If you dig into the story- the real culprit is Oracle Consulting, who took the $300 million to deliver a website that is little more than "Download this 19 page PDF, fill it out, mail it in, get the wrong answer back, get your identity stolen by prison labor, get the wrong quote back because our data interchange with the federal government doesn't work and we don't know what your particular subsidy is, send in 12 checks for amounts varying from 0-100% of the bill as we figure the subsidy out, and get overcharged for a health insurance plan that raises the deductible 5000% from the one we canceled to put you into this mess."
Those 44 people must either be idiots, or unemployed to have the time to deal with the incompetent people at Cover Oregon.
But if the mother's consent is all that matters, then child protective services is intervening as much as any other pro-lifer in forcing her to care for the child.
I'm firmly of the belief that consent is so irrational as to be an impossible to judge metric. As you say, it's a case by case thing.
Marxism was always religion. That's why the actual revolutionaries attempted to enforce atheism by law, so that the people would have no other hope than the State.
I thought the identifier was the 15 or 16 digit number on the front of the card, and the authenticator was the three-to-four digit number on the back of the card (except in cases where a keypad is available, and then the identifier is the 15 or 16 digit number encoded on the mag strip and the authenticator is your 4 digit pin).
And that, actually, is a good point- that a successful religion *must* have some reason behind it. Observation and theorization based on human nature, is most of what theology really is. In a way it is misnamed. It isn't study of God. It is study of human reaction to God, and thus is a sub-branch of sociology to begin with.
It took a rational religion to create the scientific method. I'd suggest that it takes at least a reasonable religion to survive more than a few generations at all.
But I seem to have strayed from my original, which wasn't so much about religious theology being within the bounds of its own axioms, but science straying away from testable predictions and into fictional, non testable, conclusions. Others in this thread, however, have pointed out that's more "pop sci" than science, more media than actual experimentation. Including in the case of the original article, which was using the primary definition of a hologram (that is, an n+1 dimensional object encoded into n-dimensional space) as opposed to the popular definition of a hologram (a simulation of a n+1 dimensional object projected from an n-dimensional projector). Another good example of the later is Richard Dawkin's Selfish Gene- complete science fiction analogy masquerading as science.
So you'd agree with the current attempts to limit abortion to before 20 weeks, since that's scientifically proven pain-capable? Or maybe 8 weeks, which is detectable EEG and thus thought?
Likely because it would open a can of worms that would be hard to close. After all, I don't know anybody who skipped straight from conception to childhood, do you?
One of the more modern ones was the Roman Catholic Papal Encyclical Humanae Vitae, which listed four specific predictions on what would happen in a culture that failed to respect life.
You may not accept the axioms, but the reasoning was sound, and within those axioms, all four items have indeed come true in the United States, at least.
I realize this example is a bit mundane, and really is no better than what many sociologists have also predicted, but I'm trying to point out that reason and religion are not necessarily enemies.
Isn't that precisely what modern pro-choicers also think? That different classes of persons should have different rights? The difference being that most aren't willing to call fetuses people....
Religions make accurate predictions within their axiomatic set- if they didn't, they wouldn't survive more than one generation (and in fact, many smaller cults *don't* survive the death of their founder, that's pretty much the difference between a cult of personality and an actual belief system- their predictions don't survive being tested). So I fail to see your difference. Science makes accurate predictions within its axiomatic set, and theories that don't make accurate predictions are thrown out. What is the difference between that, and the religious system that makes accurate predictions within its axiomatic set and calls inaccurate predictions heresy and throws them out?
Send offer and respond with resume, isn't that a bit backwards?
Oh, and like a cousin once told my great grandmother- nobody's going to get excited over somebody born in 1970 who needs a girdle. (ok, so the original version was more nobody's going to r*p3 a woman born in 1902, but the same idea applies).
And then from a Starbucks, using their wifi, post a meme picture saying that "X website has no security- don't use a critical password or personally identifying information for your kids unless you want them kidnapped by a sex abuser" on the App's facebook page.
Never own up to starting the meme, but watch things change VERY quickly.
Cover Oregon is full of paper-related security breaches. Until they fix the security process, I for one will NOT be trusting them with my personal data- especially not filled out on paper and snail mailed.
Slashdot Mirror
Too bad parent posted AC, because that short story is the absolute best futurist discussion of the topic.
You assume google wants to get rid of software patents, rather than corner the market?
At which point your insurance will just claim you reached your yearly limit, and refuse to pay anyway.
That's an average patient load of 365/physician. Probably much higher considering specialists.
If you dig into the story- the real culprit is Oracle Consulting, who took the $300 million to deliver a website that is little more than "Download this 19 page PDF, fill it out, mail it in, get the wrong answer back, get your identity stolen by prison labor, get the wrong quote back because our data interchange with the federal government doesn't work and we don't know what your particular subsidy is, send in 12 checks for amounts varying from 0-100% of the bill as we figure the subsidy out, and get overcharged for a health insurance plan that raises the deductible 5000% from the one we canceled to put you into this mess."
Those 44 people must either be idiots, or unemployed to have the time to deal with the incompetent people at Cover Oregon.
As it said in the story on auto driving cars- he should just ask taxi drivers.
But if the mother's consent is all that matters, then child protective services is intervening as much as any other pro-lifer in forcing her to care for the child.
I'm firmly of the belief that consent is so irrational as to be an impossible to judge metric. As you say, it's a case by case thing.
Marxism was always religion. That's why the actual revolutionaries attempted to enforce atheism by law, so that the people would have no other hope than the State.
I thought the identifier was the 15 or 16 digit number on the front of the card, and the authenticator was the three-to-four digit number on the back of the card (except in cases where a keypad is available, and then the identifier is the 15 or 16 digit number encoded on the mag strip and the authenticator is your 4 digit pin).
And that, actually, is a good point- that a successful religion *must* have some reason behind it. Observation and theorization based on human nature, is most of what theology really is. In a way it is misnamed. It isn't study of God. It is study of human reaction to God, and thus is a sub-branch of sociology to begin with.
It took a rational religion to create the scientific method. I'd suggest that it takes at least a reasonable religion to survive more than a few generations at all.
But I seem to have strayed from my original, which wasn't so much about religious theology being within the bounds of its own axioms, but science straying away from testable predictions and into fictional, non testable, conclusions. Others in this thread, however, have pointed out that's more "pop sci" than science, more media than actual experimentation. Including in the case of the original article, which was using the primary definition of a hologram (that is, an n+1 dimensional object encoded into n-dimensional space) as opposed to the popular definition of a hologram (a simulation of a n+1 dimensional object projected from an n-dimensional projector). Another good example of the later is Richard Dawkin's Selfish Gene- complete science fiction analogy masquerading as science.
Consent was given by your mother when she had sex, except in cases of rape and incest.
Continuing consent is another issue. Say she decided not to consent to feeding you after birth, did she have a right to starve you?
I ask because I find many of the pro-choice arguments are not very well thought out.
So you'd agree with the current attempts to limit abortion to before 20 weeks, since that's scientifically proven pain-capable? Or maybe 8 weeks, which is detectable EEG and thus thought?
Likely because it would open a can of worms that would be hard to close. After all, I don't know anybody who skipped straight from conception to childhood, do you?
One of the more modern ones was the Roman Catholic Papal Encyclical Humanae Vitae, which listed four specific predictions on what would happen in a culture that failed to respect life.
You may not accept the axioms, but the reasoning was sound, and within those axioms, all four items have indeed come true in the United States, at least.
I realize this example is a bit mundane, and really is no better than what many sociologists have also predicted, but I'm trying to point out that reason and religion are not necessarily enemies.
and just like calling a fetus not a person....
Isn't that precisely what modern pro-choicers also think? That different classes of persons should have different rights? The difference being that most aren't willing to call fetuses people....
Religions make accurate predictions within their axiomatic set- if they didn't, they wouldn't survive more than one generation (and in fact, many smaller cults *don't* survive the death of their founder, that's pretty much the difference between a cult of personality and an actual belief system- their predictions don't survive being tested). So I fail to see your difference. Science makes accurate predictions within its axiomatic set, and theories that don't make accurate predictions are thrown out. What is the difference between that, and the religious system that makes accurate predictions within its axiomatic set and calls inaccurate predictions heresy and throws them out?
it is more like Plato's cave, where the physical world we see is only a projection of some deeper physics.
Might we even say a METAphysics?
The more science becomes science fiction, the less like science it is and the more like religion it is.
Send offer and respond with resume, isn't that a bit backwards?
Oh, and like a cousin once told my great grandmother- nobody's going to get excited over somebody born in 1970 who needs a girdle. (ok, so the original version was more nobody's going to r*p3 a woman born in 1902, but the same idea applies).
And then from a Starbucks, using their wifi, post a meme picture saying that "X website has no security- don't use a critical password or personally identifying information for your kids unless you want them kidnapped by a sex abuser" on the App's facebook page.
Never own up to starting the meme, but watch things change VERY quickly.
http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2013/11/cover_oregon_applicant_mails_i.html
http://www.katu.com/politics/Embattled-head-of-Cover-Oregon-taking-a-leave-234138441.html
Cover Oregon is full of paper-related security breaches. Until they fix the security process, I for one will NOT be trusting them with my personal data- especially not filled out on paper and snail mailed.
"that would seem to imply that people could become far more intelligent simply by acting like a genius"
Which is kind of Edison's life story, isn't it?
Actually, the last time I snail-mailed a State Income Tax return, was 1994. Since my first W2 job, I've used Turbotax and saved the stamp.
And IIRC, even back then, it was a 40EZ since I was still in school- a one page form.
Wish I had mod points for this. Exactly right. Which makes me think that $100/15 minute stints in this room wouldn't be bad at all.