> Ancient felines hunted crop-destroying rats and mice for early farmers, and in return we provided food and protection.
> In case city dwellers get the wrong idea, felines hut crop-destroying rats and mice for current farmers, also. Everyone works on a farm, including the pets.
Similar, but in my case I actually get a popup that casts aspersions on my power supply for not being genuine, and it's not intermittent -- it will always power the laptop, but it will not charge the battery.
Good point, but to be cost effective you need to know how to boil water. And this is where, I think, these cost comparisons go wonky. If the comparison is the fast food value menu vs the convenience food section in the freezer compartment, you could make a case that fast food is cheaper. (Although it can't be good for you.) But if you buy in bulk and cook for yourself, you can definitely be healthier and cheaper than McDonald's (fercrissake!, my internal voice wants to add).
I think it comes down to putting a little time and planning into eating, which isn't quite as convenient as dipping into a paper bag while killing zombies.
> It IS better for the DNC as it provides a nice new entitlement to ensnare unsuspecting weak individuals into a lifelong servitude of voting for the candidates the Party Dictates they vote for.
Except... how could that work if the entitlement in question is looked forward even less than having a live frog for breakfast?
> Those who complained about their canceled plans actually got better plans - less cost and more coverage.
Um, really? We didn't. Our plans (wife and I) were canceled because the company didn't want to pay the cadillac tax. For a replacement, we get higher cost, and much higher deductible. The strategy, as I understand it, is that you are supposed to live off your FSA for the first five months or so before your coverage actually starts paying for stuff. This is a definition of "better plans" of which I am unaware.
My company issues Dell laptops, and in the years I've been here I've been issued three as the old ones go out of service. As a result, and because I like to have chargers at home and at work, I've ended up with a fair number of chargers. I've noticed, though, that my most recent laptop won't charge when connected to the previous two model's chargers, despite being the same voltage and current. It'll pop up an error something like "this is not a Dell charger. The laptop will operate but the battery will not charge". I'm guessing some kind of DRM mechanism in the charger itself.
Assuming that for the sake of argument, specifying a common connector, voltage and current isn't going to do a whole lot of good if the charger and laptop have circuitry that must validly handshake before charging occurs. Unless they're going to tackle that issue also.
Some kids legitimately have the affliction. I would never argue that it doesn't exist, just that it's overdiagnosed, which I think was the point of TFA. Sounds like your kid was a borderline case but actually in the 5%, and congratulations to you for taking the harder path and dealing with it without medication.
Let's not argue amongst ourselves. Parents of kids like yours who are truly attention deficit, and kids like mine who are wildly misdiagnosed by educators with no medical training, should have no beef with each other. It's not the tool that's at fault, it's the uses to which the tool is sometimes put that's at issue.
Around third grade, the school diagnosed my daughter with ADHD. Not knowing any better, I talked to her GP, who recommended a psychiatrist. A few days later, we all went to see the psych. He did not interact with my daughter at all, just gave my wife and I each a questionnaire to fill out. We came to the second appointment with questionnaires filled out, again with our daughter. He again did not interact with her in any way, and she fell asleep on the couch while we were talking. He scored the tests, and announced that she was borderline ADHD. He went into another room and came back with some drug literature, saying we had a choice of this kind or that kind of Ritalin. I tried to drill down a little, asking what he was basing his diagnosis on, and whether he was at any time going to test the child himself. But he made it clear that this was the extent of the service he provided.
It's an assembly line, with each person acting as a well oiled component to move you along the process. The school teachers zero in on any kid that's not absolutely fitting in or absolutely attentive. The GPs get these requests frequently, and point the parents at the specialist, who makes his diagnosis based on a questionnaire that has questions like "does your child like to climb?" (a) never, (b) sometimes (c) frequently. The insurance pays for most of it -- there's only a minor copay for the doctor visits and for the medication.
I revolted, got a second opinion, got a completely different answer. Some easy tests -- done with the actual child, not just depending on the parents' opinion, got to the root of the problem -- my daughter was severely dyslexic. I put her through a summer of tests and remedial training on my own dime, took the inch thick findings to the next parent/teacher conference, was told that -- I swear I am not making this up -- the school didn't recognize dyslexia as an affliction, and that my daughter would be so much happier on Ritalin, "my son takes it, and he is doing so much better with his life". I'd hear this a lot from school teachers and admins -- that they invariably had a son or daughter or niece who's life was changed by Ritalin.
I continued to research, and the more I read the more it looked like Ritalin really did help certain kids, but it was overprescribed by a factor of three or four depending on which study you believed.
The school made it clear that this was the only solution they would consider.
I pulled her out of school. This caused quite a furor and I had to justify my decision in front of eleven people -- counselors, teachers, principal... it was a tense meeting. I summarized it thus: "Each of you have a report in front of you by actual doctors, on their findings on my daughter's affliction. They have diagnosed my daughter as severely dyslexic. You have diagnosed her as ADHD. Are you doctors?" Silence. She was homeschooled for three years, then applied and was accepted into an art magnet school. Completely different environment, and she thrived.
Your mileage, as always, may vary, and not all school systems are alike, but in ours, there seemed to be a huge push to put as many kids on the drug as possible. I always wondered what some sleuthing would turn up regarding donations made by drug manufacturers.
I don't know any more about this than I was told by a windshield tech, but the people they send out to fix chips in windows so they don't develop into cracks, first ask if you've ever used rainx on your windshield. I'm told that whatever they use to repair chips (I'm totally ignorant on the technology) doesn't work on windshields treated with rainx.
On the other hand, rainx works really well for its intended purpose.
I'm not a huge user of Netflix. I mostly have it as a sop to wife and daughter so I don't have to pay for cable. What I've noticed in passing is that the Netflix GUI is set up to encourage binge viewing, much like certain video games are crafted so that the most natural thing to do upon completing a level is to start the next level. When watching a series, the next episode is cued up and takes only a single press to play. It's much more work to find something else to watch. Although this almost certainly isn't the root cause of binge viewing, I suspect it's a factor.
Another factor is that series with a story arc work better when you can see several episodes end to end, instead of waiting a a week as your memory of details fade, to watch the next. I think writers can write tighter stories with subtler details if they can assume you don't have a week to forget after 43 minutes.
As to how this will affect the industry, I'm not sure. I find it interesting that much TV is still written for the "tv tray generation", the progressively older group that watches whatever is on, in the order and on the days chosen by the network. I don't think that's a viable business model anymore.
How does this affect content creation? Maybe the industry will have to get used to creating shows for less money.
If they're talking about birth defects in general, I believe the rate is something like 3% in the USA, so a 30% kick on that would increase the risk to 3.9%.
Good! That's good information. So, the next question might be, are we talking about a 30% increase in all kinds of birth defects, or a 30% increase in only certain kinds of defects? If the types of defects in question are themselves rare *for defects*, we still may be talking about a vanishingly small number.
Slashdot Mirror
> Ancient felines hunted crop-destroying rats and mice for early farmers, and in return we provided food and protection.
> In case city dwellers get the wrong idea, felines hut crop-destroying rats and mice for current farmers, also. Everyone works on a farm, including the pets.
Similar, but in my case I actually get a popup that casts aspersions on my power supply for not being genuine, and it's not intermittent -- it will always power the laptop, but it will not charge the battery.
Good point, but to be cost effective you need to know how to boil water. And this is where, I think, these cost comparisons go wonky. If the comparison is the fast food value menu vs the convenience food section in the freezer compartment, you could make a case that fast food is cheaper. (Although it can't be good for you.) But if you buy in bulk and cook for yourself, you can definitely be healthier and cheaper than McDonald's (fercrissake!, my internal voice wants to add).
I think it comes down to putting a little time and planning into eating, which isn't quite as convenient as dipping into a paper bag while killing zombies.
> It IS better for the DNC as it provides a nice new entitlement to ensnare unsuspecting weak individuals into a lifelong servitude of voting for the candidates the Party Dictates they vote for.
Except... how could that work if the entitlement in question is looked forward even less than having a live frog for breakfast?
I suspect that used textbooks are quite a bit cheaper than new ebooks.
How would a used ebook market work, I wonder?
You're right, I should have said, end well for us, not Microsoft....
> Those who complained about their canceled plans actually got better plans - less cost and more coverage.
Um, really? We didn't. Our plans (wife and I) were canceled because the company didn't want to pay the cadillac tax. For a replacement, we get higher cost, and much higher deductible. The strategy, as I understand it, is that you are supposed to live off your FSA for the first five months or so before your coverage actually starts paying for stuff. This is a definition of "better plans" of which I am unaware.
That's absolutely brilliant.
I'm trying to think how this could end well.
Right, no cronyism here. Move along now, nothing to see.
My company issues Dell laptops, and in the years I've been here I've been issued three as the old ones go out of service. As a result, and because I like to have chargers at home and at work, I've ended up with a fair number of chargers. I've noticed, though, that my most recent laptop won't charge when connected to the previous two model's chargers, despite being the same voltage and current. It'll pop up an error something like "this is not a Dell charger. The laptop will operate but the battery will not charge". I'm guessing some kind of DRM mechanism in the charger itself.
Assuming that for the sake of argument, specifying a common connector, voltage and current isn't going to do a whole lot of good if the charger and laptop have circuitry that must validly handshake before charging occurs. Unless they're going to tackle that issue also.
Funny you should mention that...
Um, why?
Agreed, if the process of reimbursement isn't too onerous, it's inconvenient but not quite the rip-off it first seems. Still annoying.
Some kids legitimately have the affliction. I would never argue that it doesn't exist, just that it's overdiagnosed, which I think was the point of TFA. Sounds like your kid was a borderline case but actually in the 5%, and congratulations to you for taking the harder path and dealing with it without medication.
Let's not argue amongst ourselves. Parents of kids like yours who are truly attention deficit, and kids like mine who are wildly misdiagnosed by educators with no medical training, should have no beef with each other. It's not the tool that's at fault, it's the uses to which the tool is sometimes put that's at issue.
Around third grade, the school diagnosed my daughter with ADHD. Not knowing any better, I talked to her GP, who recommended a psychiatrist. A few days later, we all went to see the psych. He did not interact with my daughter at all, just gave my wife and I each a questionnaire to fill out. We came to the second appointment with questionnaires filled out, again with our daughter. He again did not interact with her in any way, and she fell asleep on the couch while we were talking. He scored the tests, and announced that she was borderline ADHD. He went into another room and came back with some drug literature, saying we had a choice of this kind or that kind of Ritalin. I tried to drill down a little, asking what he was basing his diagnosis on, and whether he was at any time going to test the child himself. But he made it clear that this was the extent of the service he provided.
It's an assembly line, with each person acting as a well oiled component to move you along the process. The school teachers zero in on any kid that's not absolutely fitting in or absolutely attentive. The GPs get these requests frequently, and point the parents at the specialist, who makes his diagnosis based on a questionnaire that has questions like "does your child like to climb?" (a) never, (b) sometimes (c) frequently. The insurance pays for most of it -- there's only a minor copay for the doctor visits and for the medication.
I revolted, got a second opinion, got a completely different answer. Some easy tests -- done with the actual child, not just depending on the parents' opinion, got to the root of the problem -- my daughter was severely dyslexic. I put her through a summer of tests and remedial training on my own dime, took the inch thick findings to the next parent/teacher conference, was told that -- I swear I am not making this up -- the school didn't recognize dyslexia as an affliction, and that my daughter would be so much happier on Ritalin, "my son takes it, and he is doing so much better with his life". I'd hear this a lot from school teachers and admins -- that they invariably had a son or daughter or niece who's life was changed by Ritalin.
I continued to research, and the more I read the more it looked like Ritalin really did help certain kids, but it was overprescribed by a factor of three or four depending on which study you believed.
The school made it clear that this was the only solution they would consider.
I pulled her out of school. This caused quite a furor and I had to justify my decision in front of eleven people -- counselors, teachers, principal... it was a tense meeting. I summarized it thus: "Each of you have a report in front of you by actual doctors, on their findings on my daughter's affliction. They have diagnosed my daughter as severely dyslexic. You have diagnosed her as ADHD. Are you doctors?" Silence. She was homeschooled for three years, then applied and was accepted into an art magnet school. Completely different environment, and she thrived.
Your mileage, as always, may vary, and not all school systems are alike, but in ours, there seemed to be a huge push to put as many kids on the drug as possible. I always wondered what some sleuthing would turn up regarding donations made by drug manufacturers.
> The company went so far as to retroactively withdrawn the shows from Amazon, so that customers who have already paid for them no longer have access.
So now how do you feel about keeping your content "in the cloud"?
I don't know any more about this than I was told by a windshield tech, but the people they send out to fix chips in windows so they don't develop into cracks, first ask if you've ever used rainx on your windshield. I'm told that whatever they use to repair chips (I'm totally ignorant on the technology) doesn't work on windshields treated with rainx.
On the other hand, rainx works really well for its intended purpose.
I'm not a huge user of Netflix. I mostly have it as a sop to wife and daughter so I don't have to pay for cable. What I've noticed in passing is that the Netflix GUI is set up to encourage binge viewing, much like certain video games are crafted so that the most natural thing to do upon completing a level is to start the next level. When watching a series, the next episode is cued up and takes only a single press to play. It's much more work to find something else to watch. Although this almost certainly isn't the root cause of binge viewing, I suspect it's a factor.
Another factor is that series with a story arc work better when you can see several episodes end to end, instead of waiting a a week as your memory of details fade, to watch the next. I think writers can write tighter stories with subtler details if they can assume you don't have a week to forget after 43 minutes.
As to how this will affect the industry, I'm not sure. I find it interesting that much TV is still written for the "tv tray generation", the progressively older group that watches whatever is on, in the order and on the days chosen by the network. I don't think that's a viable business model anymore.
How does this affect content creation? Maybe the industry will have to get used to creating shows for less money.
This kind of thing is outright theft so let's hope others start to think twice before outsourcing to India.
But then who will answer all my technical support questions?
Maybe someone who actually knows the answer?
Yeah, in 2007 my chances of being adopted by Angelina Jolie went up 33%. I wonder what she's going to name me.
> There is still some review from the DA's office. They don't like to just lose cases.
Sigh. One would think so. Still, strange things happen in court.
If they're talking about birth defects in general, I believe the rate is something like 3% in the USA, so a 30% kick on that would increase the risk to 3.9%.
Good! That's good information. So, the next question might be, are we talking about a 30% increase in all kinds of birth defects, or a 30% increase in only certain kinds of defects? If the types of defects in question are themselves rare *for defects*, we still may be talking about a vanishingly small number.
Wow, that took a lot of courage, to post as yourself rather than anonymously.
Made you look!