Sorry, I've worked in the medical device industry. FDA tested does not mean safe and effective. Companies work around regulations, making their products less safe, but able to pass testing. At best the regulatory process only delays medical progress a decade or so and multiplies costs ten times, and at worst it completely prevents improvements for decades.
How is it that grown ups can think government apparatchiks colluding with corporate rent seekers is a recipe for effective health care?
I want what google or IBM can provide today. That's what I *want*.
But what you or I *want* is hardly relevant. It's what those in power want that matters. FDA apparatchiks like their jobs, they like their power, and they like the money they make when they move to jobs in the industries they regulate. Similarly, the industries like protected and regulated markets and the opportunities for rent seeking it brings.
Everyone's a winner! Well, everyone that counts - those in power. Patients get robbed and die, but they don't have power, and many of them are fools besides, licking the hands that beat them.
Ha! This is just another technology that the medical industry will control to suck money out of us. Here's what's going to happen.
Machines will "assist", but as "medical devices", only medical vested interests will have legal access to them. Our health care will improve, while we *continue* to get robbed by the medical industry through the rent seeking made possible by licensing laws.
It's not just what people can afford, it's the prices competitors charge as well, which I would guess is related to tax policy, and when/how corporate activity is taxed.
What better place for people to exposed to needless cancer risk from ionizing radiation concentrated just below the surface of their skin than the place that voted for this?
Yeah, but do the feds get to bypass the scanner with a badge/id? Laws are only for the peasants; why should scanners be any different?
And because people are technically free through the "Unabomber option," libertarians wash their hands of all these problems.
The traffic and pollution examples are examples of abuse of a commons, which most libertarians recognize as a problem. I do. Tax and regulate pollution. Regulate interference with a commons.
The tv commercial example is pretty lame - don't watch that channel. A channel has every interest in keeping the volume down - they don't want to have their viewers go to one of the thousands of other channels available to them. And don't you have a remote? Really, we need a government so that you're not annoyed with how loud commercials are? By the way, apparently that's not quite working for you now anyway.
I post nothing to Facebook. I guess you consider that the Unabomber option. You want privacy, but you want to post to Facebook. Ok.
I'm not opposed to privacy regulations, but you should realize that "more privacy" isn't necessarily better. I actually want search results, ads, and information targeted to me.
By the way, the government is also busy compiling your data. Who do you think has more? Who can do more harm to you with it?
> Collude or form cartels to force prices up
Compare the price increases from that to the price increases from licensing laws, regulations, tariffs, import quotas, etc. I have an off patent medicine with a 800% markup compared to world prices. Costco could be selling it at that price, but for the US government making it illegal.
And why exactly do I have to spend time and $150 to beg for a permission slip from a doctor for a $5/month cholesterol medicine? Oh yeah, that's the government protection me from cartels price gouging me. Cartels like the American Medical Association? Thanks, government!
Clearly the criminality sections of the DMCA were never intended to be enforced. Only the big players could ever afford it and there are other means for them that are cheaper and quicker.
Big players can punish their enemies, but others can't. That sounds about right.
Honda will send troopers to your house and rob you of everything if you don't buy the latest Accord? I don't think so.
How would the banks have arranged to loot the public for trillions of dollars without the government shoveling them the money?
Of course, no private corporation can ever compare to the abuse it inflicts with what government corporations. Is Microsoft as damaging as Stalin and Mao were?
Any form of private property is a government enforced monopoly
The owner of the property has exclusive rights to it backup up by government
Private property is the core of "free enterprise"
The birth of industrial capitalism was formed by the "privatization" of traditional agricultural commons, impoverishing the peasant class and creating a cheap workforce for the factories of free enterprise.
The privatization of innovation eliminates the intellectual commons in a similar way
Private property is the core of free enterprise. Taking away the property of others is not. You could just as well say that slavery was a free market.
What part of free don't you understand?
Libertarians are probably more opposed to intellectual property than most, and contain the few who want people compensated for the private control of natural resources.
Basically, I'm annoyed by teachers and educational "visionaries" who just think throwing tablets at students will solve all issues, when they merely can help but not in all circumstances (relative to the cost I can find better solutions at the moment). Sure, having a projector in the class helps me expand on lessons, but I see it used incorrectly more than not (teachers lecturing from powerpoint office style), and old-school teaching methods still make up a good portion of effective teaching. Chromebooks just feel like tablets with keyboards, I'd take an old windows XP laptop cart from the dusty corner of the library over Chromebooks at the moment. It will change within 5 years I'm sure, but at the moment Chromebooks just seem like a waste of limited school funds.
Even from your own example, it's not the Chrome books that are the problem, it's the teacher wasting the student's time.
I am so incredibly jealous of kids today. My youth was wasted in public schools learning nothing. When I was young, I read the encyclopedia for fun at home, went to the public library to take out science books, while being bored witless in school. I'm so happy for kids now a days who can get out of that soul crushing hell, stay home with a parent, and fire up Khan Academy, Wikipedia, and even online college courses.
If nothing else, even if they can't escape the government labor indoctrination camps in the day, they can breathe free and learn at night. There has never been a better time for a kid who wants to learn and a chrome book and net access make a door to that world. There isn't any better use of educational funds.
Platt reported suspicious similarities on a handful of take-home exams in his spring course Government 1310: “Introduction to Congress,”
They shouldn't worry. When they cheat in Congress, the press won't report it even if they are incompetent enough to get caught. Rules aren't for rulers.
People used to think that knowing magic is what made you wise, until some of them wised up and discovered the scientific method, and other good ideas. Which was my point.
That's what occurred to me too. How about people contribute Fine+ X dollars, so that people are compensated for their time and effort?
I don't really think it would work, because the gummint would likely change the rules. Unless... it's a country that net benefits by no copyright, so that they're just making penalties to comply with treaty obligations. "Oh, hey, it's illegal, but we can't prevent people from giving other people money."
I suspect that in the US, they'd go after people with RICO laws.
A lot of problems resolve down to something simple and intuitive that any reasonably bright middle school student should be able to understand.
Apparently the scientific method was not "intuitive" for thousands of years, while saying "a wizard did it" was. Humans have insane and retarded intuitions compared with the best of our accumulated cultural inheritance - which only a small percentage of people have availed themselves of.
Slashdot Mirror
Ha ha. No, I *don't*.
Sorry, I've worked in the medical device industry. FDA tested does not mean safe and effective. Companies work around regulations, making their products less safe, but able to pass testing. At best the regulatory process only delays medical progress a decade or so and multiplies costs ten times, and at worst it completely prevents improvements for decades.
How is it that grown ups can think government apparatchiks colluding with corporate rent seekers is a recipe for effective health care?
I want what google or IBM can provide today. That's what I *want*.
But what you or I *want* is hardly relevant. It's what those in power want that matters. FDA apparatchiks like their jobs, they like their power, and they like the money they make when they move to jobs in the industries they regulate. Similarly, the industries like protected and regulated markets and the opportunities for rent seeking it brings.
Everyone's a winner! Well, everyone that counts - those in power. Patients get robbed and die, but they don't have power, and many of them are fools besides, licking the hands that beat them.
Ha! This is just another technology that the medical industry will control to suck money out of us. Here's what's going to happen.
Machines will "assist", but as "medical devices", only medical vested interests will have legal access to them. Our health care will improve, while we *continue* to get robbed by the medical industry through the rent seeking made possible by licensing laws.
It's not just what people can afford, it's the prices competitors charge as well, which I would guess is related to tax policy, and when/how corporate activity is taxed.
What better place for people to exposed to needless cancer risk from ionizing radiation concentrated just below the surface of their skin than the place that voted for this?
Yeah, but do the feds get to bypass the scanner with a badge/id? Laws are only for the peasants; why should scanners be any different?
Insigthful?
... we pay for the subsidies in taxes. That money doesn't just spring into existence. TINSTAAFL
You haven't been paying attention to the FED.
And because people are technically free through the "Unabomber option," libertarians wash their hands of all these problems.
The traffic and pollution examples are examples of abuse of a commons, which most libertarians recognize as a problem. I do. Tax and regulate pollution. Regulate interference with a commons.
The tv commercial example is pretty lame - don't watch that channel. A channel has every interest in keeping the volume down - they don't want to have their viewers go to one of the thousands of other channels available to them. And don't you have a remote? Really, we need a government so that you're not annoyed with how loud commercials are? By the way, apparently that's not quite working for you now anyway.
I post nothing to Facebook. I guess you consider that the Unabomber option. You want privacy, but you want to post to Facebook. Ok.
I'm not opposed to privacy regulations, but you should realize that "more privacy" isn't necessarily better. I actually want search results, ads, and information targeted to me.
By the way, the government is also busy compiling your data. Who do you think has more? Who can do more harm to you with it?
> Collude or form cartels to force prices up
Compare the price increases from that to the price increases from licensing laws, regulations, tariffs, import quotas, etc. I have an off patent medicine with a 800% markup compared to world prices. Costco could be selling it at that price, but for the US government making it illegal.
And why exactly do I have to spend time and $150 to beg for a permission slip from a doctor for a $5/month cholesterol medicine? Oh yeah, that's the government protection me from cartels price gouging me. Cartels like the American Medical Association? Thanks, government!
Clearly the criminality sections of the DMCA were never intended to be enforced. Only the big players could ever afford it and there are other means for them that are cheaper and quicker.
Big players can punish their enemies, but others can't. That sounds about right.
How's that working for you?
Honda will send troopers to your house and rob you of everything if you don't buy the latest Accord? I don't think so.
How would the banks have arranged to loot the public for trillions of dollars without the government shoveling them the money?
Of course, no private corporation can ever compare to the abuse it inflicts with what government corporations. Is Microsoft as damaging as Stalin and Mao were?
Any form of private property is a government enforced monopoly
The owner of the property has exclusive rights to it backup up by government
Private property is the core of "free enterprise"
The birth of industrial capitalism was formed by the "privatization" of traditional agricultural commons, impoverishing the peasant class and creating a cheap workforce for the factories of free enterprise.
The privatization of innovation eliminates the intellectual commons in a similar way
Private property is the core of free enterprise. Taking away the property of others is not. You could just as well say that slavery was a free market.
What part of free don't you understand?
Libertarians are probably more opposed to intellectual property than most, and contain the few who want people compensated for the private control of natural resources.
You missed the point. Monopoly through copyright or patent only exists through the government.
Does the Free Market enforce patents, or does the Government? Where did the legally enforced monopoly on an idea come from?
Much better to empower the government loot individuals to pay for corporate "investments". That'll show those evil corporations!
Mencius Moldbug much?
It's a Festivus miracle!
Genes are racist!
Using accurate statistics is not racism.
And the ads served were about *arrests*. So you'd agree that the ad service algorithms were statistically accurate.
Basically, I'm annoyed by teachers and educational "visionaries" who just think throwing tablets at students will solve all issues, when they merely can help but not in all circumstances (relative to the cost I can find better solutions at the moment). Sure, having a projector in the class helps me expand on lessons, but I see it used incorrectly more than not (teachers lecturing from powerpoint office style), and old-school teaching methods still make up a good portion of effective teaching. Chromebooks just feel like tablets with keyboards, I'd take an old windows XP laptop cart from the dusty corner of the library over Chromebooks at the moment. It will change within 5 years I'm sure, but at the moment Chromebooks just seem like a waste of limited school funds.
Even from your own example, it's not the Chrome books that are the problem, it's the teacher wasting the student's time.
I am so incredibly jealous of kids today. My youth was wasted in public schools learning nothing. When I was young, I read the encyclopedia for fun at home, went to the public library to take out science books, while being bored witless in school. I'm so happy for kids now a days who can get out of that soul crushing hell, stay home with a parent, and fire up Khan Academy, Wikipedia, and even online college courses.
If nothing else, even if they can't escape the government labor indoctrination camps in the day, they can breathe free and learn at night. There has never been a better time for a kid who wants to learn and a chrome book and net access make a door to that world. There isn't any better use of educational funds.
Platt reported suspicious similarities on a handful of take-home exams in his spring course Government 1310: “Introduction to Congress,”
They shouldn't worry. When they cheat in Congress, the press won't report it even if they are incompetent enough to get caught. Rules aren't for rulers.
People used to think that knowing magic is what made you wise, until some of them wised up and discovered the scientific method, and other good ideas. Which was my point.
I'm afraid not.
All things male are evil, and all evil things are male.
That's what occurred to me too. How about people contribute Fine+ X dollars, so that people are compensated for their time and effort?
I don't really think it would work, because the gummint would likely change the rules. Unless ... it's a country that net benefits by no copyright, so that they're just making penalties to comply with treaty obligations. "Oh, hey, it's illegal, but we can't prevent people from giving other people money."
I suspect that in the US, they'd go after people with RICO laws.
A lot of problems resolve down to something simple and intuitive that any reasonably bright middle school student should be able to understand.
Apparently the scientific method was not "intuitive" for thousands of years, while saying "a wizard did it" was. Humans have insane and retarded intuitions compared with the best of our accumulated cultural inheritance - which only a small percentage of people have availed themselves of.