you're assuming he hasn't actually spoke to them, and attempted to work with them. In most cases the hospital was easy to work with, however once it gets to a certain point the accountants pass it to collections, and then all hell breaks loose. You're very quick to judge without any information.
The fact that my son is putting his daughter first in his life, and trying to get back on his feet makes me very proud of him. That he has those values speaks a fair bit for his parenting skills, and to a lesser degree my own.
As far as my helping him, I'm barely making ends meet myself. I'd hope that what little financial assistance I can offer him to get by on his week to week expenses would be considered a good thing, but then again you didn't know that either.
However, my parenting skills and my son's sense of values is not what I was responding to. The statement was made that most medical bills accrued by poor patients are written off. While they may be written off after some time, it's not before the organization ruins you financially and pushes you to the brink of bankruptsy or beyond.
Maybe you'd like to talk to my son who got sick and was out of work for several weeks. During that time, the company he worked for had a layoff (which included him as he would have been laid off anyhow) Now he's collecting a pittance on unemployment, trying to take care of his daughter as a single parent.
The various hospitals, doctors and specialists' collection agencies have made his life a miserable hell to the point where he's unwilling to answer the telephone. These incredibly intense losers have even gone so far as to call me here at work to "try to convince him to make a payment" or suggest that I give him the use of a credit card to pay off the debt.
How about the GPL be a template for a license and you actually put a copy of the license with the code. I know it's sounds crazy and all, but I don't want to wonder what will happen to some code 2 yrs or 10 yrs down the road because of a dynamic license on the internet.
If you release your code with GPL V2 or whatever, that particular release goes with the text of GPL V2 and that's it. Maybe your next release of code can go with V3 and if I like the changes maybe I'll adopt it. If I don't, I'll stick with what I've got. At least it's something that I can lay my hands on in the distribution archive, rather than checking at FSF's websites for this years potential liabilities.
Personally, I'm not comfortable with the GPL's of any flavor and avoid it. Yes that means that I do not use any GPL code in any of my code projects. It's a choice I've made, one I stick to and one I'm proud of. It's also a personal choice and your mileage may vary considerably.
Might I suggest the judicious clicking of the "Parent" link before accusing me of being a shill for Microsoft. Had you read what I replied to, you wouldn't have had to waste your hourly dose of valium on me.
You can probably find the DOS version of Internet Explorer at oldversions.com. *snicker*
Lord, I dearly hope you're acting that silly. If not, I suggest you speak to your doctor about increasing the dosage, or at least arranging for some supervision while interacting with the public at large.
Not to start a flamefest here, but why is it that most of the time any IE article is mentioned, the firefox folks have to come out in force to claim it's some kind of conspiracy by microsoft?
come on guys... could it possibly be that the "browser wars" are fought by the users far more than the developers?
Either you don't know one end of a computer from another or you're deliberately spreading FUD.
Or he might be a normal non-evangelical java junkie that runs it out of the box. Like me. It runs like shit on my sytems too, and everyone else I know that runs it.. runs like shit. Of course they're not going to tweak the VM, the applications or run around in a handful of config files or whatever else you've done to manage to get it to perform reasonably. Fact of the matter is that it works file for you, and doesn't for him (or me et al)
It doesn't mean he's unable to determine the linear end points on his computer any more than it determines you're able to recognize the difference between your posterior and a pitch fork.
notice, I was able to state my opinion without backing it up with a bunch of useless output from a console. (which mind you is dubious in that I'm sure you can use vi. You're the kind of person that loves vi right?)
Of course if you dig back far enough you can find insecurities. My door has a lock on it now, but my grandfather once owned a house that had little more than a piece of board across it with a rope to open it. Should I be considering rope operated doors in my home security plans?
It's one thing to come up with a good arguement to make a point, but another to dig up something obsolete and (mostly) globally admitted to be a problem to make that point.
In my world we call people like this zealots. Others refer to them as closed minded, yet others have more humorous and less flattering terms.
I agree with you completely, but the firefox evangelists will cry if they don't get their weekly press. Sadly Firefox has become the darling child of the OSS movement because of it's successes. Those successes are largely due to the evangelists themselves, but also in no minor part to it being a vastly useful product. This separates itself from much of the OSS on the market today. Thats not to say that most OSS isn't useful, but not globally so.
Of course it's also truly sad that a web browser is the symbol for all this evangelism. I can't think of anything better, but then again does OSS really need a symbol?
It's just a browser folks. It's software and a product, like toilet paper and cheesy tasting crackers. Honestly? I'd like to see a frontpage article about Cheez-It's upgrading to a new cheezier flavor. I'd be on that like white on rice.
Re:The definitive HAARP conspiracy book
on
HAARP Amping It Up
·
· Score: 1
I distinctly remember reading a novel (fiction) centered around HAARP. When I was reading it I remember thinking that it would be a seriously cool project, and this author really did his homework to come up with it. Then I started poking around and saw that it was a real project and again, thought coolness.
I've hit the site, and while I'm sure there are things going on behind the scenes, and they claim there's nothing classified about the project (can the knowledge of existing classified information be classified itself--hence 'black?'); what I've read seems to be a neat project, possibly helpful, but mostly harmless and of limited value to the real world. Seems to me the best part of the whole thing is that it keeps a handful of scientists busy and not running around doing a Chicken Little.
On the other hand, if the scientists can locate better ways of communicating, find alternative energy, figure out a way to zap the hairs off some military commander's ass from half way around the world, or find some other way of benefiting the world, nation or security of any of the above I see it as a good thing. If they're out there working on mind control? It's not working people. Too many conspiracy theories. If it was working even a little bit, we'd all be looking fondly at the pictures going "Mmmmmmm HAARP!"
Wish I could remember the title/author of that book though.
I don't mean to insult you because I largely agree with your statement, but to put things into perspective, a website or office/word document can't be classified in the same accessibility manner as a set of stairs.
For most handicapped people (I presume) that are at least able to use a computer physically-- have worked out what they need to be minimally effective using their computers, or decided long ago that it wasn't worth thr trouble. I'm not saying it's right, but a reasonable assumption based on human nature. Given that, the format of any particular document won't matter as long as the tools are available. This could be large type, magnifiers, text to speech etc. I'm sure there are other issues to be resolved, but I fear those are going to revolve around hardware as well.
Back to my original point though, I don't see where somebody is going to fail to be provided required services because of a failure in their computer's accessibility functions. At least not to be compared to a set of stairs that are impossible to navigate. Other than FEMA (ugh) I don't think there are any governmental agencies that require web access or even a computer to apply for (and receive) services. Yes a computer can make them more convenient, but definitely not a deal breaker.
fair point. Extremely accurate and I wholeheartedly agree. Unless something is either extremely important, or technically interesting an individual just isn't going to put his or her time into it. This may well be a situation where commercial development shines.
Maybe the community should request that Mass develope the accessibility features and submit a patch. That's what would be requested of any individual (rather than government).
Are you saying that if you could help scientists to cure a disease that's killing hundreds of thousands of people every year by devoting a big chunk of your time, you WOULDNT do it?
Thanks right, I wouldn't. Science hasn't figured out how to balance researching a "subject" without completely allocating that "subject's" time and resources. There's no way in hell I'd be a part of that. I'd go in for one more test to make sure the negative really was negative and be on my way. "Don't call me, I'll call you."
Slashdot Mirror
It's not better to fight the good fight. Not when it does no good and actually does harm in the process.
If I'm not mistaken, patents have been around much longer than GPL anything.
If they don't rewrite it, they'll be forgotten and therefore have no purpose or publicity.
Here in my office we call it busy work.
you're assuming he hasn't actually spoke to them, and attempted to work with them. In most cases the hospital was easy to work with, however once it gets to a certain point the accountants pass it to collections, and then all hell breaks loose. You're very quick to judge without any information.
The fact that my son is putting his daughter first in his life, and trying to get back on his feet makes me very proud of him. That he has those values speaks a fair bit for his parenting skills, and to a lesser degree my own.
As far as my helping him, I'm barely making ends meet myself. I'd hope that what little financial assistance I can offer him to get by on his week to week expenses would be considered a good thing, but then again you didn't know that either.
However, my parenting skills and my son's sense of values is not what I was responding to. The statement was made that most medical bills accrued by poor patients are written off. While they may be written off after some time, it's not before the organization ruins you financially and pushes you to the brink of bankruptsy or beyond.
Maybe you'd like to talk to my son who got sick and was out of work for several weeks. During that time, the company he worked for had a layoff (which included him as he would have been laid off anyhow) Now he's collecting a pittance on unemployment, trying to take care of his daughter as a single parent.
The various hospitals, doctors and specialists' collection agencies have made his life a miserable hell to the point where he's unwilling to answer the telephone. These incredibly intense losers have even gone so far as to call me here at work to "try to convince him to make a payment" or suggest that I give him the use of a credit card to pay off the debt.
How about the GPL be a template for a license and you actually put a copy of the license with the code. I know it's sounds crazy and all, but I don't want to wonder what will happen to some code 2 yrs or 10 yrs down the road because of a dynamic license on the internet.
If you release your code with GPL V2 or whatever, that particular release goes with the text of GPL V2 and that's it. Maybe your next release of code can go with V3 and if I like the changes maybe I'll adopt it. If I don't, I'll stick with what I've got. At least it's something that I can lay my hands on in the distribution archive, rather than checking at FSF's websites for this years potential liabilities.
Personally, I'm not comfortable with the GPL's of any flavor and avoid it. Yes that means that I do not use any GPL code in any of my code projects. It's a choice I've made, one I stick to and one I'm proud of. It's also a personal choice and your mileage may vary considerably.
accusatory yes, inflammatory no. In fact, I thought it was pretty diplomatic. I didn't use the words zealot or evangelist even once.
Might I suggest the judicious clicking of the "Parent" link before accusing me of being a shill for Microsoft. Had you read what I replied to, you wouldn't have had to waste your hourly dose of valium on me.
You can probably find the DOS version of Internet Explorer at oldversions.com. *snicker*
Lord, I dearly hope you're acting that silly. If not, I suggest you speak to your doctor about increasing the dosage, or at least arranging for some supervision while interacting with the public at large.
Not to start a flamefest here, but why is it that most of the time any IE article is mentioned, the firefox folks have to come out in force to claim it's some kind of conspiracy by microsoft?
come on guys... could it possibly be that the "browser wars" are fought by the users far more than the developers?
give me a call about a week before the IPO
Or he might be a normal non-evangelical java junkie that runs it out of the box. Like me. It runs like shit on my sytems too, and everyone else I know that runs it.. runs like shit. Of course they're not going to tweak the VM, the applications or run around in a handful of config files or whatever else you've done to manage to get it to perform reasonably. Fact of the matter is that it works file for you, and doesn't for him (or me et al)
It doesn't mean he's unable to determine the linear end points on his computer any more than it determines you're able to recognize the difference between your posterior and a pitch fork.
notice, I was able to state my opinion without backing it up with a bunch of useless output from a console. (which mind you is dubious in that I'm sure you can use vi. You're the kind of person that loves vi right?)
That means it was three days behind the last slashdot article on the same subject.
HAHAAH and for that comment you get to be the one wearing the falsies and cheap sweater. Enjoy!
Of course if you dig back far enough you can find insecurities. My door has a lock on it now, but my grandfather once owned a house that had little more than a piece of board across it with a rope to open it. Should I be considering rope operated doors in my home security plans?
It's one thing to come up with a good arguement to make a point, but another to dig up something obsolete and (mostly) globally admitted to be a problem to make that point.
In my world we call people like this zealots. Others refer to them as closed minded, yet others have more humorous and less flattering terms.
At least I'm a retard with dignity rather than throwing up "retard" posts hiding as an AC to save your soul/karma.
I'd much rather be a known retard, than a shadow lurking weasel.
I don't know why anyone can't put their karma where their mouth is.
*rolls eyes*
Why is it every time I see something like this, I have visions of some kid sitting around playing marbles with his own eyeballs.
or somebody doing that and following it immediately with "Come on, papa needs a new pair of shoes!"
I agree with you completely, but the firefox evangelists will cry if they don't get their weekly press. Sadly Firefox has become the darling child of the OSS movement because of it's successes. Those successes are largely due to the evangelists themselves, but also in no minor part to it being a vastly useful product. This separates itself from much of the OSS on the market today. Thats not to say that most OSS isn't useful, but not globally so.
Of course it's also truly sad that a web browser is the symbol for all this evangelism. I can't think of anything better, but then again does OSS really need a symbol?
It's just a browser folks. It's software and a product, like toilet paper and cheesy tasting crackers. Honestly? I'd like to see a frontpage article about Cheez-It's upgrading to a new cheezier flavor. I'd be on that like white on rice.
I distinctly remember reading a novel (fiction) centered around HAARP. When I was reading it I remember thinking that it would be a seriously cool project, and this author really did his homework to come up with it. Then I started poking around and saw that it was a real project and again, thought coolness.
I've hit the site, and while I'm sure there are things going on behind the scenes, and they claim there's nothing classified about the project (can the knowledge of existing classified information be classified itself--hence 'black?'); what I've read seems to be a neat project, possibly helpful, but mostly harmless and of limited value to the real world. Seems to me the best part of the whole thing is that it keeps a handful of scientists busy and not running around doing a Chicken Little.
On the other hand, if the scientists can locate better ways of communicating, find alternative energy, figure out a way to zap the hairs off some military commander's ass from half way around the world, or find some other way of benefiting the world, nation or security of any of the above I see it as a good thing. If they're out there working on mind control? It's not working people. Too many conspiracy theories. If it was working even a little bit, we'd all be looking fondly at the pictures going "Mmmmmmm HAARP!"
Wish I could remember the title/author of that book though.
wow... the doctor skip morning rounds today?
hey, at least you're being entertaining though. 2 points for that.
I don't mean to insult you because I largely agree with your statement, but to put things into perspective, a website or office/word document can't be classified in the same accessibility manner as a set of stairs.
For most handicapped people (I presume) that are at least able to use a computer physically-- have worked out what they need to be minimally effective using their computers, or decided long ago that it wasn't worth thr trouble. I'm not saying it's right, but a reasonable assumption based on human nature. Given that, the format of any particular document won't matter as long as the tools are available. This could be large type, magnifiers, text to speech etc. I'm sure there are other issues to be resolved, but I fear those are going to revolve around hardware as well.
Back to my original point though, I don't see where somebody is going to fail to be provided required services because of a failure in their computer's accessibility functions. At least not to be compared to a set of stairs that are impossible to navigate. Other than FEMA (ugh) I don't think there are any governmental agencies that require web access or even a computer to apply for (and receive) services. Yes a computer can make them more convenient, but definitely not a deal breaker.
fair point. Extremely accurate and I wholeheartedly agree. Unless something is either extremely important, or technically interesting an individual just isn't going to put his or her time into it. This may well be a situation where commercial development shines.
Maybe the community should request that Mass develope the accessibility features and submit a patch. That's what would be requested of any individual (rather than government).
so in order to find out if AOL/Yahoo has certified a potential application I have to go to a website to view a whitelist?
Might this website be laden with targetted advertising?