You have no respect for it because you don't understand its goals?
Because you don't think there will be a difference between reading a brief summary on Slashdot and taking a full semester course in which one learns about anthropology, literature, philosophy, religion, history, and everything else they're going to have to use in such a class?
I always laugh when I hear them complaining that there are so many liberals amongst college professors, as well as among journalists.
I always want to ask if they ever think it might mean something that all of the best educated and best informed people have such a strong tendency to disagree with them...
My first DVD player was made by "Sany". It actually worked (mostly) for over a year before it finally overheated and died completely. I knew it was a cheap knockoff, but this was way back in 2000 when DVD players still cost money, and it was something like $40, including a free copy of Fightclub.
I remember a timeline they had out in ads back in 1989 that mentioned among other things that Windows 3.1 was "The world's first graphic operating system."
Even if it had been true that Windows was first, I kept wondering at the time what about versions 1 or 2 or even 3.0?
They also still have the unlimited lifetime replacement guarantee.
When you strip a socket from a set, or break a wrench, or bend the end of your screwdriver, you can even today just bring in the biggest piece you've got left and they'll give you a brand new one right there.
As a service it is, to say the least, very very cool.
The only downside is that there seems to be fewer Sears stores than there used to be. Too many "real Americans" would prefer to buy the cheap knockoffs of everything for a few cents less at Wal-Mart.
Except that, apparently, children are becoming less and less violent, and have been doing so for a few decades now, according to violent crime statistics in America.
The original comment was about the extra insurance a carrier will sell you for your cell phone.
If it's so competitive, tell me where else besides through AT&T I can buy an insurance plan for my phone that will cover all repairs and accidental damage?
For health insurance, of course, it's even worse. It tends to be tied to your employer. You can't just "simply shop around for a lower price and cancel your existing policy once you find a better deal." Your stuck with the plan, or perhaps for a really good company, 2-3 plans (from the same insurer) that the company gives you. There will often be a one-month window during which you can switch every year. And, of course, a three-month period after enrollment before you can actually use it. I *could* switch to another one, but it would cost me substantially more, as the company pays for about 3/4 of it. Of course, even if I could convince the company to give me that money instead I still couldn't get insurance at that rate because the insurance companies give discounts to the corporations who buy from them for their employees.
What you say may be true of car insurance, which is probably why they all front-load the payments, and give you a discount after you've been with the same company for a year.
For homeowners insurance, yeah, I could have gone with another one, but their sales department had already been to my bank and made sure that that bank's customers got lower rates than I could get on my own, so I went with that one.
But, wait, if car insurance and medical insurance and homeowners insurance can still make a profit with all these discounts they give out, why do they charge so much more than that normally? Could it maybe be because they've determined that that's what people will pay?
You are correct in that I over-simplified the entire decision making process among consumers when I posted my example.
But by "profit", I meant overall profit, not just profit per sale. I thought that part at least was clear when I mentioned that it was possible for profit per sale to go up but profit to go down. That's what I meant, anyway.
Another factor consumers use when deciding to purchase something is how kindly they feel toward the store. Which is where the idea that "prices would be lower except for all that fraud" comes into play. If a business can deflect bad feelings about their prices away from themselves then people will feel less hostile, and thus more likely to buy their products, without changing the prices at all.
There are, of course, several thousand other factors that determine whether someone will buy something ("Product X is cooler", "Store Y is closer to where I am right now", "Company Z destroys rainforests and rapes puppies", "Bill Gates is a doodoohead", etc.) All these, and yes, even the cost to the company of some feature, will go into determining the price.
And, sometimes, they'll even do something at a loss, or hardly any profit at all, if it maximizes profit in another section of their business. (Notice how a drink at McDonalds costs more than a Big Mac, though the cost to the company is an order of magnitude or two less.)
If everyone played within the relatively simple rules, insurance would be cheaper, as would the services and products it's defending.
No.
No, it would not.
The rates set for insurance are set to maximize profits for the insurance company.
As the price increases, fewer people will purchase it. If it increases enough, few enough people will purchase it that overall profit goes down. Right before that price point is the sweet spot they try to hit. That spot has nothing to do with any costs to the insurance company, including potential fraud.
Besides all of which, the monthly price, plus the deductible, are most likely high enough that even if every single person who had the insurance smashed their phone and demanded an upgrade when a new one came out, they'd still make a profit.
I'm surprised the "suspicious" percentage is so low, actually. If the insurance company is saying two-thirds of all claims are suspicious, that means that one-third of the time they can think of no way at all the damage could have been intentional.
Last time I did this, the conversation went like this: Me: Social Security Number xxx-xx-xxxx Phone guy: Hm. The computer is saying that's not a valid SSN. Me: Yeah, I've never had service with you before. Phone guy: That shouldn't make any difference.... Me: Well, apparently it does.
Phone guy: Hold on, let me get my supervisor. (music)
Supervisor: Sir, there seems to be a problem with your social security number. We're unable to validate it. Me: Yeah, I've never had phone service with you before. Supervisor: That shouldn't matter. Me: Apparently it does. Supervisor: OK. Hold on one minute while I override... Me: No problem.
Voila, phone.
Of course, this was back in Ye Olden Dayes, when phones were utilities attached to homes, rather than something you picked up in a kiosk at the mall.
You just have to get past all the consumer crap, and dodge the salespeople, to get to the back where the good stuff is hiding in bins under the counter.
Just don't try to ask for help from the sales guy who will not only not be able to tell you where to find a 7407 LSI chip, but actually take *pride* in the fact that he's never heard of such a thing.
Yeah, I wish other legal documents could be amended, too!
I own an automobile, and I think that the law, passed 1904, should be changed so that I don't have to drive under 5mph with someone walking ahead of me waving a red flag...
But, I guess, that's just my "point of view", and I should accept all others as equally valid...
Nobody said that all those who graduate from those schools are poorly educated.
But, if your family is rich enough, yeah, it's quite possible to go all the way through those schools without getting any education at all.
I mean, any that doesn't involve drugs and parties.
If your daddy is paying your full tuition, and giving an extra couple of hundred thousand to the school in endowments, they're not going to flunk you out. When I was in college, we all knew who these people were. Some people were pissed about it, but I never minded that much, as that's where my university got the money to give me such a good financial aid package.
You say it as a joke, but it's quite possible to view the sun with a standard "backyard" telescope.
Do NOT look directly at the sun through the telescope, of course. Instead, you use the telescope as a projector.
It takes a minute or two to aim: the trick is to use the shadow from the telescope to aim. When the shadow is smallest, you're pointing the right way.)
There are lots of web sites describing how to do it, such as this one. (I've never used the extra collar like they describe, but it probably wouldn't hurt.)
It also has the advantage that it's something a small group of people can enjoy at once.
At night, if it's reasonably dark at all, I'd recommend the moon (always easy to see. Use a moon filter, which probably came with your telescope).
Also, you should be able to see the Orion Nebula as a wide fuzzy patch. I've seen the banding of Jupiter, as well as its moons, in my 3.5" telescope, though I wasn't able to find the Red Spot, and the rings of Saturn.
Definitely get a software star chart (there are free ones available online) and a red filter for your flashlight so you don't lose night vision. It makes a surprisingly large difference.
My guess is they have no idea what the price will be before they start experimenting with how the service will work, how people will use it, and how much people will be willing to pay to get away from Comcast.
The first time I was in Eugene, Oregon, I was looking for a bottle of rum at about 9 at night.
I went to two different stores before discovering that you can't buy rum in a grocery store in Oregon. After learning of the existence of specialized liquor stores, I was walking downtown in search of one. I asked several passersby if they could give me directions.
The only ones I could find were closed.
In the end, nobody could help me find rum. But three different people offered to sell me pot, and one offered LSD.
Slashdot Mirror
Wouldn't work at airports, still, though, as they X-ray all coins passing through the security checkpoints...
You have no respect for it because you don't understand its goals?
Because you don't think there will be a difference between reading a brief summary on Slashdot and taking a full semester course in which one learns about anthropology, literature, philosophy, religion, history, and everything else they're going to have to use in such a class?
I always laugh when I hear them complaining that there are so many liberals amongst college professors, as well as among journalists.
I always want to ask if they ever think it might mean something that all of the best educated and best informed people have such a strong tendency to disagree with them...
Yep, that'd be the one.
My first DVD player was made by "Sany".
It actually worked (mostly) for over a year before it finally overheated and died completely.
I knew it was a cheap knockoff, but this was way back in 2000 when DVD players still cost money, and it was something like $40, including a free copy of Fightclub.
I remember a timeline they had out in ads back in 1989 that mentioned among other things that Windows 3.1 was "The world's first graphic operating system."
Even if it had been true that Windows was first, I kept wondering at the time what about versions 1 or 2 or even 3.0?
They also still have the unlimited lifetime replacement guarantee.
When you strip a socket from a set, or break a wrench, or bend the end of your screwdriver, you can even today just bring in the biggest piece you've got left and they'll give you a brand new one right there.
As a service it is, to say the least, very very cool.
The only downside is that there seems to be fewer Sears stores than there used to be. Too many "real Americans" would prefer to buy the cheap knockoffs of everything for a few cents less at Wal-Mart.
Except that, apparently, children are becoming less and less violent, and have been doing so for a few decades now, according to violent crime statistics in America.
That doesn't preclude him from being stupid.
The original comment was about the extra insurance a carrier will sell you for your cell phone.
If it's so competitive, tell me where else besides through AT&T I can buy an insurance plan for my phone that will cover all repairs and accidental damage?
For health insurance, of course, it's even worse. It tends to be tied to your employer. You can't just "simply shop around for a lower price and cancel your existing policy once you find a better deal." Your stuck with the plan, or perhaps for a really good company, 2-3 plans (from the same insurer) that the company gives you. There will often be a one-month window during which you can switch every year. And, of course, a three-month period after enrollment before you can actually use it. I *could* switch to another one, but it would cost me substantially more, as the company pays for about 3/4 of it. Of course, even if I could convince the company to give me that money instead I still couldn't get insurance at that rate because the insurance companies give discounts to the corporations who buy from them for their employees.
What you say may be true of car insurance, which is probably why they all front-load the payments, and give you a discount after you've been with the same company for a year.
For homeowners insurance, yeah, I could have gone with another one, but their sales department had already been to my bank and made sure that that bank's customers got lower rates than I could get on my own, so I went with that one.
But, wait, if car insurance and medical insurance and homeowners insurance can still make a profit with all these discounts they give out, why do they charge so much more than that normally? Could it maybe be because they've determined that that's what people will pay?
You are correct in that I over-simplified the entire decision making process among consumers when I posted my example.
But by "profit", I meant overall profit, not just profit per sale. I thought that part at least was clear when I mentioned that it was possible for profit per sale to go up but profit to go down. That's what I meant, anyway.
Another factor consumers use when deciding to purchase something is how kindly they feel toward the store. Which is where the idea that "prices would be lower except for all that fraud" comes into play. If a business can deflect bad feelings about their prices away from themselves then people will feel less hostile, and thus more likely to buy their products, without changing the prices at all.
There are, of course, several thousand other factors that determine whether someone will buy something ("Product X is cooler", "Store Y is closer to where I am right now", "Company Z destroys rainforests and rapes puppies", "Bill Gates is a doodoohead", etc.) All these, and yes, even the cost to the company of some feature, will go into determining the price.
And, sometimes, they'll even do something at a loss, or hardly any profit at all, if it maximizes profit in another section of their business. (Notice how a drink at McDonalds costs more than a Big Mac, though the cost to the company is an order of magnitude or two less.)
No.
No, it would not.
The rates set for insurance are set to maximize profits for the insurance company.
As the price increases, fewer people will purchase it. If it increases enough, few enough people will purchase it that overall profit goes down. Right before that price point is the sweet spot they try to hit. That spot has nothing to do with any costs to the insurance company, including potential fraud.
Besides all of which, the monthly price, plus the deductible, are most likely high enough that even if every single person who had the insurance smashed their phone and demanded an upgrade when a new one came out, they'd still make a profit.
I'm surprised the "suspicious" percentage is so low, actually. If the insurance company is saying two-thirds of all claims are suspicious, that means that one-third of the time they can think of no way at all the damage could have been intentional.
If you pay me, I'll tell you whether he is or isn't.
Of course, if you pay someone else, you may get a different answer.
But they're lying. You have my word on it.
Or you can do what I did, and just make one up.
Last time I did this, the conversation went like this:
Me: Social Security Number xxx-xx-xxxx
Phone guy: Hm. The computer is saying that's not a valid SSN.
Me: Yeah, I've never had service with you before.
Phone guy: That shouldn't make any difference....
Me: Well, apparently it does.
Phone guy: Hold on, let me get my supervisor.
(music)
Supervisor: Sir, there seems to be a problem with your social security number. We're unable to validate it.
Me: Yeah, I've never had phone service with you before.
Supervisor: That shouldn't matter.
Me: Apparently it does.
Supervisor: OK. Hold on one minute while I override...
Me: No problem.
Voila, phone.
Of course, this was back in Ye Olden Dayes, when phones were utilities attached to homes, rather than something you picked up in a kiosk at the mall.
Radio shack is still geek heaven.
You just have to get past all the consumer crap, and dodge the salespeople, to get to the back where the good stuff is hiding in bins under the counter.
Just don't try to ask for help from the sales guy who will not only not be able to tell you where to find a 7407 LSI chip, but actually take *pride* in the fact that he's never heard of such a thing.
One "point of view" is based on facts, reason, evidence, science, and recorded history.
The other is based on what some people wish were true.
Fox News aside, when people talk about "both" sides of an issue, they don't generally mean the informed and uninformed sides.
In other words, not all points of view are equally valid. To claim otherwise is lazy and ignorant.
You use the word "theory."
That word does not mean what you think it means.
Yeah, I wish other legal documents could be amended, too!
I own an automobile, and I think that the law, passed 1904, should be changed so that I don't have to drive under 5mph with someone walking ahead of me waving a red flag...
But, I guess, that's just my "point of view", and I should accept all others as equally valid...
Nobody said that all those who graduate from those schools are poorly educated.
But, if your family is rich enough, yeah, it's quite possible to go all the way through those schools without getting any education at all.
I mean, any that doesn't involve drugs and parties.
If your daddy is paying your full tuition, and giving an extra couple of hundred thousand to the school in endowments, they're not going to flunk you out. When I was in college, we all knew who these people were. Some people were pissed about it, but I never minded that much, as that's where my university got the money to give me such a good financial aid package.
So we finally have a perfect car analogy!
But then how will I run Mass Effect 2?
I've heard that it can, but I've it this several times without noticeable damage.
I use it fairly infrequently, so I suppose it is possible that there are some subtle optical flaws that have crept in without me noticing.
Do NOT look directly at the sun through the telescope, of course. Instead, you use the telescope as a projector.
It takes a minute or two to aim: the trick is to use the shadow from the telescope to aim. When the shadow is smallest, you're pointing the right way.)
There are lots of web sites describing how to do it, such as this one. (I've never used the extra collar like they describe, but it probably wouldn't hurt.)
It also has the advantage that it's something a small group of people can enjoy at once.
At night, if it's reasonably dark at all, I'd recommend the moon (always easy to see. Use a moon filter, which probably came with your telescope).
Also, you should be able to see the Orion Nebula as a wide fuzzy patch. I've seen the banding of Jupiter, as well as its moons, in my 3.5" telescope, though I wasn't able to find the Red Spot, and the rings of Saturn.
Definitely get a software star chart (there are free ones available online) and a red filter for your flashlight so you don't lose night vision. It makes a surprisingly large difference.
My guess is they have no idea what the price will be before they start experimenting with how the service will work, how people will use it, and how much people will be willing to pay to get away from Comcast.
That's true just about anywhere.
The first time I was in Eugene, Oregon, I was looking for a bottle of rum at about 9 at night.
I went to two different stores before discovering that you can't buy rum in a grocery store in Oregon. After learning of the existence of specialized liquor stores, I was walking downtown in search of one. I asked several passersby if they could give me directions.
The only ones I could find were closed.
In the end, nobody could help me find rum.
But three different people offered to sell me pot, and one offered LSD.