Human labor has been in surplus since at least the invention of the cotton gin, and probably for decades and even centuries before that. How many dockworkers are required now to unload the record volumes of shipping going through the ports compared to fifty years ago? The number has dropped to about a tenth, if memory serves correctly, due to the use of standardized shipping containers and scheduling technology.
That's certainly the start of it- but it took until the 1960s until we started having problems with human labor being in SUCH surplus- and of course, by the requirements you put forth, we'd need someplace between 300 and 350 million jobs- just to handle our current population, since according to your GP post people who do not work, do not deserve housing.
According to the latest numbers, there are 148 million people in the US labor force, and 140 million of them have jobs.
Yes, but there are nearly twice that number of people in the country- you've got to ALSO look at the 152-200 million who aren't even counted as being in the labor force, as well as the 8 million who are but can't find work.
Those jobs average nearly 34 hours a week, making $15.86 an hour. Yes, it could be better. I'd like to see unemployment rates down around 4.5% or so, but that's going to take time.
The Labor Department is working on it- between reclassifying workers as Discouraged or Disabled, as well as baby boomer retirements, I'm sure they'll get the labor force down to 142 million within the next 4 years.
Mine is specifically designed for this. SSID of www.personaltelco.net - in hopes of one day joining this hobbyist group and providing free net access to the park across the street. In keeping with that group, the access point is a Linksys router on my lan, and while I don't have WEP turned on about the only open port you'll find is 80- all others are either filtered at the access point, or port forwarded to a machine on my network. Sure, this means that SSL is not available, but it also means that nobody is going to be sending spam from my LAN.
At $50,000/yr for 50 years, that's $2.5 million earned--you're saying that it's fine to incur thousands of times more than the average person earns (his earnings, of course, measure his economic contribution to society).
2nd reply, because I missed this apparently error-prone assumption. NO for-profit business EVER gives a person earnings equal to his economic contribution to society- it's usually at least an order of magnitude less, sometimes FAR less. That's how profit is made- the difference between wages and value. Given that human labor is currently in surplus, the law of supply and demand means that $2.5 million earned over a lifetime probably represents $2.5 billion OR MORE in actual economic value.
So, what's the value of a human life if you work for $.25 per hour?
You should know the answer from the point of view of the corporations- human life is only worth the labor that it can produce, and should be paid for at as small a fraction of the value of that labor as possible.
After spending an entire day watching news channels looking for bias (I'm bored an still on winter break), I've come to the conclusion that both CNN and Fox News are biased. However, I believe Fox is worse, because it's much more aggresive in its reporting. Wheras the bias on CNN is mostly word choice, Fox straight-up attacks people. For example, while they were analyzing the recent CBS scandal, their 'fun facts' were all negative. All of them had something to do with Dan Rather being punched or how he had caused CBS ratings to plummet after Walter Cronkite.
Of course, a conservative watching both the Daily Show and CNN would say EXACTLY THE SAME THING- though I think the Chimp President would replace Dan Rather. Which is why I say CNN is the middle of the road- some of their people have a conservative bias shown only in a very subtle fashion, and some have a liberal bias (for a great one on both sides, watch Lou Dobbs- an ex conservative waging a war against American Corporatism on the side of the average worker, some great stuff is happening there).
And obviously, this was needed earlier- far earlier. Southeast asia is the home of small electronics- yet there was NO way for survivors on Sumatra to call Thailand during that first two hours and say "Hey, we just had a Tsunami here- better evacuate your coast".
I disagree. Human life is valuable, yes: that means that it has a value. At $50,000/yr for 50 years, that's $2.5 million earned--you're saying that it's fine to incur thousands of times more than the average person earns (his earnings, of course, measure his economic contribution to society). That's insane, and a very quick way to go bankrupt.
Money itself is largely mythological to begin with- it's a matter of morality, not economics. Economics is mythological, and cost is just a figment of your imagination.
Building a tsunami readiness centre is like anything else: there's a cost, and there's a benefit. Considering the unlikelihood of a tsunami, the benefit is neglible, practically non-existent.
Given the existance of Krakotoa, the probability of a tsunami happening in the Indian Ocean within 500 years was very close to 100%. Heck, given the landslide potential in the Canary Islands the potential of a Tsunami wiping out Wall Street in the next 200 years is 100%. These things ARE predictible and likely- but if you'd rather have profit than public liberty and safety, then these things are not PROFITABLE.
Detecting an earthquake might take just a few minutes, but locating and then figuring out depth and magnitude takes a lot of time.
Yeah, but finding magnitude of a 6+ quake, the kind that makes Tsunamis, someplace in the area of the Indian Ocean- is damned obvious. Hawaii monitoring stations had it pinpointed within 5 minutes- but since there isn't a communications system in the Indian Ocean they had no idea who to call.
If the earthquake is deep, no tsunami. If it is shallow, maybe tsunami. Loss of life may be averted in the Pacific, but that is because of the tsunami monitoring system which monitors, surpisingly enough, for tsunamis, not earthquakes.
True enough to a certain extent- but a 6+ earthquake will almost guarantee a tsunami, and besides, Krakotoa in the Indian Ocean produced a tsunami in 1833 that was the twin of this one.
90% of the earthquakes on the planet happen in the Pacific, which is why there is a monitoring system there and not everywhere.
True enough- though this was predictable, it was the same fault line as Krakotoa.
If we sent out a call the minute every strong earthquake happened, no one would listen because tsunamis are few and far between.
But if say, an early warning was sent out with the earthquake, and Sumatra (closest shore) reported a Tsunami, the rest should have been warned, could have been warned, HOURS before- if there had been a communication system in place.
The key to a mesh is to ad-hoc until you are out of the area, where broadband exists. Qualcom does this with their truck inventory management system that they built for Sears and sold to a ton of other trucking companies- that's why you see ad-hoc connections for *SST* SSIDs driving down most major freeways- they're adhocing back along the freeway, truck to truck, back to the distribution center.
Having said that- the rest is very good points for why it hasn't already been done.
what she's having difficulty with is managing those schedules, setting them so that they don't get impossible shifts, not too many hours per week and so - this is fucking hard by hand when dealing with thousands.
Exchange has settable warnings about impossible shifts and excessive hours per week (though the standard installation has 40 hour weeks and 15 minutes between appointments on those warnings- something tells me this situation would call for somewhat higher limits than that) which propagate down to the PDA level. Like I said- I was kind of a dumb ass stressing the enforcement rather than the management...but the functionality does exist.
Just because our dear enlightened friends at the UN decided something is a right,
Actually, it was an American who wrote that document, the UN merely ratified it. A REAL American- not a free traitor.
You were precisely correct when you said health care is a NEED. You have a RIGHT to pursue your NEEDS with your own resources.
And what do I do if your free market denies me the resources needed to pursue my needs?
The fact that you or the UN feels you need something in no way allows you to lay claim to that which I, through my own abilities and effort, EARNED.
Very few people have their own abilities or effort- most money is made leaning on government programs, like a stable monetary supply and police to keep me from robbing you.
There's no reason the most able should go hungy with the least, just so the least don't starve.
For the past 40 years, the world has produced enough food to feed everybody- there's no need for ANYBODY to go hungry if we'd just stop subsidizing the ability of some to make money off of the labor of others.
You are correct about one thing: free market capitalism is not a right, it is the system that results when rights are respected over entitlements.
No, free market capitalism is the abscence of both rights and entitlements- it's anarchy and chaos, with the strong forcing the weak to work for them.
You don't have to have a house. You don't have to have a job. But if you want a house, you have to work. It's your option. No work, no house. But many socialists would provide you with some form of accomodations, even if it's in the slums, through either rent control or forcing landlords to set aside a specific number of units for people in your situation.
True enough- and this to me is completely reasonable because of a recent (well, 40 year old) new development in economic dynamics that most economists have chosen to ignore: Human Labor is in surplus.
It's one thing to have a short-term safety net for situations completely out of your control. It's another thing to have mandated minimums even for people that don't want to put forth effort.
Given the number of jobs vs the population in the United States, we'd better have some way for the other 66% to live as well in the good times- and under a Republican controled Corporatism, make that 75% of the population who can't find jobs. Human labor is in surplus- and only 25% of the country is able to work.
Socialism != Stalinism- Distributism lasted for 1000 years before you capitalists decided to make money into the king of all. There can be no system free of coercion- because without coercion, individual coercion becomes inevitable with any economic system.
See my current sig line- without government regulation, my taking a gun and demanding money from you in exchange for allowing you to keep breathing is a completely legitimate transaction.
And if the tsunami had been smaller than expected? All you;d hear is "Look at those idiots at the earthquak/tsunami warning center! They cost the government of "country here" $XXX dollars for no reason! They shall burn ni hell!"
One of the many reasons to ignore COST when it comes to GOVENRMENT. Providing for the common welfare is often far more expensive than the greedy misers known as the rich would be willing to pay for. FAR better to cost several billion dollars of economic dislocation than lose a single human life- but then that's coming from somebody who actually believes that human live is valuable. Not all would agree.
The same could be said of central heating, people used to die regularly in harsh winters, should this now be a right?
Already is- it's a part of the right to shelter from the environment. A slippery slope indeed, right to needs.
I will agree that we have done some horrible things to our environment, but I don't think I could agree with the statement that our environment is unlivable without heathcare. Though I think this is going to be a point of opinion, without some rather unethical studies to back it up, so I'll not argue with it.
All one needs to do is compare still relatively unpolluted areas without health care, like Brazil's upper amazon area, to relatively polluted areas without health care, like the lowest caste of Inidian women living near Bhopal. One can easily see the horrendous increase in infant mortality rates; this translates to similar "Superfund" sites in the United States and polluted sites in Europe and Canada as well. We have a somewhat functional healthcare system though- thus medical care keeps our infant mortality rate low.
Good for you, you've given your children a better chance for survival, and for passing on their genes. I'm not saying that healthcare isn't a damn good idea, just that it is not a requirement for life. I would say that you should have researched the situation with your health insurance better, before having kids, so that you either would have been ready for the costs or found a better insurer.
It was the best we could afford at the time- as I was unemployed for 26 months in there, and trying to start a self-employed business since nobody would hire a computer programmer back then (been contracting for a year now with the State and hoping to go permanent). National Association of the Self-Employed- remember them and NEVER use them.
I think the difference here is, this is something which extends life, not a requirement for life. Lack of air will necessarilly kill you, lack of heathcare might kill you. In my opinion, it's up to you to get it or don't.
Depends on where you live- but the last 5000 years of modifying our environment to suit ourselves has had a negative effect on the survivability of the species; the "wild" environement has changed drastically, sometimes due to actions we did, sometimes not.
From a species standpoint, that may not be a bad thing. Going back to Darwinian "survival of the fittest". Those which are able to cope with the new disease and/or environment will survive to breed and produce a more sustainable species. When the Black Death came along to Europe, it wiped out a large part of the population, which generally sucked for them. But the species as a whole survived it and was better able to resist the disease because of it.
Really? What would you give your personal chances of surviving a new outbreak of the Bubonic Plague? There is now a new version that is highly resistant to *both* natural immune systems and our antibiotics- theory is that in any crowded population kill rate would be 100% in abscence of major medical quarentine (which, BTW, is how they ended up stopping the Black Death plague- complete isolation of anybody who got it). When I say health care- I mean *all* health care- that includes basic Center-For-Disease-Control based actions to limit epidemics.
I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this. I will agree that our environment is damaged, but I don't think it's unlivable. And this would seem to be at the heart of our disagreement.
That- and perhaps a misunderstanding of what I meant when I said health care- you immediately took it to mean heroic measures to extend life, when I meant basic preventitive stuff like teaching young children to wash their hands after going to the bathroom and encouraging people to see a doctor *before* they end up infecting their entire office with the bubonic plague.
Why hasn't anybody jumped into the area with mesh-based WiFi? Seems to me given the relatively short distance to areas of the city that DO have broadband, it would be a natural.
All other efforts will be in vain. That was the real tragedy in the Tsunami- and it's the reason why a similar event won't cause this large loss of life in the Pacific. We've already got the instruments needed to detect an earthquake as it happens anywhere in the world- the next step is where we failed. There should have been a major warning given out to every government, every police station, every military installation in the area that an earthquake had already happened and to get people away from the seashore.
There's no need to worry about security on anything that isn't mission critical- if it's not mission critical, keep offsite backups on non-executable media and be done with it.
2nd reply- I didn't misread. Says almost NOTHING about CREATING the schedule, of which I know of no non-experimental software that does that automagically for you. What was asked was software for managing and (where needed!) enforcing a schedule for all the junior doctors, in which case my original reply is correct- Exchange Server and Outlook does this quite nicely, and certainly better than large pieces of paper with colored pens, which is their current hardware.:-)
A computer works just as well as a whiteboard- you just create a virutal whiteboard. Better in fact because you can sort and group individuals to create different whiteboards quickly.
I concentrated on the enforcement in my original description- but I'd have to know a lot more about the current process the school goes through before I'd be able to advise how to use any software for *creating* the schedules. "Junior Doctors" might have also thrown me a bit- did you mean interns? Interns would be a different scheduling problem- actually an easier one, since you could group them in Outlook and schedule them all at one shot for a given class or ward work period. Doctors, on the other hand, would be much more individualized, and require different schdules for each.
Slashdot Mirror
Human labor has been in surplus since at least the invention of the cotton gin, and probably for decades and even centuries before that. How many dockworkers are required now to unload the record volumes of shipping going through the ports compared to fifty years ago? The number has dropped to about a tenth, if memory serves correctly, due to the use of standardized shipping containers and scheduling technology.
That's certainly the start of it- but it took until the 1960s until we started having problems with human labor being in SUCH surplus- and of course, by the requirements you put forth, we'd need someplace between 300 and 350 million jobs- just to handle our current population, since according to your GP post people who do not work, do not deserve housing.
According to the latest numbers, there are 148 million people in the US labor force, and 140 million of them have jobs.
Yes, but there are nearly twice that number of people in the country- you've got to ALSO look at the 152-200 million who aren't even counted as being in the labor force, as well as the 8 million who are but can't find work.
Those jobs average nearly 34 hours a week, making $15.86 an hour. Yes, it could be better. I'd like to see unemployment rates down around 4.5% or so, but that's going to take time.
The Labor Department is working on it- between reclassifying workers as Discouraged or Disabled, as well as baby boomer retirements, I'm sure they'll get the labor force down to 142 million within the next 4 years.
I get your point. I agree that my methods are not great, but does anybody have a better idea to help their neighbors?
Ever thought, just a thought, of e-mailing them and offering your services for a beer?
Mine is specifically designed for this. SSID of www.personaltelco.net - in hopes of one day joining this hobbyist group and providing free net access to the park across the street. In keeping with that group, the access point is a Linksys router on my lan, and while I don't have WEP turned on about the only open port you'll find is 80- all others are either filtered at the access point, or port forwarded to a machine on my network. Sure, this means that SSL is not available, but it also means that nobody is going to be sending spam from my LAN.
At $50,000/yr for 50 years, that's $2.5 million earned--you're saying that it's fine to incur thousands of times more than the average person earns (his earnings, of course, measure his economic contribution to society).
2nd reply, because I missed this apparently error-prone assumption. NO for-profit business EVER gives a person earnings equal to his economic contribution to society- it's usually at least an order of magnitude less, sometimes FAR less. That's how profit is made- the difference between wages and value. Given that human labor is currently in surplus, the law of supply and demand means that $2.5 million earned over a lifetime probably represents $2.5 billion OR MORE in actual economic value.
So, what's the value of a human life if you work for $.25 per hour?
You should know the answer from the point of view of the corporations- human life is only worth the labor that it can produce, and should be paid for at as small a fraction of the value of that labor as possible.
After spending an entire day watching news channels looking for bias (I'm bored an still on winter break), I've come to the conclusion that both CNN and Fox News are biased. However, I believe Fox is worse, because it's much more aggresive in its reporting. Wheras the bias on CNN is mostly word choice, Fox straight-up attacks people. For example, while they were analyzing the recent CBS scandal, their 'fun facts' were all negative. All of them had something to do with Dan Rather being punched or how he had caused CBS ratings to plummet after Walter Cronkite.
Of course, a conservative watching both the Daily Show and CNN would say EXACTLY THE SAME THING- though I think the Chimp President would replace Dan Rather. Which is why I say CNN is the middle of the road- some of their people have a conservative bias shown only in a very subtle fashion, and some have a liberal bias (for a great one on both sides, watch Lou Dobbs- an ex conservative waging a war against American Corporatism on the side of the average worker, some great stuff is happening there).
And obviously, this was needed earlier- far earlier. Southeast asia is the home of small electronics- yet there was NO way for survivors on Sumatra to call Thailand during that first two hours and say "Hey, we just had a Tsunami here- better evacuate your coast".
I disagree. Human life is valuable, yes: that means that it has a value. At $50,000/yr for 50 years, that's $2.5 million earned--you're saying that it's fine to incur thousands of times more than the average person earns (his earnings, of course, measure his economic contribution to society). That's insane, and a very quick way to go bankrupt.
Money itself is largely mythological to begin with- it's a matter of morality, not economics. Economics is mythological, and cost is just a figment of your imagination.
Building a tsunami readiness centre is like anything else: there's a cost, and there's a benefit. Considering the unlikelihood of a tsunami, the benefit is neglible, practically non-existent.
Given the existance of Krakotoa, the probability of a tsunami happening in the Indian Ocean within 500 years was very close to 100%. Heck, given the landslide potential in the Canary Islands the potential of a Tsunami wiping out Wall Street in the next 200 years is 100%. These things ARE predictible and likely- but if you'd rather have profit than public liberty and safety, then these things are not PROFITABLE.
Detecting an earthquake might take just a few minutes, but locating and then figuring out depth and magnitude takes a lot of time.
Yeah, but finding magnitude of a 6+ quake, the kind that makes Tsunamis, someplace in the area of the Indian Ocean- is damned obvious. Hawaii monitoring stations had it pinpointed within 5 minutes- but since there isn't a communications system in the Indian Ocean they had no idea who to call.
If the earthquake is deep, no tsunami. If it is shallow, maybe tsunami. Loss of life may be averted in the Pacific, but that is because of the tsunami monitoring system which monitors, surpisingly enough, for tsunamis, not earthquakes.
True enough to a certain extent- but a 6+ earthquake will almost guarantee a tsunami, and besides, Krakotoa in the Indian Ocean produced a tsunami in 1833 that was the twin of this one.
90% of the earthquakes on the planet happen in the Pacific, which is why there is a monitoring system there and not everywhere.
True enough- though this was predictable, it was the same fault line as Krakotoa.
If we sent out a call the minute every strong earthquake happened, no one would listen because tsunamis are few and far between.
But if say, an early warning was sent out with the earthquake, and Sumatra (closest shore) reported a Tsunami, the rest should have been warned, could have been warned, HOURS before- if there had been a communication system in place.
Who ever said that I normally do that, and what do those politicians have to do with the incompetance of governments halfway around the world?
Besides, it wasn't Bush, but Clinton- who signed NAFTA and started the WTO. Neo*s are all evil- doesn't matter if they're liberals or conservatives.
The key to a mesh is to ad-hoc until you are out of the area, where broadband exists. Qualcom does this with their truck inventory management system that they built for Sears and sold to a ton of other trucking companies- that's why you see ad-hoc connections for *SST* SSIDs driving down most major freeways- they're adhocing back along the freeway, truck to truck, back to the distribution center.
Having said that- the rest is very good points for why it hasn't already been done.
what she's having difficulty with is managing those schedules, setting them so that they don't get impossible shifts, not too many hours per week and so - this is fucking hard by hand when dealing with thousands.
Exchange has settable warnings about impossible shifts and excessive hours per week (though the standard installation has 40 hour weeks and 15 minutes between appointments on those warnings- something tells me this situation would call for somewhat higher limits than that) which propagate down to the PDA level. Like I said- I was kind of a dumb ass stressing the enforcement rather than the management...but the functionality does exist.
Just because our dear enlightened friends at the UN decided something is a right,
Actually, it was an American who wrote that document, the UN merely ratified it. A REAL American- not a free traitor.
You were precisely correct when you said health care is a NEED. You have a RIGHT to pursue your NEEDS with your own resources.
And what do I do if your free market denies me the resources needed to pursue my needs?
The fact that you or the UN feels you need something in no way allows you to lay claim to that which I, through my own abilities and effort, EARNED.
Very few people have their own abilities or effort- most money is made leaning on government programs, like a stable monetary supply and police to keep me from robbing you.
There's no reason the most able should go hungy with the least, just so the least don't starve.
For the past 40 years, the world has produced enough food to feed everybody- there's no need for ANYBODY to go hungry if we'd just stop subsidizing the ability of some to make money off of the labor of others.
You are correct about one thing: free market capitalism is not a right, it is the system that results when rights are respected over entitlements.
No, free market capitalism is the abscence of both rights and entitlements- it's anarchy and chaos, with the strong forcing the weak to work for them.
You don't have to have a house. You don't have to have a job. But if you want a house, you have to work. It's your option. No work, no house. But many socialists would provide you with some form of accomodations, even if it's in the slums, through either rent control or forcing landlords to set aside a specific number of units for people in your situation.
True enough- and this to me is completely reasonable because of a recent (well, 40 year old) new development in economic dynamics that most economists have chosen to ignore: Human Labor is in surplus.
It's one thing to have a short-term safety net for situations completely out of your control. It's another thing to have mandated minimums even for people that don't want to put forth effort.
Given the number of jobs vs the population in the United States, we'd better have some way for the other 66% to live as well in the good times- and under a Republican controled Corporatism, make that 75% of the population who can't find jobs. Human labor is in surplus- and only 25% of the country is able to work.
Socialism != Stalinism- Distributism lasted for 1000 years before you capitalists decided to make money into the king of all. There can be no system free of coercion- because without coercion, individual coercion becomes inevitable with any economic system.
See my current sig line- without government regulation, my taking a gun and demanding money from you in exchange for allowing you to keep breathing is a completely legitimate transaction.
And if the tsunami had been smaller than expected? All you;d hear is "Look at those idiots at the earthquak/tsunami warning center! They cost the government of "country here" $XXX dollars for no reason! They shall burn ni hell!"
One of the many reasons to ignore COST when it comes to GOVENRMENT. Providing for the common welfare is often far more expensive than the greedy misers known as the rich would be willing to pay for. FAR better to cost several billion dollars of economic dislocation than lose a single human life- but then that's coming from somebody who actually believes that human live is valuable. Not all would agree.
The same could be said of central heating, people used to die regularly in harsh winters, should this now be a right?
Already is- it's a part of the right to shelter from the environment. A slippery slope indeed, right to needs.
I will agree that we have done some horrible things to our environment, but I don't think I could agree with the statement that our environment is unlivable without heathcare. Though I think this is going to be a point of opinion, without some rather unethical studies to back it up, so I'll not argue with it.
All one needs to do is compare still relatively unpolluted areas without health care, like Brazil's upper amazon area, to relatively polluted areas without health care, like the lowest caste of Inidian women living near Bhopal. One can easily see the horrendous increase in infant mortality rates; this translates to similar "Superfund" sites in the United States and polluted sites in Europe and Canada as well. We have a somewhat functional healthcare system though- thus medical care keeps our infant mortality rate low.
Good for you, you've given your children a better chance for survival, and for passing on their genes. I'm not saying that healthcare isn't a damn good idea, just that it is not a requirement for life. I would say that you should have researched the situation with your health insurance better, before having kids, so that you either would have been ready for the costs or found a better insurer.
It was the best we could afford at the time- as I was unemployed for 26 months in there, and trying to start a self-employed business since nobody would hire a computer programmer back then (been contracting for a year now with the State and hoping to go permanent). National Association of the Self-Employed- remember them and NEVER use them.
I think the difference here is, this is something which extends life, not a requirement for life. Lack of air will necessarilly kill you, lack of heathcare might kill you. In my opinion, it's up to you to get it or don't.
Depends on where you live- but the last 5000 years of modifying our environment to suit ourselves has had a negative effect on the survivability of the species; the "wild" environement has changed drastically, sometimes due to actions we did, sometimes not.
From a species standpoint, that may not be a bad thing. Going back to Darwinian "survival of the fittest". Those which are able to cope with the new disease and/or environment will survive to breed and produce a more sustainable species. When the Black Death came along to Europe, it wiped out a large part of the population, which generally sucked for them. But the species as a whole survived it and was better able to resist the disease because of it.
Really? What would you give your personal chances of surviving a new outbreak of the Bubonic Plague? There is now a new version that is highly resistant to *both* natural immune systems and our antibiotics- theory is that in any crowded population kill rate would be 100% in abscence of major medical quarentine (which, BTW, is how they ended up stopping the Black Death plague- complete isolation of anybody who got it). When I say health care- I mean *all* health care- that includes basic Center-For-Disease-Control based actions to limit epidemics.
I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this. I will agree that our environment is damaged, but I don't think it's unlivable. And this would seem to be at the heart of our disagreement.
That- and perhaps a misunderstanding of what I meant when I said health care- you immediately took it to mean heroic measures to extend life, when I meant basic preventitive stuff like teaching young children to wash their hands after going to the bathroom and encouraging people to see a doctor *before* they end up infecting their entire office with the bubonic plague.
If I had Mod points, I'd mod you up just for referencing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in relation to infrastructure.
Why hasn't anybody jumped into the area with mesh-based WiFi? Seems to me given the relatively short distance to areas of the city that DO have broadband, it would be a natural.
And what about an indian who after a hard day of running a casino uses payote which is part of his beliefs? is that immoral? :)
:-)
From the fundie point of view of God using Disease to Punish People for Bad Behavior- no, you don't use needles in peyote usage.
All other efforts will be in vain. That was the real tragedy in the Tsunami- and it's the reason why a similar event won't cause this large loss of life in the Pacific. We've already got the instruments needed to detect an earthquake as it happens anywhere in the world- the next step is where we failed. There should have been a major warning given out to every government, every police station, every military installation in the area that an earthquake had already happened and to get people away from the seashore.
There's no need to worry about security on anything that isn't mission critical- if it's not mission critical, keep offsite backups on non-executable media and be done with it.
2nd reply- I didn't misread. Says almost NOTHING about CREATING the schedule, of which I know of no non-experimental software that does that automagically for you. What was asked was software for managing and (where needed!) enforcing a schedule for all the junior doctors, in which case my original reply is correct- Exchange Server and Outlook does this quite nicely, and certainly better than large pieces of paper with colored pens, which is their current hardware. :-)
A computer works just as well as a whiteboard- you just create a virutal whiteboard. Better in fact because you can sort and group individuals to create different whiteboards quickly.
I concentrated on the enforcement in my original description- but I'd have to know a lot more about the current process the school goes through before I'd be able to advise how to use any software for *creating* the schedules. "Junior Doctors" might have also thrown me a bit- did you mean interns? Interns would be a different scheduling problem- actually an easier one, since you could group them in Outlook and schedule them all at one shot for a given class or ward work period. Doctors, on the other hand, would be much more individualized, and require different schdules for each.