A tax break is not debt forgiveness. A tax break is a reduction in the tax you owe.
You get a tax break (I'm assuming you work for a living, which is probably a bad assumption considering your attitude that the government owns everyone and everything) all over the place, from AFDC, EIBT, Standard deductions, healthcare deductions, electric car credit, energy efficiency credit, etc. etc. Not to mention if you don't work, you can get housing credit, EBT food, etc. (except you don't if you're living in your parents basement while planning the Communist Revolution. So YOU are actually a public employee working for the Federal government.
You're looking at it selfishly. Try looking more at what benefits a society as a whole, or in this case, what benefits the most people.
I pay less (in terms of how much I have to work to get the money) and get priority treatment.
What if, instead, you have twice as much money because you worked twice as hard. Would it be immoral to offer $40 because you have more in that case? Or would you compare each others' current funds and the person with the least amount of money should be the only one allowed to bid?
Can anyone provide any evidence that this girl actually has a mitochondrial disorder? I take care of a lot of very complex mito kiddos, and the really sick ones are attached to drips 24 hours a day.
Well... there's the evidence that while being treated for it she was doing okay (could walk, skate, talk, etc.), but when that treatment was removed and denied, she deteriorated to the point that she was in a wheelchair and had trouble talking, then when treatment for mito resumed, she improved significantly.
Yes, certainly the parents are at fault here, as when their daughter was kidnapped by the state and held captive by the doctors, for some reason the refused to cooperate with the kidnappers, and even called them bad names!
The parents have found a single doctor who said it might be mitochondrial problems, but after all this time it has still not been established. The parents refuse to get a proper muscle biopsy done, something that could clarify if that is the actual cause.
The hospital had full custody of her and provided any treatment they saw fit for 16 months. Why didn't they do a "proper muscle biopsy"? Oh, right, because one of their "experts" diagnosed it as psychological, so there was no need to check for anything else. Even while her health was getting worse and worse the whole time.
Aside from that, a muscle biopsy (typically multiple are required, and they are painful) will not necessarily produce a definitive answer.
For some conditions it remains a real challenge to detect the mitochondrial abnormality. This might be because the biochemical change that we see is very subtle or alternatively because there are many, many hundreds of different genetic defects in patients with mitochondrial disease. The identification of these mutations can be like searching for a needle in a haystack.
Not sure why you want to vilify the parents and accuse them of lying after it is so clear the Children's Hospital is at fault, here. Wait... are you posting from Boston?
Boston Children's Hospital may be "private" by your definition, but it's an entirely tax-exempt organization that receives millions of dollars in Federal funding every year. It's more like a public/private partnership.
That said, I don't think that justifies attacking the hospital electronically or physically; just through legal channels. But the hospital and courts were complete and utter pieces of shit in this case.
So the courts were utter pieces of shit, but you still think there is some "legal channel" available to attack them through? There really wasn't, which is why this guy is a hero for bringing attention to the malfeasance. Legal channels had already failed the child and her family, and left her at the mercy of these psychopathic bureaucrats.
No, you're completely missing the point. The point is, the market was able to create a moral outcome (lowering the shortage of drivers) by using market incentives (pay drivers more so there will be more drivers).
Would it be more "moral" to leave the rates alone, allow the shortage of drivers as-is, and have more people standing on the sidewalk unable to get an Uber ride home?
affecting the economy as a whole due to lack of options and an enormous entry barrier.
The most effective barriers to entry are the ones erected by government regulation (often at the behest of incumbent corporations). Companies are rarely able to erect those barriers themselves without compliant government bureaucrats. As an example, when Uber and Lyft left Austin, TX, 5 other ridesharing companies showed up to take up the slack (two of the dedicated to Austin).
When supply is constricted, prices should go up so the rides go to those who need them most.
You assume that those with the greatest need also have the most resources? I'll let you explain how that's supposed to work.
So we should go with "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"? I really don't think that's going to increase the supply of Uber drivers when there are a lot of people looking for a ride. Do we threaten the Uber drivers with jail if they decide they don't want to go to work when there are more passengers than cars? Seems it should work better to offer them a little more pay. You catch more bees with honey than vinegar, as it were.
I'm running Nougat, and could turn off location for Google Play Store exactly as you describe without issue (actually, it was already off on mine). I suspect the article meant Google Play Service.
I just checked Google Play Service. It wants permissions for quite a few things, but Location is not among them.
The GPS receiver isn't on when no app is using it, even if you enabled it. The issue is that the app store uses GPS often to get your location and sends the location to Google, and you can't disable that without disabling location services altogether.
Are you sure about that? Because I just did it on my Android 6 phone...
You can try to deny Google Play access to your handheld's location by opening the Settings app and digging through Apps -> Google Play Store -> Permissions, and flipping the switch for "location." But you'll be told you can't just shut out Google Play services: you have to switch off location services for all apps if you want to block the store from knowing your whereabouts.
Is this something new in Nougat? (Does anyone even run Nougat on anything yet?)
I'm on Marshmallow (6.0.1), and I can turn off location permissions for the Google Play Store, and wasn't "told" anything when I did. Everything else works just fine. I can even turn on location for games or other apps, and they still work, and Google Play still doesn't have access to location. So I'm not sure what the summary is talking about, here.
You'd think that, but they've developed a bad case of stockholm syndrome since he won the primary.
The neocons are mostly supporting Clinton. Her foreign policy is very like the neocons. The consummate Neocons, the Kagans, have even endorsed Hillary Clinton.
I live in Brat's district. He's a Tea Party douche-nozzle who sides with the plutocrats every time he votes on a bill. He's just as bought as the rest of them.
So you don't like his politics, so you consider him "bought", even though it's bullshit. In fact, the "Tea Party" association is bullshit, too. He was tagged with it even though he never did anything to associate himself with any tea party groups and pointed it out. Nice confirmation bias you have going on, there.
Brat is representing his constituents, and doing a great job of it. That's not something that can be said of the rep he ousted, Eric Cantor. Cantor represented himself and the big banks, and that's about it.
That's okay, because all those apps will be on ONE BOX. That's what I want. Right now I have a CableCard tuner that only works with all channels on Windows Media Center. If I want to watch Netflix or Hulu, I have to close that out (they dropped Netflix from WMC), and either switch to the FireTV or Chrome, and use one or more DIFFERENT remotes. It sucks right now.
Much hope is being held out for the SiliconDust effort to make a working DVR app [kickstarter.com]... however they are a year behind schedule.
I still have a little bit of hope, too, but they seem to be going in the wrong direction right now. The did a "proof of concept" Android app, then dropped it and it still does very little. There is still no way to view "protected" content, which was the whole reason for using WMC in the first place. And, after having seen how Microsoft shafts everyone (including their customers) whenever they feel like it, they are STILL putting all their effort into Windows 10 "universal" apps and XBox.
So after a year late delivery anything very useful, I'm still left wonder what kind of device to look at using for SiliconDust apps, I just know I have no interest in an XBox or a Windows device.
Slashdot Mirror
A tax break is not debt forgiveness. A tax break is a reduction in the tax you owe.
You get a tax break (I'm assuming you work for a living, which is probably a bad assumption considering your attitude that the government owns everyone and everything) all over the place, from AFDC, EIBT, Standard deductions, healthcare deductions, electric car credit, energy efficiency credit, etc. etc. Not to mention if you don't work, you can get housing credit, EBT food, etc. (except you don't if you're living in your parents basement while planning the Communist Revolution. So YOU are actually a public employee working for the Federal government.
Tax breaks are federal funding too.
NO. No, it's not.
Good Riddance to Bad Rubbish!
You're looking at it selfishly. Try looking more at what benefits a society as a whole, or in this case, what benefits the most people.
I pay less (in terms of how much I have to work to get the money) and get priority treatment.
What if, instead, you have twice as much money because you worked twice as hard. Would it be immoral to offer $40 because you have more in that case? Or would you compare each others' current funds and the person with the least amount of money should be the only one allowed to bid?
And there is not a single private corporation in the USA who does not get a lot of federal and state funding.
WUT?? LOL!
Can anyone provide any evidence that this girl actually has a mitochondrial disorder? I take care of a lot of very complex mito kiddos, and the really sick ones are attached to drips 24 hours a day.
Well... there's the evidence that while being treated for it she was doing okay (could walk, skate, talk, etc.), but when that treatment was removed and denied, she deteriorated to the point that she was in a wheelchair and had trouble talking, then when treatment for mito resumed, she improved significantly.
So, there's that.
Yes, certainly the parents are at fault here, as when their daughter was kidnapped by the state and held captive by the doctors, for some reason the refused to cooperate with the kidnappers, and even called them bad names!
The parents have found a single doctor who said it might be mitochondrial problems, but after all this time it has still not been established. The parents refuse to get a proper muscle biopsy done, something that could clarify if that is the actual cause.
The hospital had full custody of her and provided any treatment they saw fit for 16 months. Why didn't they do a "proper muscle biopsy"? Oh, right, because one of their "experts" diagnosed it as psychological, so there was no need to check for anything else. Even while her health was getting worse and worse the whole time.
Aside from that, a muscle biopsy (typically multiple are required, and they are painful) will not necessarily produce a definitive answer.
Not sure why you want to vilify the parents and accuse them of lying after it is so clear the Children's Hospital is at fault, here. Wait... are you posting from Boston?
But can a private hospital legally take custody away from a parent? If anything, the hospital is negligent by not further exploring options.
Well, they did it. All it took was a overzealous state bureaucracy and a compliant court system.
Private hospitals. Now part of the 'nanny state'.
Boston Children's Hospital may be "private" by your definition, but it's an entirely tax-exempt organization that receives millions of dollars in Federal funding every year. It's more like a public/private partnership.
So, yea, part of the 'nanny state'.
That said, I don't think that justifies attacking the hospital electronically or physically; just through legal channels. But the hospital and courts were complete and utter pieces of shit in this case.
So the courts were utter pieces of shit, but you still think there is some "legal channel" available to attack them through? There really wasn't, which is why this guy is a hero for bringing attention to the malfeasance. Legal channels had already failed the child and her family, and left her at the mercy of these psychopathic bureaucrats.
Given the number of other things Apple's done like this I'll side on this becoming a trend.
Yep. People that have to have the latest Apple device will continue to need the latest Apple device.
the market trumps basic morality
No, you're completely missing the point. The point is, the market was able to create a moral outcome (lowering the shortage of drivers) by using market incentives (pay drivers more so there will be more drivers).
Would it be more "moral" to leave the rates alone, allow the shortage of drivers as-is, and have more people standing on the sidewalk unable to get an Uber ride home?
affecting the economy as a whole due to lack of options and an enormous entry barrier.
The most effective barriers to entry are the ones erected by government regulation (often at the behest of incumbent corporations). Companies are rarely able to erect those barriers themselves without compliant government bureaucrats. As an example, when Uber and Lyft left Austin, TX, 5 other ridesharing companies showed up to take up the slack (two of the dedicated to Austin).
When supply is constricted, prices should go up so the rides go to those who need them most.
You assume that those with the greatest need also have the most resources? I'll let you explain how that's supposed to work.
So we should go with "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"? I really don't think that's going to increase the supply of Uber drivers when there are a lot of people looking for a ride. Do we threaten the Uber drivers with jail if they decide they don't want to go to work when there are more passengers than cars? Seems it should work better to offer them a little more pay. You catch more bees with honey than vinegar, as it were.
Prepare for the onrush of /. Musk worshipers defending Teslas and everything Musk does and says...
I'm running Nougat, and could turn off location for Google Play Store exactly as you describe without issue (actually, it was already off on mine). I suspect the article meant Google Play Service.
I just checked Google Play Service. It wants permissions for quite a few things, but Location is not among them.
The GPS receiver isn't on when no app is using it, even if you enabled it. The issue is that the app store uses GPS often to get your location and sends the location to Google, and you can't disable that without disabling location services altogether.
Are you sure about that? Because I just did it on my Android 6 phone...
You can try to deny Google Play access to your handheld's location by opening the Settings app and digging through Apps -> Google Play Store -> Permissions, and flipping the switch for "location." But you'll be told you can't just shut out Google Play services: you have to switch off location services for all apps if you want to block the store from knowing your whereabouts.
Is this something new in Nougat? (Does anyone even run Nougat on anything yet?)
I'm on Marshmallow (6.0.1), and I can turn off location permissions for the Google Play Store, and wasn't "told" anything when I did. Everything else works just fine. I can even turn on location for games or other apps, and they still work, and Google Play still doesn't have access to location. So I'm not sure what the summary is talking about, here.
Seriously, "Unions" are never the answer.
Nope. That would be beer. Beer is the answer. Beer and hamburgers.
You'd think that, but they've developed a bad case of stockholm syndrome since he won the primary.
The neocons are mostly supporting Clinton. Her foreign policy is very like the neocons. The consummate Neocons, the Kagans, have even endorsed Hillary Clinton.
Meanwhile, liberal doctors think she has Parkinson's Disease.
I live in Brat's district. He's a Tea Party douche-nozzle who sides with the plutocrats every time he votes on a bill. He's just as bought as the rest of them.
So you don't like his politics, so you consider him "bought", even though it's bullshit. In fact, the "Tea Party" association is bullshit, too. He was tagged with it even though he never did anything to associate himself with any tea party groups and pointed it out. Nice confirmation bias you have going on, there.
Brat is representing his constituents, and doing a great job of it. That's not something that can be said of the rep he ousted, Eric Cantor. Cantor represented himself and the big banks, and that's about it.
That's okay, because all those apps will be on ONE BOX. That's what I want. Right now I have a CableCard tuner that only works with all channels on Windows Media Center. If I want to watch Netflix or Hulu, I have to close that out (they dropped Netflix from WMC), and either switch to the FireTV or Chrome, and use one or more DIFFERENT remotes. It sucks right now.
Much hope is being held out for the SiliconDust effort to make a working DVR app [kickstarter.com]... however they are a year behind schedule.
I still have a little bit of hope, too, but they seem to be going in the wrong direction right now. The did a "proof of concept" Android app, then dropped it and it still does very little. There is still no way to view "protected" content, which was the whole reason for using WMC in the first place. And, after having seen how Microsoft shafts everyone (including their customers) whenever they feel like it, they are STILL putting all their effort into Windows 10 "universal" apps and XBox.
So after a year late delivery anything very useful, I'm still left wonder what kind of device to look at using for SiliconDust apps, I just know I have no interest in an XBox or a Windows device.