If you were to ascribe blame to any particular group for the perceived slowing of innovation, the best target would be the lawyers. A dystopian future story pales in comparison to a stampeding herd of patent lawyers when it comes to stifling scientific and technological progress.
You can't even daydream about something new without getting sued for infringing multiple patents anymore.
The courts found the question of openness worthy of consideration in that case, but you'd probably have a hard time making the argument that a 5th grader has standing to sue the state of Florida for incorrectly assessing its students.
Perhaps the students themselves would not have standing, but involved parents would.
If it makes you feel better, the line about it being applicable only to foreign nationals overseas is a line of BS to placate the public. Beyond the shadow of a doubt, this will be used on all consoles, regardless of whether the owner is a US citizen or not.
Who determines if a project or a direction is worthy of being accepted? The same people that laid off and outsourced everyone, this single VP?
Even in the summary, it mentions this VP was hired after the firings and outsourcing to turn things back around. This VP's job is to deal with the smoking rubble which is the current IT employee morale.
It is not that this cannot happen in science - more that the bad science will always eventually be revealed eventually. TFA only serves to reinforce this idea. Though it is a tragedy that these particular problem studies were so lacking in scientific rigor, it is reassuring that the peer review system ultimately brought them to light, even if it took some time to do so.
Maybe we can shut down facebook to investigate? Or, when you reach a certain size, you're immune to prosecution?
Actually, yes. That is precisely the case.
You should celebrate our truly objective system. Everyone knows exactly how much influence they have on government. You just tally the numbers present in the corners of your green "influence papers".
Did you try contacting your phone service provider? They are under no such legal restraints, and it could be a PR win for them if it was a serious situation like that.
The main problem is that it's often impossible for a consumer to know whether a test or other medical intervention is necessary, appropriate or cost efficient.
Even further, a patient in need care is often unequipped to make a well-reasoned decision, even if fully informed. Their family is the same. This is especially true in an emergency scenario.
What's even more scary is the sentence after that:
If the new security measures are generating
similar, or even smaller, substitutions and the driving risk has grown as
hypothesized, the new methods could be contributing to more deaths
annually on U.S. roads than have been experienced cumulatively since
9/11 from terrorism against air transportation targets around the world.
In terms of loss of life, it would be better to have 9/11 occur annually than to continue the current security measures o_0
Yeah, and if that person doesn't keep their coverage with that company... less income - fewer profits.
That is less true in practice than you think. Many (most?) cases are such that the individual is provided coverage through their employer. In that case, the individual has little say in which insurance company they use. Sure, if the insurance is bad enough to cause enough complaints, the employer as a whole may switch providers, but it takes quite a bit to trigger that.
Clearly, it's coming from all the economic losses suffered at the hands of DRM and additional copyright enforcement.
Re:I have an organ donor card...
on
When Are You Dead?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I think the point made by the article is that we need more rigor in determining that the person is dead before the organs are removed. Obviously, they'll be dead afterwards.
There is no check for brain activity. They poke you a few times and remove your breather to see if you can breathe on your own. Note that a coma patient would fail some of those as well, and people *do* awake from comas. There is a big rush to declare you dead so that the organs can be harvested.
A "brain dead" patient is a money pinata, waiting to be whacked.
Because if the scanner makers paid off *every* legislator, they'd be operating at a loss. All it would take is a small group of congressmen to initiate a bill, a wave of public support from the bill to materialize, and it would pass easily because it's an election year.
What I'm wondering is: how do such small fry corporations in the grand scheme of things wield such vast lobbying power in comparison with other industries?
Slashdot Mirror
If you were to ascribe blame to any particular group for the perceived slowing of innovation, the best target would be the lawyers. A dystopian future story pales in comparison to a stampeding herd of patent lawyers when it comes to stifling scientific and technological progress.
You can't even daydream about something new without getting sued for infringing multiple patents anymore.
To help the free market fix itself better you need smart consumers.
Aye, there's the rub. The reason the "invisible hand" of the market is invisible is that it is usually not there.
The courts found the question of openness worthy of consideration in that case, but you'd probably have a hard time making the argument that a 5th grader has standing to sue the state of Florida for incorrectly assessing its students.
Perhaps the students themselves would not have standing, but involved parents would.
When did not having the absolute most-powerful military become a disaster for the U.S.?
Right around the time we decided it was our job to put our fingers into every country's business and to hell with what anyone else thought.
If it makes you feel better, the line about it being applicable only to foreign nationals overseas is a line of BS to placate the public. Beyond the shadow of a doubt, this will be used on all consoles, regardless of whether the owner is a US citizen or not.
Who determines if a project or a direction is worthy of being accepted? The same people that laid off and outsourced everyone, this single VP?
Even in the summary, it mentions this VP was hired after the firings and outsourcing to turn things back around. This VP's job is to deal with the smoking rubble which is the current IT employee morale.
It is not that this cannot happen in science - more that the bad science will always eventually be revealed eventually. TFA only serves to reinforce this idea. Though it is a tragedy that these particular problem studies were so lacking in scientific rigor, it is reassuring that the peer review system ultimately brought them to light, even if it took some time to do so.
If eliminating corporate ownership of copyrights comes at the cost of the 4th or 5th re-release of Titanic, then I am all for it.
Look, there is no such thing as "free" energy.
It's too bad that energy doesn't just fall out of the sky.
Maybe we can shut down facebook to investigate? Or, when you reach a certain size, you're immune to prosecution?
Actually, yes. That is precisely the case.
You should celebrate our truly objective system. Everyone knows exactly how much influence they have on government. You just tally the numbers present in the corners of your green "influence papers".
Did you try contacting your phone service provider? They are under no such legal restraints, and it could be a PR win for them if it was a serious situation like that.
The main problem is that it's often impossible for a consumer to know whether a test or other medical intervention is necessary, appropriate or cost efficient.
Even further, a patient in need care is often unequipped to make a well-reasoned decision, even if fully informed. Their family is the same. This is especially true in an emergency scenario.
What's even more scary is the sentence after that:
If the new security measures are generating similar, or even smaller, substitutions and the driving risk has grown as hypothesized, the new methods could be contributing to more deaths annually on U.S. roads than have been experienced cumulatively since 9/11 from terrorism against air transportation targets around the world.
In terms of loss of life, it would be better to have 9/11 occur annually than to continue the current security measures o_0
Unfortunately, it is not an issue of wisdom, but one of corruption. Millions of dollars have been spent to repeatedly extend copyright duration.
Interestingly, that would mean that the TSA has indirectly caused more deaths since 9/11 than the terrorists caused during 9/11.
Sure, you can get an abortion, but first you need to let me stick this foot-long device inside you.
If you think the control freaks sit on only one side of the aisle, you have already lost.
Yeah, and if that person doesn't keep their coverage with that company... less income - fewer profits.
That is less true in practice than you think. Many (most?) cases are such that the individual is provided coverage through their employer. In that case, the individual has little say in which insurance company they use. Sure, if the insurance is bad enough to cause enough complaints, the employer as a whole may switch providers, but it takes quite a bit to trigger that.
I see your nuclear reactor failure and raise you some coal seam fires.
Not if they mentioned it in the fine print :)
Whenever there is a global standard and a question on whether the US is following it, the safest best is that the US isn't.
More generally speaking, take any positive human endeavor, add money to it, and watch the value to humanity leech away.
Clearly, it's coming from all the economic losses suffered at the hands of DRM and additional copyright enforcement.
I think the point made by the article is that we need more rigor in determining that the person is dead before the organs are removed. Obviously, they'll be dead afterwards.
There is no check for brain activity. They poke you a few times and remove your breather to see if you can breathe on your own. Note that a coma patient would fail some of those as well, and people *do* awake from comas. There is a big rush to declare you dead so that the organs can be harvested.
A "brain dead" patient is a money pinata, waiting to be whacked.
Because if the scanner makers paid off *every* legislator, they'd be operating at a loss. All it would take is a small group of congressmen to initiate a bill, a wave of public support from the bill to materialize, and it would pass easily because it's an election year.
What I'm wondering is: how do such small fry corporations in the grand scheme of things wield such vast lobbying power in comparison with other industries?