The (whole-screen!) refresh times would drive you up a wall within seconds. See if you can find a store that sells Sony Readers so you can see what they're like.
You sound like someone who has never used an e-Ink screen. They are not suitable for general purpose computing devices. They're barely adequate for web browsing. They are good for reading, and little else.
Fertility late in life correlates with longer life. If you took a group of people, randomly selected, and had them have kids only at age 40+, and then had all of their kids have kids only at 40+, and then repeated it down the generations, you get longer-lived people.
Judging by your grammar and spelling, your IQ is in the room temperature range. When you posit that your offspring is not retarded, it strongly enhances your case if you appear to be modestly intelligent.
Antisocial, or just introverted? I mean, let's not confuse the two: I'm introverted, I'm a touch shy, and I'm cool with that, and I don't have a ton of close friends - but I'm capable of going out and talking to people if I need to. I don't hate society, I just don't need it. I would not be surprised if you're the same.
I'm the product of four generations of late-life children. Which means that the only one of my uncles/aunts who has died was a two-pack-a-day smoker, and he lived into his late 70s. The eldest is now in his late 80s and in good health. I have every expectation of hitting 90 in stride and 100 if I'm even a little bit lucky.
It's a spectrum, it makes sense, and the fact that a bunch of whiners cling to it to be their excuse for not getting ahead in life doesn't mean it's not real.
You can call me a successful introvert (who nonetheless has friends, a social life, and can carry on small talk for brief periods) or you can call me a high-functioning autist; it doesn't change a thing about me. The problem is that a bunch of kids with what used to be called "mental retardation" managed to get diagnosed as "autistic" because the latter had better benefits than the former. Quelle surprise.
don't want to learn a different system for keeping records.
Well, isn't it obvious? Many private-practice physicians work at multiple hospitals as well as their own clinics. They get little or no benefit from electronic records, but there is a very definite cost in having to learn how that hospital's system works, remembering their username/password (often username is assigned by IT and passwords have differing requirements for complexity, frequency of change, etc.), where certain pieces of information have to be entered...
By contrast a paper chart is simple and straightforward; the only difference is whether it's front-to-back or back-to-front for oldest to most recent notes.
I can easily get everything I need from a dictated clinic note or admission/discharge note, which is already available in the EHR - so why would I make my life harder by becoming a typist as well as a physician?
Don't get me started. In our EHR, changing the visit # (which is needed to make sure that that patient is billed correctly, i.e. the charge for anesthesia isn't associated with your clinic visit but instead with your actual surgery) takes almost twenty seconds of waiting for the system. The actual clicking part takes less than five.
Most of what you say is totally true, but DICOM does work for images. It's about the only electronic health record system that transfers in and out well.
Physicians on call typically get a LOT of calls during the night, especially if they have to take care of hospitalized patients. That factors into the rate charged - how much you want to be paid for calls that have a 5% chance of getting called at all is a lot less than how much you want to be paid for calls that have a 5% chance of not having to come in.
Depends on the field. My anesthesia group pays for call in our quarterly bonuses, so the older guys don't take as much (or any) while the younger guys take the call to pull in extra money.
Judging by your stated amount of money, I'm guessing you're an internist or a general surgeon? I remember those floor calls from internship...
I doubt that more than a tiny handful of people at the CoC would care at all about AGW if it weren't for the policy prescriptions.
Look, the linked example is something you really ought to think about carefully. And to limit extraneous arguments, let us stipulate that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, that it is increasing due to human activity, and that the globe is warming as a result. The EPA, a federal agency, is attempting to assert without any additional Congressional authorization that it has the power to regulate CO2 emissions. Are you really comfortable with that? Are you comfortable with your worst political enemies doing the same thing in a different agency?
No doubt about it. So what policy should be pursued? Should we kill the global economy in order to stop CO2 emissions? Should we ignore CO2 emissions in the belief that someone, somewhere, soon enough, will invent a technique to decrease CO2 in the atmosphere without affecting industrial output? Should we take the wheat-farmer-in-Saskatchewan approach and welcome the global warming?
Are any of the models good enough to stake our grandchildren's lives on? Because this is the real crux of the problem, and why people care about AGW at all (you'll notice, for example, that the public and media do not give a damn about the latest models in physical chemistry).
The US tax system is already reasonably progressive; it's just not ruinous. Do you really think that people paid 90% taxes year on year? It was something that hit the unlucky bastards who had windfalls. Those whose incomes ran into that bracket used the immense variety of tax dodges available to cut their effective rate. There's a reason the alternative minimum tax exists.
This involved what appears to be long-term disability insurance; certainly not health insurance, as it was in Canada, which has perhaps the smallest private healthcare industry in the entire western world.
Indeed, the global cooling scare that reached its peak around the early 70s attributed the cooling to particulate emissions in the atmosphere. We cleaned up our particulate emissions quite a bit after that.
Well, it's one of the four acceptable forms of jewelry on a man: a wedding ring, a watch, cufflinks, and a tie tack. (Though the last one is pretty suspect.) And I think you meant "ostentatious", not "sententious".
The states that take in federal money aren't necessarily unable to support themselves; many are just receiving large direct transfer payments to individuals within the states. If you made poor states fund themselves, you would find that welfare payments would become quite a bit smaller.
As for the West, there are plenty of states out there that would love for the Feds to sell off their holdings to private individuals...
The fact that taxes are a necessary evil does not make them cease to be evil. I pay for my sewage like any other bill - water to my house is charged for purification and sewage, while water (on a separate meter) to the sprinkler system is charged for purification only. Per gallon. Trash collection is on the same bill. I pay for bridges and roads with gasoline taxes and vehicle registration fees. I pay property taxes for (in theory) police protection and (unusable) public schools.
You've never lived somewhere that government was incompetent, have you?
Slashdot Mirror
I've always wondered why electronics were so expensive in the UK/Europe. That makes total sense.
The (whole-screen!) refresh times would drive you up a wall within seconds. See if you can find a store that sells Sony Readers so you can see what they're like.
You sound like someone who has never used an e-Ink screen. They are not suitable for general purpose computing devices. They're barely adequate for web browsing. They are good for reading, and little else.
Fertility late in life correlates with longer life. If you took a group of people, randomly selected, and had them have kids only at age 40+, and then had all of their kids have kids only at 40+, and then repeated it down the generations, you get longer-lived people.
Judging by your grammar and spelling, your IQ is in the room temperature range. When you posit that your offspring is not retarded, it strongly enhances your case if you appear to be modestly intelligent.
Antisocial, or just introverted? I mean, let's not confuse the two: I'm introverted, I'm a touch shy, and I'm cool with that, and I don't have a ton of close friends - but I'm capable of going out and talking to people if I need to. I don't hate society, I just don't need it. I would not be surprised if you're the same.
It's redefining normal variation as pathology.
Ah, but there are benefits...
I'm the product of four generations of late-life children. Which means that the only one of my uncles/aunts who has died was a two-pack-a-day smoker, and he lived into his late 70s. The eldest is now in his late 80s and in good health. I have every expectation of hitting 90 in stride and 100 if I'm even a little bit lucky.
It's a spectrum, it makes sense, and the fact that a bunch of whiners cling to it to be their excuse for not getting ahead in life doesn't mean it's not real.
You can call me a successful introvert (who nonetheless has friends, a social life, and can carry on small talk for brief periods) or you can call me a high-functioning autist; it doesn't change a thing about me. The problem is that a bunch of kids with what used to be called "mental retardation" managed to get diagnosed as "autistic" because the latter had better benefits than the former. Quelle surprise.
Oh, so - let's just take a couple here - Gordon Brown and Silvio Berlusconi have him beat?
Hot, blonde: why you want to sleep with her. Dumb: increases the odds that she'll sleep with you, since presumably you can manipulate her.
The female corollary is the preference for guys who are assholes: the dismissive treatment is a social signal of higher status, which is desirable.
don't want to learn a different system for keeping records.
Well, isn't it obvious? Many private-practice physicians work at multiple hospitals as well as their own clinics. They get little or no benefit from electronic records, but there is a very definite cost in having to learn how that hospital's system works, remembering their username/password (often username is assigned by IT and passwords have differing requirements for complexity, frequency of change, etc.), where certain pieces of information have to be entered...
By contrast a paper chart is simple and straightforward; the only difference is whether it's front-to-back or back-to-front for oldest to most recent notes.
I can easily get everything I need from a dictated clinic note or admission/discharge note, which is already available in the EHR - so why would I make my life harder by becoming a typist as well as a physician?
It should be INSTANTANEOUSLY fast!
Don't get me started. In our EHR, changing the visit # (which is needed to make sure that that patient is billed correctly, i.e. the charge for anesthesia isn't associated with your clinic visit but instead with your actual surgery) takes almost twenty seconds of waiting for the system. The actual clicking part takes less than five.
Most of what you say is totally true, but DICOM does work for images. It's about the only electronic health record system that transfers in and out well.
Patient sticky labels are a little piece of heaven. Compared to Address-o-Graphs... well, there is no comparison.
Physicians on call typically get a LOT of calls during the night, especially if they have to take care of hospitalized patients. That factors into the rate charged - how much you want to be paid for calls that have a 5% chance of getting called at all is a lot less than how much you want to be paid for calls that have a 5% chance of not having to come in.
Depends on the field. My anesthesia group pays for call in our quarterly bonuses, so the older guys don't take as much (or any) while the younger guys take the call to pull in extra money.
Judging by your stated amount of money, I'm guessing you're an internist or a general surgeon? I remember those floor calls from internship...
In the US? or the UK? It's pretty hard to win a libel suit in the US.
I doubt that more than a tiny handful of people at the CoC would care at all about AGW if it weren't for the policy prescriptions.
Look, the linked example is something you really ought to think about carefully. And to limit extraneous arguments, let us stipulate that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, that it is increasing due to human activity, and that the globe is warming as a result. The EPA, a federal agency, is attempting to assert without any additional Congressional authorization that it has the power to regulate CO2 emissions. Are you really comfortable with that? Are you comfortable with your worst political enemies doing the same thing in a different agency?
Climate modeling is god damn hard.
No doubt about it. So what policy should be pursued? Should we kill the global economy in order to stop CO2 emissions? Should we ignore CO2 emissions in the belief that someone, somewhere, soon enough, will invent a technique to decrease CO2 in the atmosphere without affecting industrial output? Should we take the wheat-farmer-in-Saskatchewan approach and welcome the global warming?
Are any of the models good enough to stake our grandchildren's lives on? Because this is the real crux of the problem, and why people care about AGW at all (you'll notice, for example, that the public and media do not give a damn about the latest models in physical chemistry).
The US tax system is already reasonably progressive; it's just not ruinous. Do you really think that people paid 90% taxes year on year? It was something that hit the unlucky bastards who had windfalls. Those whose incomes ran into that bracket used the immense variety of tax dodges available to cut their effective rate. There's a reason the alternative minimum tax exists.
This involved what appears to be long-term disability insurance; certainly not health insurance, as it was in Canada, which has perhaps the smallest private healthcare industry in the entire western world.
Indeed, the global cooling scare that reached its peak around the early 70s attributed the cooling to particulate emissions in the atmosphere. We cleaned up our particulate emissions quite a bit after that.
Well, it's one of the four acceptable forms of jewelry on a man: a wedding ring, a watch, cufflinks, and a tie tack. (Though the last one is pretty suspect.) And I think you meant "ostentatious", not "sententious".
The states that take in federal money aren't necessarily unable to support themselves; many are just receiving large direct transfer payments to individuals within the states. If you made poor states fund themselves, you would find that welfare payments would become quite a bit smaller.
As for the West, there are plenty of states out there that would love for the Feds to sell off their holdings to private individuals...
The fact that taxes are a necessary evil does not make them cease to be evil. I pay for my sewage like any other bill - water to my house is charged for purification and sewage, while water (on a separate meter) to the sprinkler system is charged for purification only. Per gallon. Trash collection is on the same bill. I pay for bridges and roads with gasoline taxes and vehicle registration fees. I pay property taxes for (in theory) police protection and (unusable) public schools.
You've never lived somewhere that government was incompetent, have you?