She's no "conservative". She gives us the usual litany of progressive complaints. And she wraps it all into a whiny and pointless call to action.
Entrepreneurs are more than happy to work in all these areas if there were a profit to be made, and there's a lot of money to be made from providing low-cost, efficient services to people below the median income.
The people who need a talking to are the voters, because they keep voting people like Obama and Bush into power, and as long as those people are in power, entrepreneurs can't do much of anything.
I think her point is exactly that these are problems that are "social and political in nature," and that our brightest minds are mostly writing inane apps instead of tackling them.
The solutions are simple, he just doesn't like them: more privatization, more competition, more personal responsibility, fewer government benefits.
Perhaps smart people just realize that the progressive refrain of "the sky is falling" and "we so many problems" is bullshit.
The problems we do have are largely self-inflicted and within people's own control. For example, you can't fix single motherood with an app, entrepreneurship, or government programs. The only way you get fewer single mothers in poverty is if women stop having kids outside of marriage.
And entrepreneurs can't fix what's wrong with government benefits, retirement plans, or the medical system because those are increasingly transferred from entrepreneurs (i.e. corporations) to the government. I mean, why would entrepreneurs be attracted to starting businesses in areas that are being demonized and regulated to death by the president and a large part of Congress?
All those distributions are designed for desktop use; they aren't optimized for low battery usage or embedded applications and they have a huge footprint. None of them currently mainstream Linux GUIs are lightweight, and the Linux GUI space is changing again in unpredictable ways. None of them have an obvious mainstream IDE that you can sit an average programmer in front of and say "start coding". Furthermore, if they'd go that route, they have to program in C/C++, which they don't want. Java on Linux is bloated and doesn't have the libraries they need. MeeGo or one of the other embedded Linux distributions might have been technically OK, but they have nowhere near the market share and virtually no tool or IDE support. Yeah, it sucks that Android is the only choice, but the Linux distros did this to themselves by screwing up the desktop UI and libraries with lots of experimental crap and by still not having any kind of decent HLL for development. You can see the sorry state of regular Linux on low-end machines when you run Linux on a Raspberry Pi. I'd really wish it were different because all these issues spell trouble for Linux in the long run.
The problem is that architecting (and implementing) a house wrongly has an extreme expensive long-term effect. Please use experts (which have all this open knowledge)
Building a house isn't rocket science. A lot of the complications and costs are regulatory in nature.
Somehow this thing remind me of all the "3d-printer"-fans around here, who are obviously unaware of what you can do with a decent set of manual tools
You have no idea what 3D printer fans are "unaware of" and you apparently don't know what 3D printers are actually used for.
They should have used IOS so they could write it in C.
They couldn't use iOS even if they wanted to because Apple isn't licensing it. And they can write C code under Android.
The Java will memory leak for unattended apps.
Quite the opposite: C/C++ code is at risk for memory leaks. People occasionally retain pointers in Java, but those problems are easy to track down. More importantly, with Java, there is no risk of memory corruption.
They want a mainstream, widely used platform for the developer, tool, and libraray support. They don't want to use C/C++ as their primary language (but have the option of using it when necessary). For R&D, an embedded UI is useful. For audio and video applications, they need an ARM chip anyway (as opposed to a smaller, cheaper embedded chip). And Android is actually optimized for long battery life, audio, video, and sensing (since that's what phones do). Realistically, what other choices are there?
Or, for that matter, mines are preprogrammed robots securing an area. Sentry guns have also been around for a while, although they usually try to shoot down missiles.
If it's close to lifetime exposure limits, that means it's still fairly safe, since our limits are very conservative. Astronauts might have a slightly elevated risk of cancer and probably shouldn't have kids, but they are still much more likely to die during takeoff and landing.
Actually it's very much a demonstration that commercial health suppliers on their own had poor sanitation. And it took the government to step in and provide a sufficiently big financial incentive.
Commercial health suppliers are government-protected, heavily regulated oligopolists; of course such providers are going to have poor sanitation, poor patient care, and spiraling costs. And of course the only way to fix problems in such a system is through more government regulation.
That's Keynesian economics that fixed it, not the free market.
Oh, what an interesting statement. Keysianism is about the relationship between aggregate demand and economic output. How exactly does that reduce hospital infections?
A claim for which you have no evidence. Other than your general belief in a mythical anarcho-capitalist utopia.
How would you even be able to tell? You can't tell Keynsianism from a hole in the ground.
As I was saying: "The problem here is that the "customer" is itself a government-established monopoly that people are forced to pay for that took forever to take action; a more liberal market in health care would likely have fixed this problem long ago."
Now you might suggest that it IS more profitable to do the sanitation thing right. But do you have any data to show that. What if hospitals lose money that way, but it's healthier for patients.
The evidence is right in the article: hospitals institute these measures because their customers refuse to pay or go elsewhere if they don't; no government regulation was needed. That's the way a free market is supposed to work.
The problem here is that the "customer" is itself a government-established monopoly that people are forced to pay for that took forever to take action; a more liberal market in health care would likely have fixed this problem long ago.
The hospital's bottom line should be the priority, right?
Quite to the contrary: libertarians believe that citizen's rights and liberties are the first priority; companies only should make a profit if the people voluntarily give them their money because they are satisfied with their products and services.
Unfortunately, progressives and left-wing politicians keep forcing us to buy services we don't want and to subsidize, support, and rescue companies that should have gone out of business long ago
Your nuke may not be strong enough to deflect the asteroid, but it may be strong enough to increase the area over which the pieces get dispersed many times, resulting in a much lower energy per area.
Superbugs have nothing to do with it; if anything, they result in higher revenues to hospitals. The real reason is in the article: Medicare won't pay for the treatment of hospital infections anymore.
You're accusing them of making up the numbers, or of using non-technical language when they described the contents of the disk? Yes, they used non-technical language, but I think it would be easy to imagine what "an intricate folder structure" would mean, and to understand that the important part of the document is the "6712 folders" and seven hundred thousand plus images they contain.
The article says nothing about "seven hundred thousand plus images". What it says is that there are a lot of folders, a lot of files. It doesn't specify the number of images. It just juxtaposes an unrelated large number to a mention of potentially illegal images so that morons like you confuse the two in their heads, as you dutifully do.
Given that misleading statement, I wouldn't take their statement that the images are illegal at face value either. For all we know (and given past such cases), these supposedly illegal images might be pictures of his nieces at the beach.
Having "non-free JavaScript" on a site seems no different to me than reading materials that are copyrighted. Does Stallman not read anything that's copyrighted? What's the problem with that? I just don't see the negative effect here.
It was an issue 20 years ago; the literature on this goes back decades, and none of the attempts to fix it have worked. This is one of the main causes of deaths in hospitals, and it's high time hospitals do something about it.
but the census bureau table [idra.org] says Texas is #1 for 2003, which is the same year as the NAAL.
The Census bureau table says no such thing; the Census bureau doesn't have data on literacy. IDRA fabricated literacy data based on a census table on education; that's misleading, and you are misrepresenting the result.
NAAL actually went out and directly measured literacy of a sample of 19000 adults. Given NAAL's direct measurements of literacy, it is clear that IDRA's numbers are just wrong.
In any case, even if there were uncertainty about these numbers, Stox's claim about Texas being "#1" on all these measures would still be false.
Slashdot Mirror
She's no "conservative". She gives us the usual litany of progressive complaints. And she wraps it all into a whiny and pointless call to action.
Entrepreneurs are more than happy to work in all these areas if there were a profit to be made, and there's a lot of money to be made from providing low-cost, efficient services to people below the median income.
The people who need a talking to are the voters, because they keep voting people like Obama and Bush into power, and as long as those people are in power, entrepreneurs can't do much of anything.
The solutions are simple, he just doesn't like them: more privatization, more competition, more personal responsibility, fewer government benefits.
Perhaps smart people just realize that the progressive refrain of "the sky is falling" and "we so many problems" is bullshit.
The problems we do have are largely self-inflicted and within people's own control. For example, you can't fix single motherood with an app, entrepreneurship, or government programs. The only way you get fewer single mothers in poverty is if women stop having kids outside of marriage.
And entrepreneurs can't fix what's wrong with government benefits, retirement plans, or the medical system because those are increasingly transferred from entrepreneurs (i.e. corporations) to the government. I mean, why would entrepreneurs be attracted to starting businesses in areas that are being demonized and regulated to death by the president and a large part of Congress?
If malware has access to the RAM of another process, the horse has left the barn.
All those distributions are designed for desktop use; they aren't optimized for low battery usage or embedded applications and they have a huge footprint. None of them currently mainstream Linux GUIs are lightweight, and the Linux GUI space is changing again in unpredictable ways. None of them have an obvious mainstream IDE that you can sit an average programmer in front of and say "start coding". Furthermore, if they'd go that route, they have to program in C/C++, which they don't want. Java on Linux is bloated and doesn't have the libraries they need. MeeGo or one of the other embedded Linux distributions might have been technically OK, but they have nowhere near the market share and virtually no tool or IDE support. Yeah, it sucks that Android is the only choice, but the Linux distros did this to themselves by screwing up the desktop UI and libraries with lots of experimental crap and by still not having any kind of decent HLL for development. You can see the sorry state of regular Linux on low-end machines when you run Linux on a Raspberry Pi. I'd really wish it were different because all these issues spell trouble for Linux in the long run.
It will probably happen real soon now in astronomical terms; just give it a few thousand years.
Now companies create crappy software with bugs, and then get government subsidized software security testing.
Building a house isn't rocket science. A lot of the complications and costs are regulatory in nature.
You have no idea what 3D printer fans are "unaware of" and you apparently don't know what 3D printers are actually used for.
They couldn't use iOS even if they wanted to because Apple isn't licensing it. And they can write C code under Android.
Quite the opposite: C/C++ code is at risk for memory leaks. People occasionally retain pointers in Java, but those problems are easy to track down. More importantly, with Java, there is no risk of memory corruption.
They want a mainstream, widely used platform for the developer, tool, and libraray support. They don't want to use C/C++ as their primary language (but have the option of using it when necessary). For R&D, an embedded UI is useful. For audio and video applications, they need an ARM chip anyway (as opposed to a smaller, cheaper embedded chip). And Android is actually optimized for long battery life, audio, video, and sensing (since that's what phones do). Realistically, what other choices are there?
Or, for that matter, mines are preprogrammed robots securing an area. Sentry guns have also been around for a while, although they usually try to shoot down missiles.
On the other hand, robots don't go on murderous rampages out of anger:
http://news.yahoo.com/lawyer-soldier-plead-guilty-afghan-massacre-140057614.html
If it's close to lifetime exposure limits, that means it's still fairly safe, since our limits are very conservative. Astronauts might have a slightly elevated risk of cancer and probably shouldn't have kids, but they are still much more likely to die during takeoff and landing.
Commercial health suppliers are government-protected, heavily regulated oligopolists; of course such providers are going to have poor sanitation, poor patient care, and spiraling costs. And of course the only way to fix problems in such a system is through more government regulation.
Oh, what an interesting statement. Keysianism is about the relationship between aggregate demand and economic output. How exactly does that reduce hospital infections?
How would you even be able to tell? You can't tell Keynsianism from a hole in the ground.
As I was saying: "The problem here is that the "customer" is itself a government-established monopoly that people are forced to pay for that took forever to take action; a more liberal market in health care would likely have fixed this problem long ago."
The fact that meteoric iron has been used for artifacts has been known for a while:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteoric_iron
The evidence is right in the article: hospitals institute these measures because their customers refuse to pay or go elsewhere if they don't; no government regulation was needed. That's the way a free market is supposed to work.
The problem here is that the "customer" is itself a government-established monopoly that people are forced to pay for that took forever to take action; a more liberal market in health care would likely have fixed this problem long ago.
Quite to the contrary: libertarians believe that citizen's rights and liberties are the first priority; companies only should make a profit if the people voluntarily give them their money because they are satisfied with their products and services.
Unfortunately, progressives and left-wing politicians keep forcing us to buy services we don't want and to subsidize, support, and rescue companies that should have gone out of business long ago
Apparently not, otherwise you wouldn't have claimed that it "didn't matter much".
Your nuke may not be strong enough to deflect the asteroid, but it may be strong enough to increase the area over which the pieces get dispersed many times, resulting in a much lower energy per area.
Superbugs have nothing to do with it; if anything, they result in higher revenues to hospitals. The real reason is in the article: Medicare won't pay for the treatment of hospital infections anymore.
The article says nothing about "seven hundred thousand plus images". What it says is that there are a lot of folders, a lot of files. It doesn't specify the number of images. It just juxtaposes an unrelated large number to a mention of potentially illegal images so that morons like you confuse the two in their heads, as you dutifully do.
Given that misleading statement, I wouldn't take their statement that the images are illegal at face value either. For all we know (and given past such cases), these supposedly illegal images might be pictures of his nieces at the beach.
Having "non-free JavaScript" on a site seems no different to me than reading materials that are copyrighted. Does Stallman not read anything that's copyrighted? What's the problem with that? I just don't see the negative effect here.
It was an issue 20 years ago; the literature on this goes back decades, and none of the attempts to fix it have worked. This is one of the main causes of deaths in hospitals, and it's high time hospitals do something about it.
The Census bureau table says no such thing; the Census bureau doesn't have data on literacy. IDRA fabricated literacy data based on a census table on education; that's misleading, and you are misrepresenting the result.
NAAL actually went out and directly measured literacy of a sample of 19000 adults. Given NAAL's direct measurements of literacy, it is clear that IDRA's numbers are just wrong.
In any case, even if there were uncertainty about these numbers, Stox's claim about Texas being "#1" on all these measures would still be false.
Yes, in reality. Believe me, I know. Why do you keep confabulating about things that you know nothing about?