The availability of subsidized hearing aids varies from one state to the next, whether you're talking private insurance, or Medicare/aid. Medicare doesn't cover hearing aids, or regular hearing exams. Most insurance plans cover $1500, at best.
Too many people need hearing aids to spread the cost over a risk pool, so the user is usually covering most of the cost. The major cost center seems to be distribution and sales, with retail about an 800% markup from wholesale. So, I suspect there's a lot of cost that could be wrung out under a more efficient business model.
As an aside, contrary to the whining in on-line forums, Medicare doesn't just pony up whatever a vendor bills for, but what they consider a "fair rate". Hence, health care suppliers stereotypically moan about Medicare "underpayment". Medicare as a whole isn't expensive because the program is spendthrift, it is expensive because they can't ditch customers... except in a wholesale manner via budget cuts.
Based on my own experience, reflected in a number of anecdotes in support forums, I believe the Mac Mini (and Macbook Pro) is configured not to run the fan at all until the CPU temp hits 80 C (and thermal shutdown at 90), at which point you go from zero dB fan noise to turbine mode. A frequent mistake when opening up a Mini is to leave the fan control lead unplugged, causing the fan to go max rpm the moment power is reapplied.
A workaround is to have the fan spin at a lower rpm, and ramp up gradually as the temperature climbs, for which I use Fan Control. It allows you to set a number of fan speed profiles, and is free speech/beer. My Mini's fan is usually turning at 1500 rpm in a quiet home office, and is largely inaudible to me until it hits 3000. Using this tool in the tropics, I've never had the Core Solo system go beyond 70 C (and 4000 rpm), even while running Handbrake.
Per the short and sweet developer's note behind the link, Roddenberry stipulated that others could use the 'tricorder' name. The take down notice seems to take issue with the LCARS look-n-feel. Thus, CBS could in theory start throwing takedown notes at all the sites featuring LCARS GUI themes. I'm going to guess the only reason this particular app got noticed is because enough Android phones have seeped through the ranks at CBS and their in-house counsel.
As such, should the developer (or others) care to, a fix is as close as a widget facelift. I suspect a change of font, color, and a couple of curves into steampunk-ish curlycues ought to do it. Unfortunately, the developer can't come up with a sufficient value of [reSources * wIll] to justify testing where this app would fit within look and feel case law. I sympathize with the developer's predicament.
Short answer to story title: No, geoengineering will not go prime time.
Longer answer: Geoengineering schemes to counteract climate change would all be large scale efforts and enormously costly... even if they worked as hoped the first time. There is an excellent chance they wouldn't work as well as hoped or even anywhere near as intended, and so additional funds would likely be required. Sort of like a war: you don't really know what it's going to cost until you stop fighting it.
Given the costs and risks, it would be a difficult sale to those who'd have to pay for it. Those at the top of the business model that causes climate change aren't going to, since it's their desire to hang onto an existing income stream that makes geoengineering even a topic of discussion. The mass of taxpayers aren't going to buy in, especially when they see that their individual out of pocket cost is vastly greater than what it'd take to just reduce the emissions that caused the problem.
But, this is all specious. Geoengineering is PR, is a distraction intended to comfort voters who are a bit undecided about climate change that everything will be OK, and if Al Gore turns out to be right, we'll get a crew out there to fix the problem, pronto.
Making a decent living doing a job you love: $xxx,xxx/yr + stock Being able to live without wage income for a year, then gradually spin back up to look for another business opportunity: priceless
There are some things only serious capital accumulation can buy. For everything else, there's the rat race.;)
To make this work requires Canadian cooperation. The most likely near term benefit once completed would be to subject Canadian raw materials to Russian competition.
So, now the cat is officially out of the bag. So, what? We already knew there was something up. Are we going to sail gunboats up the creek at Guangzhou and shell some forts? Blockade their ports? Embargo their trade? No. Hell, we still gave them control of a root DNS node, even though it's obvious this gives them added offensive capability. Really, all this might do is tweak the language in subsequent news reports when Chinese attacks occur. They'll still deny them, but now that there is an (inadvertently) officially acknowledged offensive capability, the categorical denials won't carry as much weight.
Of any periodicals, I think Linux-oriented rags are excellent candidates to go all digital. I think I'm pretty safe in assuming that the readership is on-line enough that getting their subscription material on-line is a natural step. They are probably more likely to have a tablet of some sort, even the rumored (gasp) non-Apple tablets.
On the flip side: even if they increase their subscriber base, advertisers may lose eyeballs that would have flipped through an issue on the newsstand, or on a friend's coffee table/desk. Advertisers LOVE newsstand sales because the readers typically consume more of the content. Finally, I'm not surprised, but not pleased, that the subscription rate doesn't reflect the fact that major expenses will be eliminated: the post-layout printing and distribution costs.
I'll set aside some potential issues with Mr. Dwyer's initial experiment. It's the stuff better experiments are made from, not a reason to crap on it.
My first thought was to wonder how well the fixed flat and tree arrays would measure up to a flat array with a solar tracker. Obviously, the tracking array would eat the fixed flat array's lunch. That "leaves" us to compare the tracking array with a further optimized version of the tree, grist for next year's experiment:
-> How would the trade off in complexity and maintenance requirements of the tracking array compare against the (presumably) lower power output of the tree?
-> How about in industrialized v. non-industrialized regions?
-> Would the tree benefit from the addition of a single axis of rotation to provide optimum sun exposure? Is there an optimum exposure?
Having now taken the 60 seconds needed to skim the RFI, I think my guess on what they're looking for was broadly correct. Whether the grad work has been done is still open to question.
Around about 1990, I attended a talk by Robert L. Forward at Hughes Aircraft, where he reviewed the results of a study he had completed for the USAF regarding anti-matter propulsion, primarily regarding further development of anti-matter production and storage methods. A reasonably good introduction can be found here. It was fascinating, in large part because virtually every concrete step towards reliable production of "fuel" ended with the comment "this would make a great graduate project."
I haven't looked at the details for the DARPA RFI (PDF), but I'm guessing that by this point, a lot of the grad work has been done (thesis refs, anyone?) and that for this first 1 year contract, they're looking for input on the economics of scaling up the grad work. For those seriously interested, I'd bet the 100 Year Starship Public Symposium this September in Orlando would be an excellent next step. Unfortunately, it's too late to submit papers, or respond to the RFI.
The parent made excellent points. Long story short: follow his advice, stay put.
That said, depending on who you work for now and later, a 40 y.o. doesn't have 20 years left, they've got 25 or 30. You and I are in a bit of a quandary. On the one hand, because of increasing life span and concentration of wealth, having most working people retire at 60 doesn't make economic sense, and odds are that you need to spend the extra 5 to 10 years stashing cash. On the other hand, most high-value added employers don't want to hire people near what used to be typical retirement ages, and you can't time when or how the next two or three recessions are going to affect your career.
So, listen to the parent. But, you've got more working years ahead of you than he states.
This isn't nitpicky at all. When a new Administration takes office, there is a lot of inertia from previous Administrations. There are costs associated with winding down data centers, you can't just mail pink slips and lock the place up. As to why the Obama Administration "waited" until now, review the actions of the 112th Congress.
You make a good point. A minute or two with Google suggests that the main thing Airbnb provides over Craigslist/Couch Surfing is a nicer site and a (presumably) more upscale stock of abodes. It also provides the illusion that they've done the legwork you'd expect to do yourself on Craigslist, or as an alternative to the trust-building on CouchsSurfing.
For Airbnb to rebuild the business goodwill they've lost, they'll need to 1) provide the 24/7 phone support EJ suggested, 2) provide some sort of bonding for when things go south, and 3) DO the upfront work they don't let their clients do. That's going to cost money. The investors can either spend it, and thereby buy back the lost goodwill, or they can pack it up.
Abstracted: - 1. Retain a lawyer, don't go it alone. - 2. Cooperate—carefully, the BSA's attorneys stay on retainer by maintaining a high recovery rate. - 3. Don't let the BSA's rhetoric intimidate you. - 4. Don't rush out and buy any software. - 5. Preserve evidence with confidentiality. - 6. Find your allies. - 7. Create a compliance plan. - 8. Negotiate non-monetary aspects.
I *hope* I'm wrong. I've prolly got another 30 or 40 years. I would like to live to see great things happen (again). I don't count suborbital space tourism as one of them.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this the same Olson who never met a program he didn't want to cut, or a tax expenditure (ie. loophole) for the oil industry he didn't want to protect? It's natural for a Congressional Rep to protect local industry, so I'm not surprised he's looking to replace his pork funding stream.
The days when a noticeable fraction of the US GDP goes into NASA are long over. Unless someone discovers an asteroid that shits tax breaks, private industry is going to stick with shooting sats into orbit. It's been a nice ride, but US man-in-space is basically over for the rest of my lifetime. I'll be interested to see how far the Chinese and Indians go before they hit their own limits.
The snarky title refers to Rep. Olson's largest campaign contributor, and I think it safe to say that the Kochs' could give a rat's behind about space flight.
You're correct, the US "made" money on these loans... because the Fed, with an accounting trick within its authority, in essence created trillions from thin air. The Fed created value - money - when buying what anyone else considered worthless.
During its open market operations, the Fed expands or shrinks the money supply (a superset of physical currency) by buying or selling bonds or other financial instruments. The "loans" discussed here were created when the Fed "bought" bonds and short term paper from the private institutions. Where did the Fed get the money to pay for them? The stacks of Treasury notes, whose value is ultimately backed by the "full faith and credit of the United States", ie. the ability of the Federal government to tax and print money. (Side note: the GOP is currently destroying trillions of dollars worth of goodwill. Can we expect a check from the RNC to repay it?)
Theoretically, this crap was backed by collateral. But, the edifice of fractional banking ultimately rests on a little bit of physical collateral, and a lot of trust. Since trust had by this time evaporated, the Fed was in effect passing out free money. While it's true that any surplus from Fed operations go the the US Treasury, the profits were a drop in the bucket against the trillions in value that drained out of the US economy.
I'll grant your general point, with a couple of footnotes: 1) to make the *diver's* life better, which may be a neutral or positive social good, and 2) it's the 0.01% that I'm worried about.
That 0.01% can be a real MFer, utterly negating the positive social effects of encouraging someone to sort through my trash, physical or virtual. I already shred the physical stuff I'm concerned about, but I'm not yet sold on the utility of taking time to sort the virtual.
Maybe it's a generational thing, but the/. summary writer seems to have missed the point of why people (used to) dumpster dive: collect intelligence that could be used AGAINST the divee. I'd LOVE to pick through other people's stuff, but I'll be GD'ed if I'm going to reciprocate. The crap I delete includes material nearly as valuable in terms of PII, PI, and IP as the stuff I keep on my drives, whether home or office.
Anonymous has been hacking into enough of the right kind of computers that it was a given they were going to get Federal attention. It takes a while to pull together a coordinated series of raids, so it's extremely unlikely the Sun (newspaper) exploit had any bearing on these arrests.
Obviously, this doesn't "solve" the latency issue, but the concept does help bandwidth. Also, it doesn't replace RF links, but merely would relegate them to the failover for the IPN version of the BGP.
2a) Electronic comms can be tracked. Maintain a deniable air gap.
3) Don't trust anyone to keep your confidences.
4) Don't do it unless you've got a specific axe to grind, and can think through likely consequences (general and personal).
5) Keep your ego in check.
Pvt. Manning blew all of these out of the water. The wide sweep of material he evidently collected demonstrated a pissed off individual without a cause, unsuited to be a soldier. I'm not sure he would have been much happier in a future, post-DADT Army. Manning wanted to brag, a typical downfall of lawbreakers. If he'd followed something along the lines of the "maxims" above, he may have been caught, anyway. But, he'd be in a better state of mind, and able to clam some degree of subjective control over his circumstances.
What did he plan to accomplish? Vague platitudes aside, nothing other than monkey with the system until he got his discharge.
What did he accomplish? Proved, again, that unauthorized release of classified material is not career enhancing, especially without a powerful patron. Provided more evidence that war is hell. That the Obama Administration's public and private policy goals and actions coincided, and that there was no secret agenda. Not surprisingly, the inadvertent consequence is probably the most important: an unedited snapshot of a major power's foreign policy in action, c. early 21st century. A treasure for scholars, of the sort usually unearthed only after a cataclysmic government collapse.
Slashdot Mirror
The availability of subsidized hearing aids varies from one state to the next, whether you're talking private insurance, or Medicare/aid. Medicare doesn't cover hearing aids, or regular hearing exams. Most insurance plans cover $1500, at best.
Too many people need hearing aids to spread the cost over a risk pool, so the user is usually covering most of the cost. The major cost center seems to be distribution and sales, with retail about an 800% markup from wholesale. So, I suspect there's a lot of cost that could be wrung out under a more efficient business model.
As an aside, contrary to the whining in on-line forums, Medicare doesn't just pony up whatever a vendor bills for, but what they consider a "fair rate". Hence, health care suppliers stereotypically moan about Medicare "underpayment". Medicare as a whole isn't expensive because the program is spendthrift, it is expensive because they can't ditch customers... except in a wholesale manner via budget cuts.
Based on my own experience, reflected in a number of anecdotes in support forums, I believe the Mac Mini (and Macbook Pro) is configured not to run the fan at all until the CPU temp hits 80 C (and thermal shutdown at 90), at which point you go from zero dB fan noise to turbine mode. A frequent mistake when opening up a Mini is to leave the fan control lead unplugged, causing the fan to go max rpm the moment power is reapplied.
A workaround is to have the fan spin at a lower rpm, and ramp up gradually as the temperature climbs, for which I use Fan Control. It allows you to set a number of fan speed profiles, and is free speech/beer. My Mini's fan is usually turning at 1500 rpm in a quiet home office, and is largely inaudible to me until it hits 3000. Using this tool in the tropics, I've never had the Core Solo system go beyond 70 C (and 4000 rpm), even while running Handbrake.
Per the short and sweet developer's note behind the link, Roddenberry stipulated that others could use the 'tricorder' name. The take down notice seems to take issue with the LCARS look-n-feel. Thus, CBS could in theory start throwing takedown notes at all the sites featuring LCARS GUI themes. I'm going to guess the only reason this particular app got noticed is because enough Android phones have seeped through the ranks at CBS and their in-house counsel.
As such, should the developer (or others) care to, a fix is as close as a widget facelift. I suspect a change of font, color, and a couple of curves into steampunk-ish curlycues ought to do it. Unfortunately, the developer can't come up with a sufficient value of [reSources * wIll] to justify testing where this app would fit within look and feel case law. I sympathize with the developer's predicament.
Short answer to story title: No, geoengineering will not go prime time.
Longer answer: Geoengineering schemes to counteract climate change would all be large scale efforts and enormously costly... even if they worked as hoped the first time. There is an excellent chance they wouldn't work as well as hoped or even anywhere near as intended, and so additional funds would likely be required. Sort of like a war: you don't really know what it's going to cost until you stop fighting it.
Given the costs and risks, it would be a difficult sale to those who'd have to pay for it. Those at the top of the business model that causes climate change aren't going to, since it's their desire to hang onto an existing income stream that makes geoengineering even a topic of discussion. The mass of taxpayers aren't going to buy in, especially when they see that their individual out of pocket cost is vastly greater than what it'd take to just reduce the emissions that caused the problem.
But, this is all specious. Geoengineering is PR, is a distraction intended to comfort voters who are a bit undecided about climate change that everything will be OK, and if Al Gore turns out to be right, we'll get a crew out there to fix the problem, pronto.
Making a decent living doing a job you love: $xxx,xxx/yr + stock
Being able to live without wage income for a year, then gradually spin back up to look for another business opportunity: priceless
There are some things only serious capital accumulation can buy. For everything else, there's the rat race. ;)
To make this work requires Canadian cooperation. The most likely near term benefit once completed would be to subject Canadian raw materials to Russian competition.
So, now the cat is officially out of the bag. So, what? We already knew there was something up. Are we going to sail gunboats up the creek at Guangzhou and shell some forts? Blockade their ports? Embargo their trade? No. Hell, we still gave them control of a root DNS node, even though it's obvious this gives them added offensive capability. Really, all this might do is tweak the language in subsequent news reports when Chinese attacks occur. They'll still deny them, but now that there is an (inadvertently) officially acknowledged offensive capability, the categorical denials won't carry as much weight.
Of any periodicals, I think Linux-oriented rags are excellent candidates to go all digital. I think I'm pretty safe in assuming that the readership is on-line enough that getting their subscription material on-line is a natural step. They are probably more likely to have a tablet of some sort, even the rumored (gasp) non-Apple tablets.
On the flip side: even if they increase their subscriber base, advertisers may lose eyeballs that would have flipped through an issue on the newsstand, or on a friend's coffee table/desk. Advertisers LOVE newsstand sales because the readers typically consume more of the content. Finally, I'm not surprised, but not pleased, that the subscription rate doesn't reflect the fact that major expenses will be eliminated: the post-layout printing and distribution costs.
I'll set aside some potential issues with Mr. Dwyer's initial experiment. It's the stuff better experiments are made from, not a reason to crap on it.
My first thought was to wonder how well the fixed flat and tree arrays would measure up to a flat array with a solar tracker. Obviously, the tracking array would eat the fixed flat array's lunch. That "leaves" us to compare the tracking array with a further optimized version of the tree, grist for next year's experiment:
-> How would the trade off in complexity and maintenance requirements of the tracking array compare against the (presumably) lower power output of the tree?
-> How about in industrialized v. non-industrialized regions?
-> Would the tree benefit from the addition of a single axis of rotation to provide optimum sun exposure? Is there an optimum exposure?
Having now taken the 60 seconds needed to skim the RFI, I think my guess on what they're looking for was broadly correct. Whether the grad work has been done is still open to question.
Around about 1990, I attended a talk by Robert L. Forward at Hughes Aircraft, where he reviewed the results of a study he had completed for the USAF regarding anti-matter propulsion, primarily regarding further development of anti-matter production and storage methods. A reasonably good introduction can be found here. It was fascinating, in large part because virtually every concrete step towards reliable production of "fuel" ended with the comment "this would make a great graduate project."
I haven't looked at the details for the DARPA RFI (PDF), but I'm guessing that by this point, a lot of the grad work has been done (thesis refs, anyone?) and that for this first 1 year contract, they're looking for input on the economics of scaling up the grad work. For those seriously interested, I'd bet the 100 Year Starship Public Symposium this September in Orlando would be an excellent next step. Unfortunately, it's too late to submit papers, or respond to the RFI.
The parent made excellent points. Long story short: follow his advice, stay put.
That said, depending on who you work for now and later, a 40 y.o. doesn't have 20 years left, they've got 25 or 30. You and I are in a bit of a quandary. On the one hand, because of increasing life span and concentration of wealth, having most working people retire at 60 doesn't make economic sense, and odds are that you need to spend the extra 5 to 10 years stashing cash. On the other hand, most high-value added employers don't want to hire people near what used to be typical retirement ages, and you can't time when or how the next two or three recessions are going to affect your career.
So, listen to the parent. But, you've got more working years ahead of you than he states.
This isn't nitpicky at all. When a new Administration takes office, there is a lot of inertia from previous Administrations. There are costs associated with winding down data centers, you can't just mail pink slips and lock the place up. As to why the Obama Administration "waited" until now, review the actions of the 112th Congress.
You make a good point. A minute or two with Google suggests that the main thing Airbnb provides over Craigslist/Couch Surfing is a nicer site and a (presumably) more upscale stock of abodes. It also provides the illusion that they've done the legwork you'd expect to do yourself on Craigslist, or as an alternative to the trust-building on CouchsSurfing.
For Airbnb to rebuild the business goodwill they've lost, they'll need to 1) provide the 24/7 phone support EJ suggested, 2) provide some sort of bonding for when things go south, and 3) DO the upfront work they don't let their clients do. That's going to cost money. The investors can either spend it, and thereby buy back the lost goodwill, or they can pack it up.
Google is your friend, turning up this 2008 advice column.
Abstracted:
- 1. Retain a lawyer, don't go it alone.
- 2. Cooperate—carefully, the BSA's attorneys stay on retainer by maintaining a high recovery rate.
- 3. Don't let the BSA's rhetoric intimidate you.
- 4. Don't rush out and buy any software.
- 5. Preserve evidence with confidentiality.
- 6. Find your allies.
- 7. Create a compliance plan.
- 8. Negotiate non-monetary aspects.
I *hope* I'm wrong. I've prolly got another 30 or 40 years. I would like to live to see great things happen (again). I don't count suborbital space tourism as one of them.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this the same Olson who never met a program he didn't want to cut, or a tax expenditure (ie. loophole) for the oil industry he didn't want to protect? It's natural for a Congressional Rep to protect local industry, so I'm not surprised he's looking to replace his pork funding stream.
The days when a noticeable fraction of the US GDP goes into NASA are long over. Unless someone discovers an asteroid that shits tax breaks, private industry is going to stick with shooting sats into orbit. It's been a nice ride, but US man-in-space is basically over for the rest of my lifetime. I'll be interested to see how far the Chinese and Indians go before they hit their own limits.
The snarky title refers to Rep. Olson's largest campaign contributor, and I think it safe to say that the Kochs' could give a rat's behind about space flight.
You're correct, the US "made" money on these loans... because the Fed, with an accounting trick within its authority, in essence created trillions from thin air. The Fed created value - money - when buying what anyone else considered worthless.
During its open market operations, the Fed expands or shrinks the money supply (a superset of physical currency) by buying or selling bonds or other financial instruments. The "loans" discussed here were created when the Fed "bought" bonds and short term paper from the private institutions. Where did the Fed get the money to pay for them? The stacks of Treasury notes, whose value is ultimately backed by the "full faith and credit of the United States", ie. the ability of the Federal government to tax and print money. (Side note: the GOP is currently destroying trillions of dollars worth of goodwill. Can we expect a check from the RNC to repay it?)
Theoretically, this crap was backed by collateral. But, the edifice of fractional banking ultimately rests on a little bit of physical collateral, and a lot of trust. Since trust had by this time evaporated, the Fed was in effect passing out free money. While it's true that any surplus from Fed operations go the the US Treasury, the profits were a drop in the bucket against the trillions in value that drained out of the US economy.
Per the Wikipedia entry, normal audits of the Fed leave significant gaps, gaps that were to some degree addressed by this more through audit.
Perhaps so. Let's install this tool on *your* system. Maybe there's more value to be found.
I'll grant your general point, with a couple of footnotes: 1) to make the *diver's* life better, which may be a neutral or positive social good, and 2) it's the 0.01% that I'm worried about.
That 0.01% can be a real MFer, utterly negating the positive social effects of encouraging someone to sort through my trash, physical or virtual. I already shred the physical stuff I'm concerned about, but I'm not yet sold on the utility of taking time to sort the virtual.
Maybe it's a generational thing, but the /. summary writer seems to have missed the point of why people (used to) dumpster dive: collect intelligence that could be used AGAINST the divee. I'd LOVE to pick through other people's stuff, but I'll be GD'ed if I'm going to reciprocate. The crap I delete includes material nearly as valuable in terms of PII, PI, and IP as the stuff I keep on my drives, whether home or office.
Anonymous has been hacking into enough of the right kind of computers that it was a given they were going to get Federal attention. It takes a while to pull together a coordinated series of raids, so it's extremely unlikely the Sun (newspaper) exploit had any bearing on these arrests.
Obviously, this doesn't "solve" the latency issue, but the concept does help bandwidth. Also, it doesn't replace RF links, but merely would relegate them to the failover for the IPN version of the BGP.
Pvt. Manning blew all of these out of the water. The wide sweep of material he evidently collected demonstrated a pissed off individual without a cause, unsuited to be a soldier. I'm not sure he would have been much happier in a future, post-DADT Army. Manning wanted to brag, a typical downfall of lawbreakers. If he'd followed something along the lines of the "maxims" above, he may have been caught, anyway. But, he'd be in a better state of mind, and able to clam some degree of subjective control over his circumstances.
What did he plan to accomplish? Vague platitudes aside, nothing other than monkey with the system until he got his discharge.
What did he accomplish? Proved, again, that unauthorized release of classified material is not career enhancing, especially without a powerful patron. Provided more evidence that war is hell. That the Obama Administration's public and private policy goals and actions coincided, and that there was no secret agenda. Not surprisingly, the inadvertent consequence is probably the most important: an unedited snapshot of a major power's foreign policy in action, c. early 21st century. A treasure for scholars, of the sort usually unearthed only after a cataclysmic government collapse.