Came here to ask the same question: Yeah, what about comparing untrained humans vs trained humans?/It's a fair question, seeing that what put them in jail in the first place was a jury of untrained humans, no?
...you can begin by not invading so many countries, eh.
/Bonus: you'll save a lot of money. //Double-bonus: you can use that money to pay for single-payer medical care. ///Double-plus-bonus: single-payer will save you even more money.
One anecdote doesn't override stats, jedidiah. I could give pointless, inapplicable anecdotes if that is the only thing you'll believe, but I won't bother. Numbers, however...
"New study finds 45,000 deaths [in the US] annually linked to lack of health coverage" - Harvard Gazette http://news.harvard.edu/gazett...
In 1978, the U.S. Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) reported that, "Only 10%-20% of all procedures currently used in medical practice have been shown to be efficacious by controlled trial. In 1995, the OTA compared medical technology in eight countries (Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom, and the United States) and again noted that few medical procedures in the U.S. had been subjected to clinical trial. It also reported that infant mortality was high and life expectancy was low compared to other developed countries. Although almost ten years old, much of what was said in this report holds true today. The report lays the blame for the high cost of medicine squarely at the feet of the medical free-enterprise system and the fact that there is no national health care policy. It describes the failure of government attempts to control health care costs due to market incentive and profit motive in the financing and organization of health care including private insurance, hospital system, physician services, and drug and medical device industries. Whereas we may want to expand health-care, expansion of disease-care is the goal of free enterprise. "Health Care Technology and Its Assessment in Eight Countries" is also the last report prepared by the OTA, which was shut down in 1995. It's also, perhaps, the last honest, in-depth look at modern medicine. Because of the importance of this 60-page report, we enclose a summary in the Appendix. http://www.wnho.net/deathbymed...
There is none so blind, as those that will not see. - Matthew Henry.
Lookit that: an anonymous commenter dissing Canadian public health care!! Sigh...
I'm Canadian, I occasionally use Medicare and I'm satisfied with it. Yes, outpatient service in hospitals is nearly always slow. But based on personal and other people's experience, real emergencies are generally taken care of quickly.
When/where it's available, avoid outpatient service by using local, smaller health clinics. They're generally fast, and often take appointments so you don't have to wait 4-5 hours at the hospital. When they needed medical care, friends and parents were generally well taken care of and in a timely manner, at no cost to themselves, even when the medical procedure was very expensive.
Yes, people have died in Canadian ER and outpatient waiting areas. A lot more people have died, in the American system, because they couldn't afford medical care at all, and because of its profit-driven exigencies. See here "Is US Health Really the Best in the World?", Barbara Starfield, MD, MPH, from the JAMA: http://www.jhsph.edu/research/... Link goes to a downloadable PDF.
If you wanted to see how most/nearly-all Canadians feel about Medicare, just run stand for office and have a plank in your platform stating that you want to dismantle Medicare and switch to an American-style system.
I'm not going to bother replying to those below, but: "Uh, why yes. You need to get out more. Or at least, read non-US news sources every once in a while."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I can just imagine the grand-standing and filibusters in Congress if Canada (gentle, kind, peaceful Canada!) suggested installing polite, respectful Canadian Customs officials in 'Mercan airports, eh.
From my experience, professional photographers, photo lab technicians, and their ilk, who spend lots of time looking photos and their technical aspects (sharpness, lighting, colour, pixelation, etc, etc, etc), would easily spot the, to me, obviously edited photos. Case in point: the top photo in the The Stack article - clinton-fake-photo-832x333.jpg - is so obviously faked that I'm surprised that anyone would be fooled by it.
First dead giveaway: Clinton's head is illuminated from the right-read as is Mandela's(?) head. De Angelis's head? From the top-front. (I can't believe that De Angelis's victims didn't spot that fakery.)
Second less-dead giveaway: the pixelation isn't quite the same. The imposter's pixels are larger, not by much, than Clinton's - at least in the sample from the article.
I'm sooo getting tired of top-level, highly-paid executives who give out these kinds of general directions, meanwhile they have absolutely no idea where to start, no inkling of how it might work, nor whether it's even mathematically possible. I'm looking of at you, Mr. Director of the FBI, whose main qualifications seems to be to ignore science..
I had the same reaction as epine: "Margaret Wente, really? People still pay attention to her"?
If you did go to the Stats Can link that Wente provided, you should have noticed that the link only shows stats for the years 2010 to 2014, a very short period of time. Now, Statistics Canada is a very good, reputable government agency, so I didn't dismiss their stats out of hand, but still... What was going on?
Do as I did and as iONiUM should have done before posting this article here: Click on the Add/Remove Data tab, right next to the default-selected Data Table tab. You can change the range of years reported. At Step 3 - select the time frame I selected a range from 1984 to 2014. Lo and behold!: the bee population nowadays is less than half of what it was in the mid--eighties - from 20,810 in 1984 to 8,777 in 2014, the year of Wente's purported rebound...
Frackin' info-cherry-picking Margaret Wente! She's one of the reasons I stopped reading the Globe and Mail.
Slashdot Mirror
This and an earlier story confirm Slashdot eschews editors.
Came here to ask the same question: Yeah, what about comparing untrained humans vs trained humans? /It's a fair question, seeing that what put them in jail in the first place was a jury of untrained humans, no?
we can call it a 'free gift'.
I know: "why not both?"
They're wayyy more likely to be killed by a cow than by a sharks.
http://thenewdaily.com.au/news...
In fact, with all the dangerous animals in Australia, you're probably much safer in the water...
...you can begin by not invading so many countries, eh.
/Bonus: you'll save a lot of money.
//Double-bonus: you can use that money to pay for single-payer medical care.
///Double-plus-bonus: single-payer will save you even more money.
And their Marketing Division will have been the first against the wall when the revolution came.
It's a 42-day release schedule.
It's a small but important difference.
One anecdote doesn't override stats, jedidiah. I could give pointless, inapplicable anecdotes if that is the only thing you'll believe, but I won't bother. Numbers, however...
"New study finds 45,000 deaths [in the US] annually linked to lack of health coverage" - Harvard Gazette
http://news.harvard.edu/gazett...
In 1978, the U.S. Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) reported that, "Only 10%-20% of all procedures currently used in medical practice have been shown to be efficacious by controlled trial. In 1995, the OTA compared medical technology in eight countries (Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom, and the United States) and again noted that few medical procedures in the U.S. had been subjected to clinical trial. It also reported that infant mortality was high and life expectancy was low compared to other developed countries. Although almost ten years old, much of what was said in this report holds true today. The report lays the blame for the high cost of medicine squarely at the feet of the medical free-enterprise system and the fact that there is no national health care policy. It describes the failure of government attempts to control health care costs due to market incentive and profit motive in the financing and organization of health care including private insurance, hospital system, physician services, and drug and medical device industries. Whereas we may want to expand health-care, expansion of disease-care is the goal of free enterprise. "Health Care Technology and Its Assessment in Eight Countries" is also the last report prepared by the OTA, which was shut down in 1995. It's also, perhaps, the last honest, in-depth look at modern medicine. Because of the importance of this 60-page report, we enclose a summary in the Appendix.
http://www.wnho.net/deathbymed...
There is none so blind, as those that will not see. - Matthew Henry.
Lookit that: an anonymous commenter dissing Canadian public health care!! Sigh...
I'm Canadian, I occasionally use Medicare and I'm satisfied with it. Yes, outpatient service in hospitals is nearly always slow. But based on personal and other people's experience, real emergencies are generally taken care of quickly.
When/where it's available, avoid outpatient service by using local, smaller health clinics. They're generally fast, and often take appointments so you don't have to wait 4-5 hours at the hospital. When they needed medical care, friends and parents were generally well taken care of and in a timely manner, at no cost to themselves, even when the medical procedure was very expensive.
Yes, people have died in Canadian ER and outpatient waiting areas. A lot more people have died, in the American system, because they couldn't afford medical care at all, and because of its profit-driven exigencies. See here "Is US Health Really the Best in the World?", Barbara Starfield, MD, MPH, from the JAMA: http://www.jhsph.edu/research/... Link goes to a downloadable PDF.
If you wanted to see how most/nearly-all Canadians feel about Medicare, just run stand for office and have a plank in your platform stating that you want to dismantle Medicare and switch to an American-style system.
Even Harper wouldn't have dared to that.
Really, this should have been the first reply to this story. Leaving soooo disappointed.
Does Forbes pay for clicks? The ISS HD Earth-pointed, real-time, HD camera system: http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/HDEV/
I can just imagine the grand-standing and filibusters in Congress if Canada (gentle, kind, peaceful Canada!) suggested installing polite, respectful Canadian Customs officials in 'Mercan airports, eh.
From my experience, professional photographers, photo lab technicians, and their ilk, who spend lots of time looking photos and their technical aspects (sharpness, lighting, colour, pixelation, etc, etc, etc), would easily spot the, to me, obviously edited photos. Case in point: the top photo in the The Stack article - clinton-fake-photo-832x333.jpg - is so obviously faked that I'm surprised that anyone would be fooled by it.
First dead giveaway: Clinton's head is illuminated from the right-read as is Mandela's(?) head. De Angelis's head? From the top-front. (I can't believe that De Angelis's victims didn't spot that fakery.)
Second less-dead giveaway: the pixelation isn't quite the same. The imposter's pixels are larger, not by much, than Clinton's - at least in the sample from the article.
Not new, PARC just discovered the long-existing, well-known(?) CE (Chip Explode) pin.
Grrrr! My consumer-/tax-dollars at work.
I had the same reaction as epine: "Margaret Wente, really? People still pay attention to her"?
If you did go to the Stats Can link that Wente provided, you should have noticed that the link only shows stats for the years 2010 to 2014, a very short period of time. Now, Statistics Canada is a very good, reputable government agency, so I didn't dismiss their stats out of hand, but still... What was going on?
Do as I did and as iONiUM should have done before posting this article here: Click on the Add/Remove Data tab, right next to the default-selected Data Table tab. You can change the range of years reported. At Step 3 - select the time frame I selected a range from 1984 to 2014. Lo and behold!: the bee population nowadays is less than half of what it was in the mid--eighties - from 20,810 in 1984 to 8,777 in 2014, the year of Wente's purported rebound...
Frackin' info-cherry-picking Margaret Wente! She's one of the reasons I stopped reading the Globe and Mail.
Came here to say the same thing. It's slow/unusable on the original Nexus 7, but on the 2013 version, it's fine.
Came here to ask the same question.
...er, no. We're building an army of drones and the attendant expertise to fly them so we can use them to burn down your White House....again.
Naw, it's just a Magrathean project to kick-start the still sluggish economy.
Set phasers to malkie!
Or I guess he never heard of or used MSR equipment, eh? Y'know, 'cuz it's only been around, like, thirty-five years or so.
In addition, the rotting half-eaten salmon carcasses are often the only source of nitrogen for the vegetation.
Me, I would have gone with Ciscical.