Maybe what they can do with this project is quickly solve the easy-to-solve ones. If 9 out of 10 (or some other threshold) people identify a galaxy as clockwise-spiral, then they might be able to consider that one "solved".
That leaves the harder ones and the ones with less consensus for more astronomically valuable people like you (not that you are orders of magnitude more valuable than the rest of us, but rather as an astronomy undergrad your ability to discern these things is hopefully better than ours).
As for what there will be to keep astrophysics students busy - I get the impression that there are plenty of galaxies to go around. And then there's probably other massive amounts of data that need some human attention.
I personally hope this project does not get pulled. If properly designed it CAN be scientifically useful. On top of that it helps get those who are not scientists interested and involved in science. I grew up on Sagan's Cosmos and NOVA programs and at one time wanted to be an astronomer. I'm now a supply chain analyst working on becoming a systems scientist. It's cool that I can contribute even just a little to the field of science in this project. And it just might be the thing that inspires some kid somewhere to take up more science classes.
One wonders just how the subitter used to play Tetris...
That's funny!
Actually, I can't stand to play Tetris for more than a couple minutes. But I had a girlfriend once who could not stop playing the darned game. She had it on her computer and played it - and then had a Gameboy she played it on too when she wasn't on her computer. Hours and hours she would play that game, and she got really angry when I hid the Gameboy.
This site seems addictive to me in that some of the pictures are really astounding, but a lot seem pretty average (lots of ellipticals). But I find I don't want to log out - I want to keep classifying the one it's given me in case the next one will be really cool. It must be the same thing that keeps people playing slot machines...
It's also humbling though. Each picture is probably hundreds of millions of stars. Without going all Sagan, but there could have been thousands of civilizations in that bunch of stars. And I'm looking at it for about a second and deciding "spiral clockwise, next".
You're engaging in a circular argument. If you don't accept the license at install time: you then get the source; you modify and distribute it while keeping your changes secret; then you get sued by the author for violating the license.
I don't think the argument is circular. There is a difference between installing with intent to merely use and to obtain with the goal of revising and distributing.
If I download Gimp so I can edit some graphics, I don't have to agree to the GPL - the person who allowed me to download it did. As a mere user, the GPL is not impacting what I am doing and I don't need to agree to the GPL.
It should be enough for the installer to show the GPL to tell me about it, but I should still be permitted to install and use the program without agreeing to the GPL. As far as I can tell, the GPL covers conveyance and incorporation of the program into other programs - not its mere use.
From the GPL: 9. Acceptance Not Required for Having Copies.
You are not required to accept this License in order to receive or run a copy of the Program.
At this point, you stand there with your bare face hanging out and say, "Demonstrate to me where I signed or otherwise accepted your license. While I've not looked at much GPL code - I'm not a developer/coder - it's my understanding that code released under the GPL needs to have the text of the GPL or at least references to it in the code itself.
It would be hard to modify the code while removing the copyright and GPL notices and then say you weren't aware of it.
On top of that, in most cases you can download the source without installing the program itself, so the click-through page on the installer doesn't have much binding effect if you're just getting the source.
Plus a tar xvf - foo_src.tgz won't force you to read any licenses either. Finally as a developer, if you're taking code from other sources, it's up to you to make sure you comply with any licenses or restrictions that come with it. If you can't find a license or you don't agree with it, then you just need to move along and find what you need somewhere else.
You can use OSS all you want and your IP is safely yours. It's only when you want to incorporate OSS software and code in your own code that you are then bound by the OSS terms.
For example, you can: use OpenOffice to write all your documents use Gimp to do your image processing use vi/emacs to edit your source code use gcc to compile your program (be careful what you link to) use PDFMaker to generate PDFs from your programs use Firefox to browse the web use Thunderbird to handle your e-mail use apache to serve your web pages and so on
and your code and works are still completely your own, free to distribute in any way you see fit.
You are free to use OSS in any way and for any purpose. It's only when you want to redistribute it in some way (including incorporating it into your own work) that you incur any restrictions.
First of all, you have not been blackmailed by the FBI either.
I wasn't implying the FBI was blackmailing me. I interpreted the post I responded to as saying that the FBI has an interest in spying on me in case I could be blackmailed by someone else. Even if I were personally in a position to be blackmailed, there is no way the government can be harmed by such blackmail - so they have no legitimate interest in spying on me.
You could also be blackmailed into helping the crooks commit crimes, We could all ostensibly be blackmailed into committing crimes: "do this thing, or we'll kill you/your wife/your kids/your pets". That still doesn't give the FBI a legitimate interest in spying on me.
Once I commit a crime, they then have an interest in investigating me. Before that, I am an American citizen and I am supposed to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. Though I guess such ideas are somewhat out of fashion these days.
You are left alone. There are no strange men following you around, and no black helicopter is buzzing over your house. That's a nice thought. But how can you really know that? The administration has already admitted they are illegally wiretapping US citizens. Do you really think you and I are somehow immune to that? Try requesting the dossier on yourself sometime...
I've never seen an open source license that controls how a person uses the software.
I have to disagree with you there. The installer for many windows versions of OSS software have a clickwrap style page where you have to agree to the conditions of the GPL before you can install the software.
As you said, the GPL (and others) only apply when you want to distribute the code. You shouldn't have to "accept" the GPL to merely use the software. At least that's how I understand it.
It's not so much that it's unexpected. Theory predicts the existence of water on planets. This is just conclusive confirmation... which is pretty cool.
Kind of like how theoretically, in spite of being a male who reads slashdot, I should be able to get laid. It's just pretty cool when I get conclusive proof of that theory.
Actually, black mailing such individuals is a tried and true method of the foreign intelligence services. Hence the legitimate motivation for the FBI to look into such things with respect to security risks.
Well, that's all fine for government employees where the government has an interest in making sure the employees aren't compromised. Those employees have consented in writing to be investigated, watched, and spied on.
I, however, am not a government employee. I'm a student and employee at a large company. The government has no legitimate interest in spying on me or determining my security risk or my risk of committing "moral crimes".
Once I commit a crime, they have an interest in investigating me and my activities. Until then, the should just leave me the hell alone.
When, in the future, someone goes to Microsoft with a voucher and Microsoft conveys a copy of SLES with Samba [slashdot.org] (or some of the other projects [vnunet.com] who're switching) then the GPLv3 will apply:
I'll be the first to admit that I must have missed the Slashdot article about these vouchers - and the certain serveral dupes, so maybe I'm off base here.
But can't Microsoft just convey old copies that are are still covered under GPLv2?
Like most coupons and ads, do the vouchers say something like "not responsible for typographical errors"? Forgetting an expiration date might be considered a typo...
It installs like Acrobat in that it appears as a printer that you simply print to to create your PDF files. This lets you make PDFs of anything you can print.
I haven't encountered anything it doesn't do a decent job with.
Unlike Acrobat, you can't edit/merge your PDFs, but since it's free and makes PDF files, it's already doing a lot.
Why assume that the people getting the boot are customers with legitimate problems and not jerks who are wasting the time of customer service operators and thus making your fees go up?
Probably because most of us have either been or know someone who has been screwed by the phone companies, especially through their billing.
For example, my ex-girlfriend spent 3 weeks in Peru and I was house-sitting for her. Her cellphone was turned off and sitting at my house the whole time.
When she got back, her bill had thousands of dollars of calls to and from all over the place: China to Spain, Mexico to South Africa, Viet Nam to Canada, and so on. Even if she had her phone with her, there was no way she could travel that quickly (calling from Viet Nam at noon and then from Canada at 2:00pm).
Clearly she did not make the calls. She fought for months with the company for months and even against threats for collection.
She was on the phone with them a LOT. Needless to say, she dropped them before they had the chance to drop her.
So, anyway, we probably side against the companies because they have such a long and expansive track record of abusing their customers.
Replacement batteries for cheaper phones are STILL quite expensive. Many batteries are $45 or $50, which is often more than many people pay for the phones! (Which is why when the batteries die, people toss the phones.)
I have a cheap Kyocera phone from Virgin Mobile that cost $20. I've used it for a year and a half and it's been great. The same phone is now free* online (you pay $20, but it comes with a $20 credit on the account). If it dies and stops charging, I'll just go buy another one. The only hassle is transferring my phone book. Or maybe I'll just buy a new phone and transfer the battery.
Anyway, I just can't fathom paying $500 for a phone, even if it's an ipod and can surf the internet too. And then an $80 battery that I can't replace on my own?
Just looked up replacements online... found them for between $0.99 and $15.99.
I think the argument made my fmr. Gov. Kitzhaber (formerly an ER doc) is that the cost of providing the *free*, preventative healthcare is less than providing the emergency treatment. So, over time, even if you are giving free benefits for preventative care, the overall cost to society is less.
The only other choice is to decide that only those who can afford it should get emergency care.
"Illegals" are not the problem. It's the vast numbers of uninsured US-born Americans that are the drain on the system. Even if you take the highest estimates of "illegals" and assume that 100% of them are using emergency medical services, that number is much less than the number of "authorized" Americans using emergency services.
You're points are all very good. But I was quoting the parent post and refuting it myself. Thanks for the support!
Among my peers, I'm very lucky because I am a veteran (served between the Gulf Wars) and have at least basic medical coverage for the rest of my life. It's such a great safety net to have.
One of my friends is stuck in a crappy job that I'm sure is ruining his mental health. But he doesn't dare leave it for another one because he has medical coverage in his crappy job.
I'm thinking about going back to school to pursue a PhD and at least one of the things I don't have to worry about is medical care if I end up needing.
I wonder how much potential is lost in a system like the one in the US when people are trapped in crappy situations that make them unhappy yet they don't dare try to make changes like getting different jobs or going back to school because they can't risk not having medical coverage. It's sad, really.
And don't we already have a huge problem in the US because emergency rooms can't turn away seriously ill people... and all of the uninsured people are basically forced to wait until their minor (cheap to treat) illness becomes serious (expensive to treat), and they come in to the ER?
Not exactly my field of expertise, but the issue is clearly not so simple.
I live in Oregon and our former governor Kitzhaber (who was previously an ER Doc) made exactly that argument. We, as a society, by ensuring everyone can get emergency care, are incurring a certain cost. He argues, with more facts than I have readily available, that if more money were spent on basic healthcare the ER costs reduce by more than the money spent - resulting in a net savings.
We basically have 3 choices: 1. keep spending more for ER treatment with only so-so outcome 2. spend more on basic/preventative health care and probably save more in the long run with better outcomes 3. stop treating people in the ER who can't pay for it, which may save money in the short term but will probably result in higher societal costs across the board (higher crime, more job insecurity, lost potential)
If this was true, anyone could start a hospital that offers the same quality at lower prices and get huge business. By your logic, food prices should be out of control, but they're not.
In other words, the free market handles it just fine.
Not quite. There is tremendous variety in the ways people get food - anyone can even grow it themselves. Even without home-growing there are lots of ways to get basic nutrition really cheap (huge bags of rice and beans are pretty cheap).
The medical field, on the other hand, is highly regulated by the government causing a scarcity in the number of people who can practice medicine. Even if I have a lot of money I can't just go open a hospital because I'd have to staff that hospital with qualified doctors, nurses, physicians assistants, surgeons, specialists, and medical assistants. There are only so many people who are already qualified and the schools can only pump them out so fast.
So you have a situation where the supply is not very elastic and most of the elasticity in demand is to simply choose to get care or not. And often the choice to not get care early on means the overall costs, and demands on the system, will be much much higher when situation gets worse.
A friend of mine, for example, got a deep cut on his finger. Instead of going to the doc-in-a-box and get stitches, he decided to take care of it himself. A couple days later he woke up with a high fever and he was unable to move his entire arm. He ended up spending 3 days in intensive care and another 3 days under observation. The cut had gotten infected and the infection went systemic on him. Thankfully for him he had insurance.
Having insurance he should have gotten it treated right away. But so many Americans lack insurance that they couldn't afford the $300 bill to get the finger treated when it would have been simple. Such a person would also be unable to pay the several thousands of dollars the 6 days in the hospital would have cost. "The system" currently buries this cost in overhead.
In Oregon (where I live now), our former governor, who was an E-room doc, has been advocating for universal coverage here in Oregon. The models used by his team demonstrate that the overall cost to the system would be less by helping ensure people get small things taken care of before they become really big.
Mass. probably is hoping they can save on those overhead costs by making sure everyone has the incentive and financial capability to get insured.
furthermore, putting more citizens on the governments teet, eliminating the need for them to take care of themselves, to take resposbility for their actions, will hurt a country in the long run.
That's all fine for those who actually have the resources to divert directly to healthcare. But many don't - and because we as a society have decided that everyone can get emergency care, those people wait until small things become emergencies.
There are really only 3 choices: pay excessive costs for emergency treatment, pay moderate costs for preventive care, or simply turn away the uninsured and let them die in the streets (and have higher secondary costs such as higher threats of epidemics, higher crime, and lost potential as people end up living lives crippled and damaged when they could have been treated).
The bad news is that there are fees involved. I don't care if the fee is even $1
Well, you know, if you say had an attache case in your car that had a copy of your taxes. Then suddenly you had to go inside the house for a minute. Then you come back out and the bag is gone, voila, you're a victim of identity theft. All you need is a police report that describes said events.
Of course, I'm not advocating filing a false police report because that is a crime.
I resisted buying a home printer because I mostly print at work. But among the things I've printed since buying a networkable b/w laser printer:
- directions to a party - recipe I needed to buy ingredients for and cook - my county's "noise complaint" form for my neighbor's barking dogs - a "drivers' note" saying he could leave a package for me without my signature - itinerary, maps, etc for a friend who's traveling in Europe for a month - mail-in rebate forms
My neighbor is a lawyer and can use my printer over the network. She has found it handy for printing briefs when she's working late into the night and needs to have printouts before a 7:30 meeting.
I agree with you on using technology to its fullest. I scan a vast majority of my documents and store them electronically. But as much as we may "want" to be a paperless society, we aren't there yet and some things just need to be printed.
What makes me sad is that it is quite difficult for manufactures to actually "convince" a customer that a more expensive printer with a cheaper "refill" is worthwhile.
You would think someone could make a commercial where Exxon or Chevron are selling special cars for $25. But they cost $500 every time you want to fill them up with their special "magic gas". And when you get it for the first time the tank is only 1/4 full.
I finally decided I needed a printer at home. I hate inkjets and knew I wanted a home/small office laser printer. I searched around a lot and finally settled on the Brother HL-5250DN as a factory refurbish from Staples online for $150. It showed up the next day.
It's been a great printer so far. It's fast and prints in a high quality - and in duplex. One of the fun features is that it's networkable so my neighbors who use my WIFI can also print to it as needed.
The consumables don't appear to be too expensive. The high capacity toner cartridge is about $70.
Most of the reviews for this printer were very positive.
My next printer will be a laser. Switch on, print, switch off. This particular one shuts down nearly completely unless you send a print job. It heats up quickly - but it's just as fast as the first time I printed, so I don't think it sits there with the fuser heated up when it's in standby.
And if you're wondering, I work for a footwear company an have no stock in Brother.
Contact is definitely first in my list, because of the "my daddy is an alien" and "your mind can't bear how we actually look" cop-out ending.
A really nice echo of that theme was in the Venture Brothers episode "Twenty Years to Midnight". That was probably one of the best episodes of one of the best cartoons for geeks.
spoiler: "Jonas": Alright, fine! You wanna see?! Here! ["Jonas" starts to rip open his face; we only see everyone's looks of horror and a bright light from "Jonas"'s direction] There! That would have been better?! If I had shown up like that out of nowhere?! Look at you. You practically crapped your pants! [points at Ned] Except him. He crapped his pants!
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe what they can do with this project is quickly solve the easy-to-solve ones. If 9 out of 10 (or some other threshold) people identify a galaxy as clockwise-spiral, then they might be able to consider that one "solved".
That leaves the harder ones and the ones with less consensus for more astronomically valuable people like you (not that you are orders of magnitude more valuable than the rest of us, but rather as an astronomy undergrad your ability to discern these things is hopefully better than ours).
As for what there will be to keep astrophysics students busy - I get the impression that there are plenty of galaxies to go around. And then there's probably other massive amounts of data that need some human attention.
I personally hope this project does not get pulled. If properly designed it CAN be scientifically useful. On top of that it helps get those who are not scientists interested and involved in science. I grew up on Sagan's Cosmos and NOVA programs and at one time wanted to be an astronomer. I'm now a supply chain analyst working on becoming a systems scientist. It's cool that I can contribute even just a little to the field of science in this project. And it just might be the thing that inspires some kid somewhere to take up more science classes.
One wonders just how the subitter used to play Tetris...
That's funny!
Actually, I can't stand to play Tetris for more than a couple minutes. But I had a girlfriend once who could not stop playing the darned game. She had it on her computer and played it - and then had a Gameboy she played it on too when she wasn't on her computer. Hours and hours she would play that game, and she got really angry when I hid the Gameboy.
This site seems addictive to me in that some of the pictures are really astounding, but a lot seem pretty average (lots of ellipticals). But I find I don't want to log out - I want to keep classifying the one it's given me in case the next one will be really cool. It must be the same thing that keeps people playing slot machines...
It's also humbling though. Each picture is probably hundreds of millions of stars. Without going all Sagan, but there could have been thousands of civilizations in that bunch of stars. And I'm looking at it for about a second and deciding "spiral clockwise, next".
You're engaging in a circular argument. If you don't accept the license at install time: you then get the source; you modify and distribute it while keeping your changes secret; then you get sued by the author for violating the license.
I don't think the argument is circular. There is a difference between installing with intent to merely use and to obtain with the goal of revising and distributing.
If I download Gimp so I can edit some graphics, I don't have to agree to the GPL - the person who allowed me to download it did. As a mere user, the GPL is not impacting what I am doing and I don't need to agree to the GPL.
It should be enough for the installer to show the GPL to tell me about it, but I should still be permitted to install and use the program without agreeing to the GPL. As far as I can tell, the GPL covers conveyance and incorporation of the program into other programs - not its mere use.
From the GPL:
9. Acceptance Not Required for Having Copies.
You are not required to accept this License in order to receive or
run a copy of the Program.
At this point, you stand there with your bare face hanging out and say, "Demonstrate to me where I signed or otherwise accepted your license.
While I've not looked at much GPL code - I'm not a developer/coder - it's my understanding that code released under the GPL needs to have the text of the GPL or at least references to it in the code itself.
It would be hard to modify the code while removing the copyright and GPL notices and then say you weren't aware of it.
On top of that, in most cases you can download the source without installing the program itself, so the click-through page on the installer doesn't have much binding effect if you're just getting the source.
Plus a tar xvf - foo_src.tgz won't force you to read any licenses either. Finally as a developer, if you're taking code from other sources, it's up to you to make sure you comply with any licenses or restrictions that come with it. If you can't find a license or you don't agree with it, then you just need to move along and find what you need somewhere else.
Actually, you're spreading a bit of FUD yourself.
t a seIsOutputGPL
You can use OSS all you want and your IP is safely yours. It's only when you want to incorporate OSS software and code in your own code that you are then bound by the OSS terms.
For example, you can:
use OpenOffice to write all your documents
use Gimp to do your image processing
use vi/emacs to edit your source code
use gcc to compile your program (be careful what you link to)
use PDFMaker to generate PDFs from your programs
use Firefox to browse the web
use Thunderbird to handle your e-mail
use apache to serve your web pages
and so on
and your code and works are still completely your own, free to distribute in any way you see fit.
You are free to use OSS in any way and for any purpose. It's only when you want to redistribute it in some way (including incorporating it into your own work) that you incur any restrictions.
I refer you to:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLOutpu
and
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCWhatC
First of all, you have not been blackmailed by the FBI either.
I wasn't implying the FBI was blackmailing me. I interpreted the post I responded to as saying that the FBI has an interest in spying on me in case I could be blackmailed by someone else. Even if I were personally in a position to be blackmailed, there is no way the government can be harmed by such blackmail - so they have no legitimate interest in spying on me.
You could also be blackmailed into helping the crooks commit crimes,
We could all ostensibly be blackmailed into committing crimes: "do this thing, or we'll kill you/your wife/your kids/your pets". That still doesn't give the FBI a legitimate interest in spying on me.
Once I commit a crime, they then have an interest in investigating me. Before that, I am an American citizen and I am supposed to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. Though I guess such ideas are somewhat out of fashion these days.
You are left alone. There are no strange men following you around, and no black helicopter is buzzing over your house.
That's a nice thought. But how can you really know that? The administration has already admitted they are illegally wiretapping US citizens. Do you really think you and I are somehow immune to that? Try requesting the dossier on yourself sometime...
I've never seen an open source license that controls how a person uses the software.
I have to disagree with you there. The installer for many windows versions of OSS software have a clickwrap style page where you have to agree to the conditions of the GPL before you can install the software.
As you said, the GPL (and others) only apply when you want to distribute the code. You shouldn't have to "accept" the GPL to merely use the software. At least that's how I understand it.
It's not so much that it's unexpected. Theory predicts the existence of water on planets. This is just conclusive confirmation... which is pretty cool.
Kind of like how theoretically, in spite of being a male who reads slashdot, I should be able to get laid. It's just pretty cool when I get conclusive proof of that theory.
Actually, black mailing such individuals is a tried and true method of the foreign intelligence services. Hence the legitimate motivation for the FBI to look into such things with respect to security risks.
Well, that's all fine for government employees where the government has an interest in making sure the employees aren't compromised. Those employees have consented in writing to be investigated, watched, and spied on.
I, however, am not a government employee. I'm a student and employee at a large company. The government has no legitimate interest in spying on me or determining my security risk or my risk of committing "moral crimes".
Once I commit a crime, they have an interest in investigating me and my activities. Until then, the should just leave me the hell alone.
When, in the future, someone goes to Microsoft with a voucher and Microsoft conveys a copy of SLES with Samba [slashdot.org] (or some of the other projects [vnunet.com] who're switching) then the GPLv3 will apply:
I'll be the first to admit that I must have missed the Slashdot article about these vouchers - and the certain serveral dupes, so maybe I'm off base here.
But can't Microsoft just convey old copies that are are still covered under GPLv2?
Like most coupons and ads, do the vouchers say something like "not responsible for typographical errors"? Forgetting an expiration date might be considered a typo...
I like to use PDF Creator: http://sourceforge.net/projects/pdfcreator/.
It installs like Acrobat in that it appears as a printer that you simply print to to create your PDF files. This lets you make PDFs of anything you can print.
I haven't encountered anything it doesn't do a decent job with.
Unlike Acrobat, you can't edit/merge your PDFs, but since it's free and makes PDF files, it's already doing a lot.
Why assume that the people getting the boot are customers with legitimate problems and not jerks who are wasting the time of customer service operators and thus making your fees go up?
Probably because most of us have either been or know someone who has been screwed by the phone companies, especially through their billing.
For example, my ex-girlfriend spent 3 weeks in Peru and I was house-sitting for her. Her cellphone was turned off and sitting at my house the whole time.
When she got back, her bill had thousands of dollars of calls to and from all over the place: China to Spain, Mexico to South Africa, Viet Nam to Canada, and so on. Even if she had her phone with her, there was no way she could travel that quickly (calling from Viet Nam at noon and then from Canada at 2:00pm).
Clearly she did not make the calls. She fought for months with the company for months and even against threats for collection.
She was on the phone with them a LOT. Needless to say, she dropped them before they had the chance to drop her.
So, anyway, we probably side against the companies because they have such a long and expansive track record of abusing their customers.
Replacement batteries for cheaper phones are STILL quite expensive. Many batteries are $45 or $50, which is often more than many people pay for the phones! (Which is why when the batteries die, people toss the phones.)
I have a cheap Kyocera phone from Virgin Mobile that cost $20. I've used it for a year and a half and it's been great. The same phone is now free* online (you pay $20, but it comes with a $20 credit on the account). If it dies and stops charging, I'll just go buy another one. The only hassle is transferring my phone book. Or maybe I'll just buy a new phone and transfer the battery.
Anyway, I just can't fathom paying $500 for a phone, even if it's an ipod and can surf the internet too. And then an $80 battery that I can't replace on my own?
Just looked up replacements online... found them for between $0.99 and $15.99.
I think the argument made my fmr. Gov. Kitzhaber (formerly an ER doc) is that the cost of providing the *free*, preventative healthcare is less than providing the emergency treatment. So, over time, even if you are giving free benefits for preventative care, the overall cost to society is less.
The only other choice is to decide that only those who can afford it should get emergency care.
"Illegals" are not the problem. It's the vast numbers of uninsured US-born Americans that are the drain on the system. Even if you take the highest estimates of "illegals" and assume that 100% of them are using emergency medical services, that number is much less than the number of "authorized" Americans using emergency services.
You're points are all very good. But I was quoting the parent post and refuting it myself. Thanks for the support!
Among my peers, I'm very lucky because I am a veteran (served between the Gulf Wars) and have at least basic medical coverage for the rest of my life. It's such a great safety net to have.
One of my friends is stuck in a crappy job that I'm sure is ruining his mental health. But he doesn't dare leave it for another one because he has medical coverage in his crappy job.
I'm thinking about going back to school to pursue a PhD and at least one of the things I don't have to worry about is medical care if I end up needing.
I wonder how much potential is lost in a system like the one in the US when people are trapped in crappy situations that make them unhappy yet they don't dare try to make changes like getting different jobs or going back to school because they can't risk not having medical coverage. It's sad, really.
And don't we already have a huge problem in the US because emergency rooms can't turn away seriously ill people... and all of the uninsured people are basically forced to wait until their minor (cheap to treat) illness becomes serious (expensive to treat), and they come in to the ER?
Not exactly my field of expertise, but the issue is clearly not so simple.
I live in Oregon and our former governor Kitzhaber (who was previously an ER Doc) made exactly that argument. We, as a society, by ensuring everyone can get emergency care, are incurring a certain cost. He argues, with more facts than I have readily available, that if more money were spent on basic healthcare the ER costs reduce by more than the money spent - resulting in a net savings.
He's involved in two major projects two that aim:
http://archimedesmovement.org/
http://wecandobetter.org/
We basically have 3 choices:
1. keep spending more for ER treatment with only so-so outcome
2. spend more on basic/preventative health care and probably save more in the long run with better outcomes
3. stop treating people in the ER who can't pay for it, which may save money in the short term but will probably result in higher societal costs across the board (higher crime, more job insecurity, lost potential)
And the poor people are not only the jobless ones, but those that work for minimum pay, because of being unlucky to be born in the lower classes.
/sarcasm
Didn't you know? There are no classes in the US.
If this was true, anyone could start a hospital that offers the same quality at lower prices and get huge business. By your logic, food prices should be out of control, but they're not.
In other words, the free market handles it just fine.
Not quite. There is tremendous variety in the ways people get food - anyone can even grow it themselves. Even without home-growing there are lots of ways to get basic nutrition really cheap (huge bags of rice and beans are pretty cheap).
The medical field, on the other hand, is highly regulated by the government causing a scarcity in the number of people who can practice medicine. Even if I have a lot of money I can't just go open a hospital because I'd have to staff that hospital with qualified doctors, nurses, physicians assistants, surgeons, specialists, and medical assistants. There are only so many people who are already qualified and the schools can only pump them out so fast.
So you have a situation where the supply is not very elastic and most of the elasticity in demand is to simply choose to get care or not. And often the choice to not get care early on means the overall costs, and demands on the system, will be much much higher when situation gets worse.
A friend of mine, for example, got a deep cut on his finger. Instead of going to the doc-in-a-box and get stitches, he decided to take care of it himself. A couple days later he woke up with a high fever and he was unable to move his entire arm. He ended up spending 3 days in intensive care and another 3 days under observation. The cut had gotten infected and the infection went systemic on him. Thankfully for him he had insurance.
Having insurance he should have gotten it treated right away. But so many Americans lack insurance that they couldn't afford the $300 bill to get the finger treated when it would have been simple. Such a person would also be unable to pay the several thousands of dollars the 6 days in the hospital would have cost. "The system" currently buries this cost in overhead.
In Oregon (where I live now), our former governor, who was an E-room doc, has been advocating for universal coverage here in Oregon. The models used by his team demonstrate that the overall cost to the system would be less by helping ensure people get small things taken care of before they become really big.
Mass. probably is hoping they can save on those overhead costs by making sure everyone has the incentive and financial capability to get insured.
furthermore, putting more citizens on the governments teet, eliminating the need for them to take care of themselves, to take resposbility for their actions, will hurt a country in the long run.
That's all fine for those who actually have the resources to divert directly to healthcare. But many don't - and because we as a society have decided that everyone can get emergency care, those people wait until small things become emergencies.
There are really only 3 choices: pay excessive costs for emergency treatment, pay moderate costs for preventive care, or simply turn away the uninsured and let them die in the streets (and have higher secondary costs such as higher threats of epidemics, higher crime, and lost potential as people end up living lives crippled and damaged when they could have been treated).
The bad news is that there are fees involved. I don't care if the fee is even $1
Well, you know, if you say had an attache case in your car that had a copy of your taxes. Then suddenly you had to go inside the house for a minute. Then you come back out and the bag is gone, voila, you're a victim of identity theft. All you need is a police report that describes said events.
Of course, I'm not advocating filing a false police report because that is a crime.
I resisted buying a home printer because I mostly print at work. But among the things I've printed since buying a networkable b/w laser printer:
- directions to a party
- recipe I needed to buy ingredients for and cook
- my county's "noise complaint" form for my neighbor's barking dogs
- a "drivers' note" saying he could leave a package for me without my signature
- itinerary, maps, etc for a friend who's traveling in Europe for a month
- mail-in rebate forms
My neighbor is a lawyer and can use my printer over the network. She has found it handy for printing briefs when she's working late into the night and needs to have printouts before a 7:30 meeting.
I agree with you on using technology to its fullest. I scan a vast majority of my documents and store them electronically. But as much as we may "want" to be a paperless society, we aren't there yet and some things just need to be printed.
What makes me sad is that it is quite difficult for manufactures to actually "convince" a customer that a more expensive printer with a cheaper "refill" is worthwhile.
You would think someone could make a commercial where Exxon or Chevron are selling special cars for $25. But they cost $500 every time you want to fill them up with their special "magic gas". And when you get it for the first time the tank is only 1/4 full.
I finally decided I needed a printer at home. I hate inkjets and knew I wanted a home/small office laser printer. I searched around a lot and finally settled on the Brother HL-5250DN as a factory refurbish from Staples online for $150. It showed up the next day.
It's been a great printer so far. It's fast and prints in a high quality - and in duplex. One of the fun features is that it's networkable so my neighbors who use my WIFI can also print to it as needed.
The consumables don't appear to be too expensive. The high capacity toner cartridge is about $70.
Most of the reviews for this printer were very positive.
My next printer will be a laser. Switch on, print, switch off.
This particular one shuts down nearly completely unless you send a print job. It heats up quickly - but it's just as fast as the first time I printed, so I don't think it sits there with the fuser heated up when it's in standby.
And if you're wondering, I work for a footwear company an have no stock in Brother.
I'll NEVER buy another inkjet again.
What is that from? I love the imagery... a whole lot said in 4 short sentences.
I always liked these pictures/drawings comparing the magnetic fields of Earth and Mars.
s h_1484710.htm
http://abc.net.au/science/news/space/SpaceRepubli
The Martian picture makes me think of something like the wreckage of a ship floating in space.
Contact is definitely first in my list, because of the "my daddy is an alien" and "your mind can't bear how we actually look" cop-out ending.
A really nice echo of that theme was in the Venture Brothers episode "Twenty Years to Midnight". That was probably one of the best episodes of one of the best cartoons for geeks.
spoiler:
"Jonas": Alright, fine! You wanna see?! Here! ["Jonas" starts to rip open his face; we only see everyone's looks of horror and a bright light from "Jonas"'s direction] There! That would have been better?! If I had shown up like that out of nowhere?! Look at you. You practically crapped your pants! [points at Ned] Except him. He crapped his pants!
and Jenny Agutter at that! Rowrr. At age 12, that makes an indelible impression. :-)
And at 36 too...