at the bottom serves only to muddy the waters of any attempt at a rational discussion.
The actual text of the article cited by the parent is below:
(c) No person shall be punished, fined, discriminated against, or be denied any right or privilege for lawfully engaging in any conduct permitted by this Act or authorized pursuant to Section 11301 of this Act. Provided however, that the existing right of an employer to address consumption that actually impairs job performance by an employee shall not be affected.
Seems to me that what the Proposition is saying is that an employer can't fire you solely on the basis of your usage of cannabis, but there's nothing there that says you can't be fired for cause; i.e. being late, not fulfilling your job duties. Doesn't strike me as any different than the status quo -- employers have plenty of reasons to unload a problem worker without discriminating.
Actually, you don't understand correctly. The documents were from Iraq's pre-Gulf War nuclear weapons program.
detailed accounts of Iraq's secret nuclear research before the 1991 Persian Gulf war.
Remember? The program that was shut down by the war, subsequent inspections and sanctions?
These documents are far more useful to a terrorist doing research than they would have been to one of Saddam's scientists in a country with no access to the material or equipment needed to build a bomb.
The developers of Rails are quite clear that they are trying to create a framework for developing a web applications, leaving the actual implementation of all the application logic, including security (or lack thereof!) up to the application developer.
That being said, I know of at least three secirity implementations being actively worked on and used (in order from least to greatest complexity):
1) There is a generator on the rails wiki:
A controller/model/view generator for easily adding authentication, users, and logins to your rails app.
There were in this country two very large monopolies. The larger of the two had the following record: the Vietnam War, Watergate, double- digit inflation, fuel and energy shortages, bankrupt airlines, and the 8-cent postcard. The second was responsible for such things as the transistor, the solar cell, lasers, synthetic crystals, high fidelity stereo recording, sound motion pictures, radio astronomy, negative feedback, magnetic tape, magnetic "bubbles", electronic switching systems, microwave radio and TV relay systems, information theory, the first electrical digital computer, and the first communications satellite. Guess which one got to tell the other how to run the telephone business?
This seems like a couple of pretty selective lists. As a thought experiment, I propose this alternative:
There were in this country two very large monopolies. The larger of the two had the following record: Social Security, Women's Sufferage, The Declaration of Independence, and the Liberation of Auschwitz. The second was responsible for such things as the Bhopal Disaster, Love Canal, Enron, War Profiteering, and Carly Fiorina. Guess which one got to tell the other how to conduct its business, distorting the process through huge political contributions?
Synopsis: The government distorts how our income tax dollars are spent because it includes Trust Funds (e.g., Social Security), and the expenses of past military spending are not distinguished from nonmilitary spending.
This is SOOOOO true, and how many times have we all read the same thing, and on how many issues? As a measure of the high regard in which I hold this community, I
Lobbyists not only have money, but the ablility to leverage information in order to manage their contacts with Congress, and maximize their effectiveness. Can we put this information in tha hands of Joe Public? (And make it easier for us to be effective in communicating)
How about a client which gets updated with a small XML database of legislation, information about legislators (contact information, voting records etc...), and the ability to solicit lobbying from interested parties (I see this happening from a central server, so you as the user would have the ability to filter commentary from any unwanted source.) The client would allow you to compose letters and mail them off, track resopnses (in the unlikely event that there are any) and non-responses. You could also cross-post to forums like Slashdot.
Lobbyists and interested parties of all stripes could foot the costs of maintenance by buying the opportunity to interact and influence anyone who was running the client, and could even foot the bill for a bank of printers and postage machines, so you wouldn't even need to take a trip to the Post Office to mail a letter.
/* Did the US or Commonwealth forces slaughter 70,000 people when they took Rome or Vienna like the Japanese did at Nanking? */
No, but if you know your history, (read "Slaughterhouse Five", by Kurt Vonnegut) the allied forces firebombed the city of Dresden, ostensibly to destroy the production capacity of the city. 135,000 civilians died in that attack, more than the combined total in Hiroshima and Nagasaki (although the total of civilian deaths in those two cities is equally abhorrent, and about as militarily significant.)
Are you seriously claiming that these bombings in particular, which came just weeks before the end of the war, when our enemies were practically on their knees, were neccesary to ensure our victory? Most of the historical work that I've read speculates, with good evidence, that these acts were undertaken to 'send a message' to the Soviet Union before the end of the war. Add this to the total civilian deaths in Viet Nam, Cambodia, Panama, Nicaragua, Somalia, Sudan, Iraq (in my lifetime) and it's not a pretty picture.
That's not to say that bombing of industrial and military sites is never necessary, or that our enemies always play fair, but how can we claim righteousness when our aims in most of these cases were so transparently political, and so at odds with our rhetoric and mythology ?
Am I the only one to see the irony that while the passengers on this flight were able to analyze their own danger and respond by refusing to allow their own live, that the entire national defense infrastructure had 45 minutes to determine that a hijacked plane was heading for Washington, DC, and didn't even scramble a fighter jet to see what the hell was going on? (see the timeline here) The plane's tracking beacon was turned off 45 minutes BEFORE it hit the Pentagon, and at almost exactly the same time as the second plane hit the World Trade Center towers, removing all doubt and confusion about the intentions of the hijackers.
fleadope
Slashdot Mirror
In addition, under Federal Law, the proceeds of the forfeiture go directly to the agency that seized them, the goods are charged with a crime, and the owner must go to trial against the Federal FSKING Governent to prove the goods innocent in order to get them back.
For extra credit, can anyone spot the perverse incentive here?
Not to mention that a) defibrillation alone without medication and oxygen has a very low success rate and b) not all cardiac dysrhythmias respond to defibrillation. And not all pulseless patients are having a heart attack. Try defibrillating a brain aneurysm or a pulmonary embolism and see what you get. Just like the defibrillators in airports - how many have been used successfully to date? This is good news only for companies that sell defibrillators.
I am an Emergency Room RN, with 8+ years of experience, including Advanced Cardiac Life Support.
Most of the research of which I'm aware shows that early defibrillation is second only to good CPR in the vast majority of cases. Studies from Japan have showed that the most common medication, epinephrine, actually does nothing more than allow a body to get to the hospital with a non-functioning brain, but it has been used for so long by out of hospital providers that it is a very difficult thing to remove from the protocols ("but, we have to do something!") Oxygen is also being stressed less, as research shows that it can cause vasoconstriction of the coronary arteries.
Out of hospital survival rates for cardiac arrest are lower than most people think (as are in-hospital rates, though they are higher. See http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/... for U.S. statistics). The reason for higher survival rates in the hospital setting are varied, but the biggest reason is that you have trained people nearby, and quick access to the one thing that makes a real difference - early defibrillation of an appropriate arrhythmia.
Early AED delivery in the field could be of great assistance in the right circumstances.
BTW, an AEDs do not recommend defibrillation unless it senses a "Shockable Rhythm," i.e. Ventricular Tachycardia or Fibrillation. OP is correct that there are other rhythms which do not respond to defibrillation, but a) AEDs are good at recognizing them, and b) rates of survival to neurologically-intact discharge are much lower, on the order of a full order of magnitude. A patient with Pulmonary Embolus or Aneurysm (or Seizure for that matter) would not have either of these rhythms.
This is a partial answer, and misleading, at best. A significant portion of the value of a given property is due to the services provided by the governemt - not just streets, but education, law enforcement, fire protection, etc... The same size house in Mississippi is worth orders of magnitude less that the same building in San Francisco. The owner derives benefit proportional to that value, and therefore has the social burden of paying for that benefit.
In addition, Ellsberg never got a "fair trial"; the charges against him were dismissed for gross misconduct on the part of the government -- see http://www.washingtonpost.com/... for a summary.
Way to keep hawking that meme, Baloroth!
The methodology used to come up with that 35% figure counts only the FEDERAL INCOME TAX, leaving out sales taxes, licenses, payroll taxes, local income taxes, state income taxes, property taxes, fees, tolls, energy taxes, etc... According to Citizens for Tax Justice, ( http://www.ctj.org/pdf/taxday2009.pdf), when you take all of these taxes and fees into account, that 1% pays 23% of ALL taxes on 22.2% of ALL income -- not exactly representative of a progressive tax system.
In addition, that same 1% controls 40% of the wealth in this country, which they supplement by raking in that 22.2% of income, along with returns on the investment of that wealth, which are taxed at a far lower rate. And don't get me started on carried interest!
Now, we can argue about whether or not the tax system is fair, or working to advance the goals which we agree on. But to continue to trot out the trope that the poor wealthy are overburdened compared to the moochers at the bottom serves only to muddy the waters of any attempt at a rational discussion.
Full text here: http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Text_of_Proposition_19,_the_%22Regulate,_Control_and_Tax_Cannabis_Act_of_2010%22_(California)/
Seems to me that what the Proposition is saying is that an employer can't fire you solely on the basis of your usage of cannabis, but there's nothing there that says you can't be fired for cause; i.e. being late, not fulfilling your job duties. Doesn't strike me as any different than the status quo -- employers have plenty of reasons to unload a problem worker without discriminating.
Remember? The program that was shut down by the war, subsequent inspections and sanctions?
These documents are far more useful to a terrorist doing research than they would have been to one of Saddam's scientists in a country with no access to the material or equipment needed to build a bomb.
That being said, I know of at least three secirity implementations being actively worked on and used (in order from least to greatest complexity):
1) There is a generator on the rails wiki:
http://wiki.rubyonrails.com/rails/pages/LoginGene
2) Bruce Perens has just released ModelSecurity:
http://perens.com/FreeSoftware/ModelSecurity/
3) ActiveRBAC
https://rbaconrails.turingstudio.com/trac/wiki
There has also been considerable work done on a component model that will make these even easier to use and extend.
Check out this link for a different perspective.
Synopsis: The government distorts how our income tax dollars are spent because it includes Trust Funds (e.g., Social Security), and the expenses of past military spending are not distinguished from nonmilitary spending.
This is SOOOOO true, and how many times have we all read the same thing, and on how many issues? As a measure of the high regard in which I hold this community, I
Lobbyists not only have money, but the ablility to leverage information in order to manage their contacts with Congress, and maximize their effectiveness. Can we put this information in tha hands of Joe Public? (And make it easier for us to be effective in communicating)
How about a client which gets updated with a small XML database of legislation, information about legislators (contact information, voting records etc...), and the ability to solicit lobbying from interested parties (I see this happening from a central server, so you as the user would have the ability to filter commentary from any unwanted source.) The client would allow you to compose letters and mail them off, track resopnses (in the unlikely event that there are any) and non-responses. You could also cross-post to forums like Slashdot.
Lobbyists and interested parties of all stripes could foot the costs of maintenance by buying the opportunity to interact and influence anyone who was running the client, and could even foot the bill for a bank of printers and postage machines, so you wouldn't even need to take a trip to the Post Office to mail a letter.
/* Did the US or Commonwealth forces slaughter 70,000 people when they took Rome or Vienna like the Japanese did at Nanking? */
No, but if you know your history, (read "Slaughterhouse Five", by Kurt Vonnegut) the allied forces firebombed the city of Dresden, ostensibly to destroy the production capacity of the city. 135,000 civilians died in that attack, more than the combined total in Hiroshima and Nagasaki (although the total of civilian deaths in those two cities is equally abhorrent, and about as militarily significant.)
Are you seriously claiming that these bombings in particular, which came just weeks before the end of the war, when our enemies were practically on their knees, were neccesary to ensure our victory? Most of the historical work that I've read speculates, with good evidence, that these acts were undertaken to 'send a message' to the Soviet Union before the end of the war. Add this to the total civilian deaths in Viet Nam, Cambodia, Panama, Nicaragua, Somalia, Sudan, Iraq (in my lifetime) and it's not a pretty picture.
That's not to say that bombing of industrial and military sites is never necessary, or that our enemies always play fair, but how can we claim righteousness when our aims in most of these cases were so transparently political, and so at odds with our rhetoric and mythology ?
Am I the only one to see the irony that while the passengers on this flight were able to analyze their own danger and respond by refusing to allow their own live, that the entire national defense infrastructure had 45 minutes to determine that a hijacked plane was heading for Washington, DC, and didn't even scramble a fighter jet to see what the hell was going on? (see the timeline here) The plane's tracking beacon was turned off 45 minutes BEFORE it hit the Pentagon, and at almost exactly the same time as the second plane hit the World Trade Center towers, removing all doubt and confusion about the intentions of the hijackers. fleadope