First off, pure R&D (like the kind that drives actual human development, technological advancement, and industry creation) doesn't often deliver immediate industrial benefits or applications. It is only over time as ideas are refined, enhanced, and evolved that they often find a purpose.
Hell, LOOK AT THE INTERNET. Do you know how much money is literally DUMPED into DARPA every year that doesn't do diddly squat? Yet every so often you get something that just explodes. Do you think the original developers of the DARPAnet said:
"Hey, you know what Chuck? We could have someone right some langauges and abstraction layers on this, like a mark-up language or some kind of hyper-text thing, make a company that allows people to auction off the knick knacks in their attic, and make a fortune! Better yet, we'll create a whole world of ecommerce and REVOLUTIONIZE commerce!"
Evolution, whether industrial or bioligical, is organic in nature and doesn't evolove linearly. Sure, it would be really nice if we could just say "this is where we need to invest x dollars and everything will be OOOOOO-tay", but it would also be nice if we could resolve world piece to a 10 character mathmatical formula.
Think for just ONE MOMENT what life would be like if countries and companies didn't accept the 10% return on their R&D dollars. You wouldn't have 75% of the technology that came out of the industrial revolution and 20th century, you'd have less than HALF the medical advancement AT BEST!
I can easily see how Scramjet technology could make world-wide convenient travel a REAL possibilty in the next 20 years, and given the more sensible economics of fuel with scramjets it would make more sense from a cost basis as well.
BTW, the reason the Concorde was a failure was because supersonic flight based on current engine technology is a pig (eats fuel) and can't make a profit off the people it can carry. If you brought scramjet powered planes capable of hour flights ANYWHERE ON THE GLOBE and could do it on half the fuel I think I can safely say that airline companies would kill each other for it (last CEO standing... GO!).
I haven't looked into it too much, but from what I understand newer 2.4ghz phones use an adaptive frequency response to get around interference from other devices. In essence they detect other devices on "locked" channels and maneuver their way through the mine field without causing any real problems for everyone else.
As for actual signal strength, the phones aren't usually the problem. 2.4ghz phones have 2.4ghz transmitters in the base station, but the phone itself is often just 900mhz. That being the case positioning the phones base unit away from any WIFI equipment can help, the same way positioning WIFI gear away from a microwave does.
You can probably just find more about the newer adaptive 2.4ghz stuff by doing a search with google...
Nothing quite like a robust multiple socks proxyt client to make one all warm and snugly. Now, to return to my plan to undermine the capitalist machine.
Why on earth would anyone make a movie out of Firefly? Let's see, a totally unbelievable melding of the western and space genres in an almost direct take-off of Cowboy Bebop with cheesy dialog and cookie cutter characters. Yeah, right, I can see how this would be seen as original.
I mean I know there are people out there who liked the show, but seriously, how can you even begin to compare this with the myriad number of other canceled but better shows that haven't gotten movie treatment? Let ALONE revised on TV itself.
I'm calling it right now, this is going to be a flop of titanic proportions. Not only does it have a miniscule audience, but the main plot for the show (and any sub-polots you can dream up) can't in trhe least be compelling. A two hour extravaganza to deliver penicillin to Trillium-6! Hooray!
The only credit I'll give Firefly was the scene in the first episode where he kicked the non-compliant bad guy into the engine's intake. THAT was original, unexpected, and highly amusing.
The Apple product has to be WIRED into the network, so effectively it is JUST like a wired squeezebox. The only item the apple unit offers that the squeezebox doesn't is that it's also a wireless g AP... big woopty doo, I can buy one of those from SMC for $50.
I'll give the Apple unit props for being a portable AP since that's kind of cool. I think the addition of profiles is interesting, though I highly doubt most users will have places they frequent regularly (enough to make up a profile) to use them.
The problem is the selling of this thing as a music item. First off it doesn't offer ANY interface, meaning you STILL need a PC to change songs or play things on the stereo where you have set-up the remote unit. How often do you want to change the songs in teh living room from your upstairs office?!? Pfft, utter waste of time. Then there's the fact it doesn't even deliver real audio outs, etc.
In contract the squeezebox IS the only device you need with your stereo; its a digital receiver that streams the music from the server or source via software. You can change songs and scroll through your library FROM the squeezebox, meaning you don't have to go back to your office, pick a song, and then tell the thing to play it in the living room.
Basically if you want a small 802.11g AP to go on the road with you great. If you want a digital music receiver the Apple unit is a waste of time.
-rt
The funny part is that your boss is an idiot...
on
Why I.T. Matters
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
That's the argument made by the business "no creativity/technology ability" plebes who sucked off the internet boom like leeches and fled into thr night light vampires at the first sign of daylight.
The TRUTH is that the US business world saw some potential to make money off of the technological innovatgions coming out of Silicon Valley in the early 90s. Without thinking it through they threw massive funds into the soup, attracting totally incapable morons looking for a buck, and then when those idiots presented outrageous skyscrapers of cards to these "investment geniuses" they gave them MORE MONEY (think of bike messengers delivering $50 rolls of toilet paper here).
Now were just insulted, but THEN these morons toss the "slow and steady" tech-heads who WERE building solid business and plans to teh wind in favor of the "profit RIGHT NOW" IPO craze of the end 90s, building illusory value at an astronomical rate in the search for a buck.
You tell your boss that if she doesn't like making a living off the back of the ideas of people 10x more intelligent, innovative, and creative than she is she can go join P&G with the rest of her ilk.
I hate nothing more than idiots who make outrageous arguments with zero evidence and even less understanding.
Have you ever heard the old adage that a squirrel could walk from Maine to Florida without touching the ground? The reason for this adage is that the entire eastern seaboard of the US used to be a SUPER-dense old-growth forest. That forest has since been nearly obliterated, and very little of the original growth actually remains.
That's the greatest example of deforestation in the US, but there are plenty of others that are worthy of note. Then you can look at other countries (Ireland, UK) that used to be almost entirely covered and have less than 1% of their original forests remaining.
Actually that's incorrect. It applies to program files, system files, drivers, etc.
I just went in and checked for a digital signature on Windows Office XP Dev edition (2002). The setup.exe and assorted other files are all digitally signed by MS and countersigned by Verisign (I can include the specifics of the Verisign license if necessary).
That's two years old and still has a verifiable digital signature on the installer files.
In answer to all the aforementioned I have Office Developer 2002 (XP) and just checked the executable to see.
"Setup.exe" (what you might call the installer, since it is the claunch file) is digitally signed by MS and checks out perfectly under Windows XP SP1. The digital sigtnature is cosigned by Verisign, etc.
So as I originally speculated Windows does have a feature to counter this (verifiable signature) that would have insured a method to prevent the such a Trojan from getting launched on your PC. Of course this is assuming the user went into the properties setting for one of teh installer files and actually looked, which is probably unlikely when dealing with a noob.
If it was a windows installed you could check to make sure that various files were signed and authenticated by MS, information which I don't believe can actually be faked (dlls, exe, cab files, etc.).
I don't know if Mac has a similar feature, and I don't know if some random moron like this guy would even have bothered to check. However, it would seem that MS' own security would indeed have offered a better chance of preventing such a Trojan.:)
This morning I woke up, ordered the sun to rise, and it rose high into the sky. The only possible conclusion is that I am the most powerful man in the world.
The Nitrus debuted a year before the iPod mini using the first generation Hitachi 1" drive (1.2gb).
I'm not sure what research you're talking about, but I would probably analogize it with the "research" Apple did when they stopped by Xerox's research center for a "visit"...;)
That the Nitrus I'm discussing is the first generation Nitrus that shipped A YEAR AGO.
The new Nitrus (which is supposed be released very soon) uses the same Hitachi 1" drive as the iPod (the original Nitrus used the original 1" Hitachi drive that only had 1.2gb capacity) and comes in silver and black.
"the breakthrough was to have a audio player that a capacity beyond ~500 megs that was also suitable for running/jogging--the mini is the first to break that barrier."
The Rio Nitrus was the first player to use a 1" drive. It:
- has a capacity of 1.2gb - plays WMA or MP3 files - has a battery life double the iPod or the iPod mini (15-16 hours vs. the iPod's 8hr max) - doesn't come with a defective headphone jack
Oh, and you can pick one up immediately at any local electronics store.:)
The ground behind dumpsters along the St. Patrick's Day parade route in new York will be electrified and "smart-monitored" to prevent unacceptable public urination. The "smart-monitors" are designed to detect small increases in both temperature and humidity, and will activate an electric grid to immediately stun the perpetrator by delivering a charge up the "line of offense."
I mean seriously, when exactly did Americans decide that the only way to get your neighbor to do EXACTLY what you want is to legislate him into the ground?!? What the hell happened to the "live and let live" ethos that took hold after we finally crawled out from under the puritan gravestone?!?
I just love the fact that I can't buy certain property in my town unless I agree to live under the micro-rules of a private group of homeowners who want to tell their neighbors what color their doormat should be. I thought being a US citizen and adhering to state and federal law was enough to allow me to own and manage my own property, but its good to know I have a bunch of busy-body neighbors with no lives to involve themselves in my personal business!
This country is not being flushed down the drain, it is being air-rammed down the drain with a 1000psi motor.
I don't really understand the problem you're talking about. I have yet to encounter a copy protected CD that good ripping software couldn't just bypass in error recovery or secure mode. In fact, I cazn generally bypass any protection on a CD with the NORMAL ripping more at like 6x or so for accuracy.
ECDDA is the easiest and most robust tool I've found, and it rips straight to any of about 10 different codecs including Ogg, MP3, AAC, WAV, FLAC, WMA, etc. EAC is nice in that it has a secure mode that "guarantees" you get an exact copy of the music file, but it doesn't rip straight to certain standards and can be a bit irritatingly complex.
In the case where I did encounter a protected CD I couldnt bypass I would just return it to teh store and tell them that I couldn't use it per my rights under fair use (i.e., it didn't work) and I want my money back.
Ford sued the Daimler-Chrysler Group on Tuesday for infringement of their patent for using hydrocarbon powered combustion machines to power vehicular transports.
near permanent, so no, it wasn't permanent. With surgery and treatment by one of the foremost doctors in the country she recovered almost completely. However, years later her face and eyes are exteremly sensitive to sunlight, so much so that she has to take extra precautions when traveling in summer or tropical climates or out in the sun.
If you believe that you have never worked or hung out with people who operate in an industry where there is an "us against them" mentality. Try the police, try doctors, etc.
Psychological studies back up this idea of group behavior, I don't have to make it up. It isn't a conscious effort to screw others or some nefarious plot. The doctors on the review boards simply:
1. Identify with the doctors being reviewed 2. Empathize with the practice ending affect losing a medical license would have after 30 years of schooling. 3. Buy into the bs argument about how patients are just litigious bastards looking to score, like you do.
And they act accordingly. Why do you think that GOOD cops (and there are good cops) will cover-up for a bad cop who beat up a suspect? Because they're part of a secret cult bent on world domination? No, because theu identify with that cop and, through the develolpment of a group identity via opposition with the public, they see themselves as cops first and the public as the enemy "other".
Much of this has been shown to come from the indemnification of certain professions from singular responsibility. In teh case of cops it is IMPOSSIBLE to sure a single police officer who commits abuse or a crime against a suspect. You can sue the DEPARTMENT or the CITY, but because of the coverage the union has gotten for officers you CANNOT sue the lone cop who actually performed the act.
Flip this over to doctors and it holds true yet again. Doctors have shown (againt, supported evidence, RTFAs I supplied) a reluctance to hold their own accountable and actually revoke licenses for known offenders. The result of this is that those individuals continue to practice, causing more problems, causing more malpractice claims, driving up insurance costs for doctors as a group, and perpetuating the EXACT reason doctors feel persecuted to begin with.
So what's the short of it? If you analyze the situation you see that the actions of a few bad doctors in the system feed a self-perpetuating persecution complex that drive up rates, make doctors defensive, and cause them to "protect themselves" in the face of an attack that doesn't exist.
As I said, RTFAs. Then read about group and mob behavior to get an idea of how the larger identity relates to individual action.
I make $110k a year. Ove the course of my life (assumed to be 72 years for the average) I should expect to pull down almost $8mil at that rate. However, I plan to do better over the years, so this will likely exceed $10mil in total earnings over the course of my life.
If I were blinded by a doctor's negligence I would be unable to do my job (information architect, manager), would have to find a new career, would have nothing to live on in the interim, would be unable to drive, would be unable to do just about ANYTHING I do now.
And you're telling me that after a doctor, in his negligence, blinded me FOR LIFE all I can get for that is $250k?!? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!? The doctor took my career, took my life, took everything I have or will have in a flick and I get $250k for my life.
I don't know about you, but I consider my life worth a site more than $250k dude, and your liability caps do nothing to accomodate that kind of loss. The insurance industry wants it TO MAKE MONEY. Don't kid yourself and think they're all high and mighty dude, they want to make MORE MONEY at the expense of US citizens, and only an ass would buy into the tripe they shovel out about how insurance rates are destroying the medical profession in the face of studies, like the one I cited, that DIRECTLY REFUTE THAT ARGUMENT.
First off the Harvard study I cited was/is teh most comprehensive study of medical malpractice ever attempted in the United States. If the AMA and the insurance companies think its so flawed I wonder why they haven't bothered to conduct a study that refutes it. They've only had 15 YEARS!
Second, if you don't believe that study fine, I'm not going to argue the point with you. The people that conducted it did a thorough analysis using doctors to validate or invalidate patient cases where a claim for malpractice could be made. They didn't just look at someone and go "oh yeah dude, you got fizucked!" These are researchers with PHD, doctors, etc. who assembled a scientific study on the problem.
As for the rest of your argument, are you REALLY arguing that having 1% of the peopl who have valid claims (if you RTFA you'd see that valid is people who were injured through the incompetence or gross negligence of their doctors, i.e. the exact definition of malpractice) is too much? REALLY?!? I mean dude, 1% of the poeple who could sue do, of that 1% actually WIN of people who have SUFFERED NEGLIGENCE, and you have a problem with that?
I really hope you don't suffer some horrible mistake in the ER, get blinded or screwed up for life, and then get told by a lawyer "I ve mmanaged to fight for $75k. You'll just have to deal with being blind for the rest of your life... maybe you can program using a braille keyboard." Actually maybe I do, I always like it when someone gets bitten in the ass by his ignorant remarks.
Slashdot Mirror
First off, pure R&D (like the kind that drives actual human development, technological advancement, and industry creation) doesn't often deliver immediate industrial benefits or applications. It is only over time as ideas are refined, enhanced, and evolved that they often find a purpose.
Hell, LOOK AT THE INTERNET. Do you know how much money is literally DUMPED into DARPA every year that doesn't do diddly squat? Yet every so often you get something that just explodes. Do you think the original developers of the DARPAnet said:
"Hey, you know what Chuck? We could have someone right some langauges and abstraction layers on this, like a mark-up language or some kind of hyper-text thing, make a company that allows people to auction off the knick knacks in their attic, and make a fortune! Better yet, we'll create a whole world of ecommerce and REVOLUTIONIZE commerce!"
Evolution, whether industrial or bioligical, is organic in nature and doesn't evolove linearly. Sure, it would be really nice if we could just say "this is where we need to invest x dollars and everything will be OOOOOO-tay", but it would also be nice if we could resolve world piece to a 10 character mathmatical formula.
Think for just ONE MOMENT what life would be like if countries and companies didn't accept the 10% return on their R&D dollars. You wouldn't have 75% of the technology that came out of the industrial revolution and 20th century, you'd have less than HALF the medical advancement AT BEST!
I can easily see how Scramjet technology could make world-wide convenient travel a REAL possibilty in the next 20 years, and given the more sensible economics of fuel with scramjets it would make more sense from a cost basis as well.
BTW, the reason the Concorde was a failure was because supersonic flight based on current engine technology is a pig (eats fuel) and can't make a profit off the people it can carry. If you brought scramjet powered planes capable of hour flights ANYWHERE ON THE GLOBE and could do it on half the fuel I think I can safely say that airline companies would kill each other for it (last CEO standing... GO!).
-rt
Quick search found the following:
http://www.dectweb.com/News&Views/Features/0302
Not the most impressive site or source, but we're not looking for NASA level input and I don't think anyone's going to be lying about this stuff.
-rt
I haven't looked into it too much, but from what I understand newer 2.4ghz phones use an adaptive frequency response to get around interference from other devices. In essence they detect other devices on "locked" channels and maneuver their way through the mine field without causing any real problems for everyone else.
As for actual signal strength, the phones aren't usually the problem. 2.4ghz phones have 2.4ghz transmitters in the base station, but the phone itself is often just 900mhz. That being the case positioning the phones base unit away from any WIFI equipment can help, the same way positioning WIFI gear away from a microwave does.
You can probably just find more about the newer adaptive 2.4ghz stuff by doing a search with google...
-rt
Price for a laptop? $1500.00
Price for Win XP Pro? $299.99
Price for SP2? Free
Resinstalling Windows XP, all your programs, and all your data after SP2 renders the computer unusable? Priceless
-rt
Nothing quite like a robust multiple socks proxyt client to make one all warm and snugly. Now, to return to my plan to undermine the capitalist machine.
-rt
Why on earth would anyone make a movie out of Firefly? Let's see, a totally unbelievable melding of the western and space genres in an almost direct take-off of Cowboy Bebop with cheesy dialog and cookie cutter characters. Yeah, right, I can see how this would be seen as original.
I mean I know there are people out there who liked the show, but seriously, how can you even begin to compare this with the myriad number of other canceled but better shows that haven't gotten movie treatment? Let ALONE revised on TV itself.
I'm calling it right now, this is going to be a flop of titanic proportions. Not only does it have a miniscule audience, but the main plot for the show (and any sub-polots you can dream up) can't in trhe least be compelling. A two hour extravaganza to deliver penicillin to Trillium-6! Hooray!
The only credit I'll give Firefly was the scene in the first episode where he kicked the non-compliant bad guy into the engine's intake. THAT was original, unexpected, and highly amusing.
-rt
The Apple product has to be WIRED into the network, so effectively it is JUST like a wired squeezebox. The only item the apple unit offers that the squeezebox doesn't is that it's also a wireless g AP... big woopty doo, I can buy one of those from SMC for $50.
I'll give the Apple unit props for being a portable AP since that's kind of cool. I think the addition of profiles is interesting, though I highly doubt most users will have places they frequent regularly (enough to make up a profile) to use them.
The problem is the selling of this thing as a music item. First off it doesn't offer ANY interface, meaning you STILL need a PC to change songs or play things on the stereo where you have set-up the remote unit. How often do you want to change the songs in teh living room from your upstairs office?!? Pfft, utter waste of time. Then there's the fact it doesn't even deliver real audio outs, etc.
In contract the squeezebox IS the only device you need with your stereo; its a digital receiver that streams the music from the server or source via software. You can change songs and scroll through your library FROM the squeezebox, meaning you don't have to go back to your office, pick a song, and then tell the thing to play it in the living room.
Basically if you want a small 802.11g AP to go on the road with you great. If you want a digital music receiver the Apple unit is a waste of time.
-rt
That's the argument made by the business "no creativity/technology ability" plebes who sucked off the internet boom like leeches and fled into thr night light vampires at the first sign of daylight.
The TRUTH is that the US business world saw some potential to make money off of the technological innovatgions coming out of Silicon Valley in the early 90s. Without thinking it through they threw massive funds into the soup, attracting totally incapable morons looking for a buck, and then when those idiots presented outrageous skyscrapers of cards to these "investment geniuses" they gave them MORE MONEY (think of bike messengers delivering $50 rolls of toilet paper here).
Now were just insulted, but THEN these morons toss the "slow and steady" tech-heads who WERE building solid business and plans to teh wind in favor of the "profit RIGHT NOW" IPO craze of the end 90s, building illusory value at an astronomical rate in the search for a buck.
You tell your boss that if she doesn't like making a living off the back of the ideas of people 10x more intelligent, innovative, and creative than she is she can go join P&G with the rest of her ilk.
I hate nothing more than idiots who make outrageous arguments with zero evidence and even less understanding.
-rt
None of us would be able to lose our jobs to foreigners willing to do teh work for 25% of the pay and none of the benefits!
THANK YOU DARPA!
-rt
Are you kidding?
Have you ever heard the old adage that a squirrel could walk from Maine to Florida without touching the ground? The reason for this adage is that the entire eastern seaboard of the US used to be a SUPER-dense old-growth forest. That forest has since been nearly obliterated, and very little of the original growth actually remains.
That's the greatest example of deforestation in the US, but there are plenty of others that are worthy of note. Then you can look at other countries (Ireland, UK) that used to be almost entirely covered and have less than 1% of their original forests remaining.
-rt
Actually that's incorrect. It applies to program files, system files, drivers, etc.
I just went in and checked for a digital signature on Windows Office XP Dev edition (2002). The setup.exe and assorted other files are all digitally signed by MS and countersigned by Verisign (I can include the specifics of the Verisign license if necessary).
That's two years old and still has a verifiable digital signature on the installer files.
-rt
In answer to all the aforementioned I have Office Developer 2002 (XP) and just checked the executable to see.
"Setup.exe" (what you might call the installer, since it is the claunch file) is digitally signed by MS and checks out perfectly under Windows XP SP1. The digital sigtnature is cosigned by Verisign, etc.
So as I originally speculated Windows does have a feature to counter this (verifiable signature) that would have insured a method to prevent the such a Trojan from getting launched on your PC. Of course this is assuming the user went into the properties setting for one of teh installer files and actually looked, which is probably unlikely when dealing with a noob.
-rt
If it was a windows installed you could check to make sure that various files were signed and authenticated by MS, information which I don't believe can actually be faked (dlls, exe, cab files, etc.).
I don't know if Mac has a similar feature, and I don't know if some random moron like this guy would even have bothered to check. However, it would seem that MS' own security would indeed have offered a better chance of preventing such a Trojan.
-rt
Well I've got that beat.
This morning I woke up, ordered the sun to rise, and it rose high into the sky. The only possible conclusion is that I am the most powerful man in the world.
Point, game, match.
-rt
The Nitrus debuted a year before the iPod mini using the first generation Hitachi 1" drive (1.2gb).
I'm not sure what research you're talking about, but I would probably analogize it with the "research" Apple did when they stopped by Xerox's research center for a "visit"...
-rt
That the Nitrus I'm discussing is the first generation Nitrus that shipped A YEAR AGO.
The new Nitrus (which is supposed be released very soon) uses the same Hitachi 1" drive as the iPod (the original Nitrus used the original 1" Hitachi drive that only had 1.2gb capacity) and comes in silver and black.
-rt
"the breakthrough was to have a audio player that a capacity beyond ~500 megs that was also suitable for running/jogging--the mini is the first to break that barrier."
The Rio Nitrus was the first player to use a 1" drive. It:
- has a capacity of 1.2gb
- plays WMA or MP3 files
- has a battery life double the iPod or the iPod mini (15-16 hours vs. the iPod's 8hr max)
- doesn't come with a defective headphone jack
Oh, and you can pick one up immediately at any local electronics store.
Best,
rt
The ground behind dumpsters along the St. Patrick's Day parade route in new York will be electrified and "smart-monitored" to prevent unacceptable public urination. The "smart-monitors" are designed to detect small increases in both temperature and humidity, and will activate an electric grid to immediately stun the perpetrator by delivering a charge up the "line of offense."
I mean seriously, when exactly did Americans decide that the only way to get your neighbor to do EXACTLY what you want is to legislate him into the ground?!? What the hell happened to the "live and let live" ethos that took hold after we finally crawled out from under the puritan gravestone?!?
I just love the fact that I can't buy certain property in my town unless I agree to live under the micro-rules of a private group of homeowners who want to tell their neighbors what color their doormat should be. I thought being a US citizen and adhering to state and federal law was enough to allow me to own and manage my own property, but its good to know I have a bunch of busy-body neighbors with no lives to involve themselves in my personal business!
This country is not being flushed down the drain, it is being air-rammed down the drain with a 1000psi motor.
-rt
DAMN STRAIGHT! Holy S%^&!
Dude, that trailer rocked, and if the movie is half of what that makes it out to be it will, in the words of Cartman, "kick ass..."
Absolutely amazing. As the thing unfolded my mouth just started opening and going up at the edges all on its own. I'm blown away.
-rt
I don't really understand the problem you're talking about. I have yet to encounter a copy protected CD that good ripping software couldn't just bypass in error recovery or secure mode. In fact, I cazn generally bypass any protection on a CD with the NORMAL ripping more at like 6x or so for accuracy.
Some of the programs I use include:
- Easy CD-DA Creator
- EAC
ECDDA is the easiest and most robust tool I've found, and it rips straight to any of about 10 different codecs including Ogg, MP3, AAC, WAV, FLAC, WMA, etc. EAC is nice in that it has a secure mode that "guarantees" you get an exact copy of the music file, but it doesn't rip straight to certain standards and can be a bit irritatingly complex.
In the case where I did encounter a protected CD I couldnt bypass I would just return it to teh store and tell them that I couldn't use it per my rights under fair use (i.e., it didn't work) and I want my money back.
-rt
Ford sued the Daimler-Chrysler Group on Tuesday for infringement of their patent for using hydrocarbon powered combustion machines to power vehicular transports.
"This is indeed a strange universe Kodos..."
-rt
near permanent, so no, it wasn't permanent. With surgery and treatment by one of the foremost doctors in the country she recovered almost completely. However, years later her face and eyes are exteremly sensitive to sunlight, so much so that she has to take extra precautions when traveling in summer or tropical climates or out in the sun.
-rt
If you believe that you have never worked or hung out with people who operate in an industry where there is an "us against them" mentality. Try the police, try doctors, etc.
Psychological studies back up this idea of group behavior, I don't have to make it up. It isn't a conscious effort to screw others or some nefarious plot. The doctors on the review boards simply:
1. Identify with the doctors being reviewed
2. Empathize with the practice ending affect losing a medical license would have after 30 years of schooling.
3. Buy into the bs argument about how patients are just litigious bastards looking to score, like you do.
And they act accordingly. Why do you think that GOOD cops (and there are good cops) will cover-up for a bad cop who beat up a suspect? Because they're part of a secret cult bent on world domination? No, because theu identify with that cop and, through the develolpment of a group identity via opposition with the public, they see themselves as cops first and the public as the enemy "other".
Much of this has been shown to come from the indemnification of certain professions from singular responsibility. In teh case of cops it is IMPOSSIBLE to sure a single police officer who commits abuse or a crime against a suspect. You can sue the DEPARTMENT or the CITY, but because of the coverage the union has gotten for officers you CANNOT sue the lone cop who actually performed the act.
Flip this over to doctors and it holds true yet again. Doctors have shown (againt, supported evidence, RTFAs I supplied) a reluctance to hold their own accountable and actually revoke licenses for known offenders. The result of this is that those individuals continue to practice, causing more problems, causing more malpractice claims, driving up insurance costs for doctors as a group, and perpetuating the EXACT reason doctors feel persecuted to begin with.
So what's the short of it? If you analyze the situation you see that the actions of a few bad doctors in the system feed a self-perpetuating persecution complex that drive up rates, make doctors defensive, and cause them to "protect themselves" in the face of an attack that doesn't exist.
As I said, RTFAs. Then read about group and mob behavior to get an idea of how the larger identity relates to individual action.
-rt
I make $110k a year. Ove the course of my life (assumed to be 72 years for the average) I should expect to pull down almost $8mil at that rate. However, I plan to do better over the years, so this will likely exceed $10mil in total earnings over the course of my life.
If I were blinded by a doctor's negligence I would be unable to do my job (information architect, manager), would have to find a new career, would have nothing to live on in the interim, would be unable to drive, would be unable to do just about ANYTHING I do now.
And you're telling me that after a doctor, in his negligence, blinded me FOR LIFE all I can get for that is $250k?!? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!? The doctor took my career, took my life, took everything I have or will have in a flick and I get $250k for my life.
I don't know about you, but I consider my life worth a site more than $250k dude, and your liability caps do nothing to accomodate that kind of loss. The insurance industry wants it TO MAKE MONEY. Don't kid yourself and think they're all high and mighty dude, they want to make MORE MONEY at the expense of US citizens, and only an ass would buy into the tripe they shovel out about how insurance rates are destroying the medical profession in the face of studies, like the one I cited, that DIRECTLY REFUTE THAT ARGUMENT.
-rt
First off the Harvard study I cited was/is teh most comprehensive study of medical malpractice ever attempted in the United States. If the AMA and the insurance companies think its so flawed I wonder why they haven't bothered to conduct a study that refutes it. They've only had 15 YEARS!
Second, if you don't believe that study fine, I'm not going to argue the point with you. The people that conducted it did a thorough analysis using doctors to validate or invalidate patient cases where a claim for malpractice could be made. They didn't just look at someone and go "oh yeah dude, you got fizucked!" These are researchers with PHD, doctors, etc. who assembled a scientific study on the problem.
As for the rest of your argument, are you REALLY arguing that having 1% of the peopl who have valid claims (if you RTFA you'd see that valid is people who were injured through the incompetence or gross negligence of their doctors, i.e. the exact definition of malpractice) is too much? REALLY?!? I mean dude, 1% of the poeple who could sue do, of that 1% actually WIN of people who have SUFFERED NEGLIGENCE, and you have a problem with that?
I really hope you don't suffer some horrible mistake in the ER, get blinded or screwed up for life, and then get told by a lawyer "I
ve mmanaged to fight for $75k. You'll just have to deal with being blind for the rest of your life... maybe you can program using a braille keyboard." Actually maybe I do, I always like it when someone gets bitten in the ass by his ignorant remarks.
-rt