I've never had complaints in the US about how long it took me to get seen by a doctor.
Yeah, I typically have to wait in the US to see a doctor for anything non-emergency.
Depends where you are I guess and how much you look into options.
I've had no trouble seeing a doctor after a couple hour wait at one of the walk in clinics in the city (which takes pretty much every insurance under the sun). I've also managed to get same day appointments as well. Now with my regular doctor that's not going to happen but that doesn't meant there aren't other options.
And definitely to see a specialist.
My gf has managed to get same day appointments with specialists in the past and worst case she had to wait a few days. I haven't had a need with my current insurance to get quick specialists appointments.
My last insurance, Kaiser HMO, I had no issues getting appointments with specialists same day if it was necessary (ear infection? wow that's nasty, okay, drive to our larger location here, you'll be seen in 45 minutes). Easily within a week for less urgent needs like sleep issues although, to be fair, their psychiatry department was utter crap.
I guess there might be some super-premium service where you pay tons of cash out of pocket and get concierge-like service. But if you're a normal person with a normal health plan from your employer, you play by their rules to get scheduled.
The bigger issues with this may be that it causes the laser to bounce back into the lens which asfaik can cause damage to the lens. A decent tabletop laser cutter should be opaque to the laser itself so even a reflection shouldn't requires safety glasses.
Like diving through dumpsters for your next meal....
Did you even read his post? Did the "offer unconditional base income (generated from those automated low-level jobs)" part somehow go over your head or did all the foam coming from your mouth block your vision?
People like you complain about how many jobs are soul sucking jobs, about repetitive tasks that cause life long injuries, about dangerous jobs, about unskilled jobs that are easily replaced and so on and so on. Then when someone finds a way to get rid of the need for those, as you'd say inhumane, jobs you complain about where those people will work.
If you want to spend 10 hours a day shoveling coal and then dying of lung cancer at 40 be my guest. I'll take the machines over the need to subject peopel to that any day of the week.
If already employed as a programmer, what possible satisfaction could one derive from working on somebody else's project during the day, relegating one's own projects ("hobbies") to second place and second priority?
Why do you assume someone can't enjoy coding someone else's projects? Why do you assume a programmer must enjoy project design as well as coding?
If you truly are a hot shit coder, then start your own company and make your own products. Put your money where your mouth is and truly make it your life.
But then you're not coding. You're doing sales, marketing, management, project design and so on. And it's still not your project. Now it's the project of your clients and whomever gives you money. You are their bitch.
Hobby projects are truly your own and have no BS attached to them, everything else leaves in someone's pocket.
Otherwise yeah, I'd say the guy who also works as a wage slave but at least spends his off-hours doings other things (i.e. boating) is living a slightly better life.
The fact that you use wage slave shows that you must have a very shitty job, I'm sorry about that.
It just means you have to go out and do some legwork in rounding them up.
So all he has to do is fly to the US, randomly knock on doors till he finds enough typewriters, ship them to Bangladesh (can't be cheap given how heavy those things are) and then fly back to Bangladesh.
Or did you miss the part where he wasn't in the US?
What you linked explicitly says that others can copy the wikitravel website because of the licence. So according to your own document it's not theft if it's attributed. In other words your original statement was utter stupidity and you just admitted as much. Good job.
The complaints are about trademark infringement and various things which have nothing to do with the fact that wikitravel was copied but merely deals with the circumstances around it being copied.
What you linked explicitly says that others can copy the wikitravel website because of the licence. So according to your own document it's not theft if it's attributed.
The complaints are about trademark infringement and various things which had nothing to do with the fact that wikitravel was copied but merely deals with the circumstances around it being copied. In other words it's nothing to do with the licence so your statements are utter BS.
Those deaths have absolutely nothing to do with regulation. A doctor accidentally injecting you with the wrong drug or screwing up a surgery has nothing to do with regulation. It's called medical errors (note the word error as in it shouldn't happen) and it is the number you're referring to.
The deaths you probably wanted to mention, but are too stupid to realize the difference regarding, are due to "faulty" medicines or devices. That you can tie to regulations or their failures as that is what regulations should prevent. This also wouldn't include deaths due to side-effects if those side-effects are known, I'd take a 10% chance of liver failure if it means I don't die of a heart attack in the next 10 minutes baring other options. That has nothing specifically to do with doctors except in the sense that doctors are probably involved with making them.
Of course, as someone else pointed out if not for regulation there'd be million or tens of millions who died from snake oil medicines of all kinds. There's a reason the FDA was formed and back then there's wasn't an ocean of Chinese companies willing to Fedex poisons to anyone with a mailing address.
In summary, you're an utter moron who doesn't even understand your own argument.
Yes because we know every part of the world is exactly identical with the same terrain, cell tower site availability, population density and cell phone usage. *rolls eyes*
I guess you want there to be fifty cell phone towers per person in the Alaskan wilderness, I wonder which cell tower builder you work for.
If you have no experience then you're either incompetent or lazy. No summer internships? No summer research? No side projects for a professor? Ho hobby work? No github account? Nothing?
Unemployed? What have you been doing with all that free time? What have you been learning? What have you been building? Nothing? Why would a company hire someone who is that apathetic about what they do?
Just 8 hours a week for a year building a toy project that uses X data on amazon ec2 using hadoop will likely you get you more 100k+ offers than you can sort through.
So yes, entry level people are getting hired if they've shown they've got more drive and intelligence than the average zombie. Most people don't.
An incompetent worker is a liability, they cost the company money through their actions and cause competent workers to flee.
Because then 80% of the internet websites you love to see for free will cease to exist as their advertising revenue stream dies. I'm sure you'll have no problems paying for all those sites, right? Just like slashdot users just loved it when the NY Times put up a paywall.
Also, a million rows of data? Most any decent web startup that does data is probably running at a million rows of data per day. Minimum. Maybe closer to a 100 million once they get around to collecting everything and got a few companies or users on board. Especially once you remove silly idiotically low restrictions on scaling and storage (unless you spend $$$$$). Got more data? Add more nodes, problem solved, get on with running the company. And they want to run complex analysis over the last year of data including, potentially, resource intensive machine learning. And they want to do it easily with maximum flexibility.
Like I said in another post, I've dealt with both worlds and you can keep your utterly limited systems if you want. When I want to do something with the data and the answer is "No" for any non-legal reason, well that's a show stopper. I don't care if there's a more "elegant solution" to some problem, if Hadoop solves the bottle neck most easily then Hadoop is the best tool for the job unless there's other issues it causes. I want to get work done, not play armchair philosopher.
Hadoop is a decent technology and is one approach to dealing with "Big Data" problems. There are other products out there, and for the most part they have all been around a lot longer than Hadoop. The problems all these products address have been around for quite some time, as most people know.
So what are these alternatives? I like how people keep mentioning "alternatives" but never state them by name. Afraid of their actual flaws being ripped apart I guess. Always a vague "other options" statement.
Hadoop is inexpensive, flexible and well supported. It's cheaper overall than paying for some silly clustered RDBM licence which is optimized to solve a problem you don't actually care about. If you don't realize the specific set of problems Hadoop excels at solving then, frankly, you really don't understand the space. The fact that you think Hadoop is being used to solve the same problems as an RDBM pretty much says everything about your experience in this area. Hint: Hadoop is not a database, it's a batch processing system/data warehouse.
My bet is that most of Hadoop's growth is due to the marketing and "me too" effects rather than true technological need.
Keep thinking that if you want to, I'll take my actual experience with these companies and their problems.
Really, so what would you use to deal with 10Petabytes of data while going through 1Petabyte of it per day? I'm sure Google, Ebay, LinkedIn, Twitter, Yahoo and Facebook have no idea what they're doing. Hahaha. Get back to me when you're running a multi-billion dollar company.
That just indicates you lack the skills and knowledge to deal with big data sets.
Keep thinking that, I'm going to be over here enjoying my guaranteed job security with occasional breaks to beat hordes of recruiters away. No, seriously, keep thinking it, more idiots like you out there the better my job security will be.
See, I've actually got experience dealing with big data which I'm guessing is a lot more than you can say. I've talked to companies that think like you, it's downright hilarious to watch their jaws drop when you casually mention how trivial going through data is for us on Hadoop. A month long data project for them is a ten minute query for me that I let run for a few hours. I've personally played in both worlds, you can keep the alternative while I get actual work done.
As someone who actually uses Hadoop, you're so far off the mark you've hit a bystander in the head. Dealing with large amount of data is a major PITA. If you don't understand that then you must never have worked with anything but trivial data sets. Hadoop fixes much of it, period. Without having to spend insane amount of money on databases, DBAs and still not being able to scale properly. It's not optimal but it works, it scales and it's flexible.
Regarding Hadoop, I'm always surprised by its popularity given the relative fragility of HDFS (the NameNode is a single point of failure; other distributed filesystems have beaten this problem) and the dubious, beta-like quality of the tools built on top of it (Pig, etc.)
So basically you suck at office politics and you suck at dealing with people. Frankly you sound like an asshole without great technical chops which would explain why you suck at those things. Then you blame your problems on everyone else and don't realize that the one common variable across the board was you.
Yes, spend $20 billion on a Moon program instead of $100million launching a couple ICBMs to show you have them. Great use of resources. More to the point, cold war era nukes were neither big nor heavy. The W56, 1.2 MT yield, from 1963 was 17 inches wide by 47 inches long and weighed less than 700lbs.
Earlier space missions you can argue about as they did use modified ICBMs and showed the reliability of the rocket. However by the time of the Moon program neither of those applied or mattered.
And many other projects have delivered so your whole argument is rubbish. It's not a guarantee but you accept that going in and the likelihood of return is high.
And how did the Apollo program help the US win the Cold War? Why did Americans care so much about winning the space race? After all, it had no real military or economical advantages.
Honestly though there's no point in continuing this conversation. Your question shows you have no concept of nationalism either person or theoretical. Which is in some ways rather sad regarding the state of whatever country you live in.
Slashdot Mirror
I've never had complaints in the US about how long it took me to get seen by a doctor.
Yeah, I typically have to wait in the US to see a doctor for anything non-emergency.
Depends where you are I guess and how much you look into options.
I've had no trouble seeing a doctor after a couple hour wait at one of the walk in clinics in the city (which takes pretty much every insurance under the sun). I've also managed to get same day appointments as well. Now with my regular doctor that's not going to happen but that doesn't meant there aren't other options.
And definitely to see a specialist.
My gf has managed to get same day appointments with specialists in the past and worst case she had to wait a few days. I haven't had a need with my current insurance to get quick specialists appointments.
My last insurance, Kaiser HMO, I had no issues getting appointments with specialists same day if it was necessary (ear infection? wow that's nasty, okay, drive to our larger location here, you'll be seen in 45 minutes). Easily within a week for less urgent needs like sleep issues although, to be fair, their psychiatry department was utter crap.
I guess there might be some super-premium service where you pay tons of cash out of pocket and get concierge-like service. But if you're a normal person with a normal health plan from your employer, you play by their rules to get scheduled.
Trust me, my insurance is far from the best.
Hadoop is not real time, it's a batch processing system, no one gives a damn if a node spend 50ms garbage collecting or not every so often.
Given the salaries of CEOs and executives at for-profit companies that is perfectly reasonable.
The bigger issues with this may be that it causes the laser to bounce back into the lens which asfaik can cause damage to the lens. A decent tabletop laser cutter should be opaque to the laser itself so even a reflection shouldn't requires safety glasses.
Like diving through dumpsters for your next meal....
Did you even read his post? Did the "offer unconditional base income (generated from those automated low-level jobs)" part somehow go over your head or did all the foam coming from your mouth block your vision?
People like you complain about how many jobs are soul sucking jobs, about repetitive tasks that cause life long injuries, about dangerous jobs, about unskilled jobs that are easily replaced and so on and so on. Then when someone finds a way to get rid of the need for those, as you'd say inhumane, jobs you complain about where those people will work.
If you want to spend 10 hours a day shoveling coal and then dying of lung cancer at 40 be my guest. I'll take the machines over the need to subject peopel to that any day of the week.
If already employed as a programmer, what possible satisfaction could one derive from working on somebody else's project during the day, relegating one's own projects ("hobbies") to second place and second priority?
Why do you assume someone can't enjoy coding someone else's projects? Why do you assume a programmer must enjoy project design as well as coding?
If you truly are a hot shit coder, then start your own company and make your own products. Put your money where your mouth is and truly make it your life.
But then you're not coding. You're doing sales, marketing, management, project design and so on. And it's still not your project. Now it's the project of your clients and whomever gives you money. You are their bitch.
Hobby projects are truly your own and have no BS attached to them, everything else leaves in someone's pocket.
Otherwise yeah, I'd say the guy who also works as a wage slave but at least spends his off-hours doings other things (i.e. boating) is living a slightly better life.
The fact that you use wage slave shows that you must have a very shitty job, I'm sorry about that.
How come your boat is more of a life than a hobby of coding?
It just means you have to go out and do some legwork in rounding them up.
So all he has to do is fly to the US, randomly knock on doors till he finds enough typewriters, ship them to Bangladesh (can't be cheap given how heavy those things are) and then fly back to Bangladesh.
Or did you miss the part where he wasn't in the US?
What you linked explicitly says that others can copy the wikitravel website because of the licence. So according to your own document it's not theft if it's attributed. In other words your original statement was utter stupidity and you just admitted as much. Good job.
The complaints are about trademark infringement and various things which have nothing to do with the fact that wikitravel was copied but merely deals with the circumstances around it being copied.
What you linked explicitly says that others can copy the wikitravel website because of the licence. So according to your own document it's not theft if it's attributed.
The complaints are about trademark infringement and various things which had nothing to do with the fact that wikitravel was copied but merely deals with the circumstances around it being copied. In other words it's nothing to do with the licence so your statements are utter BS.
Those deaths have absolutely nothing to do with regulation. A doctor accidentally injecting you with the wrong drug or screwing up a surgery has nothing to do with regulation. It's called medical errors (note the word error as in it shouldn't happen) and it is the number you're referring to.
The deaths you probably wanted to mention, but are too stupid to realize the difference regarding, are due to "faulty" medicines or devices. That you can tie to regulations or their failures as that is what regulations should prevent. This also wouldn't include deaths due to side-effects if those side-effects are known, I'd take a 10% chance of liver failure if it means I don't die of a heart attack in the next 10 minutes baring other options. That has nothing specifically to do with doctors except in the sense that doctors are probably involved with making them.
Of course, as someone else pointed out if not for regulation there'd be million or tens of millions who died from snake oil medicines of all kinds. There's a reason the FDA was formed and back then there's wasn't an ocean of Chinese companies willing to Fedex poisons to anyone with a mailing address.
In summary, you're an utter moron who doesn't even understand your own argument.
Yes because we know every part of the world is exactly identical with the same terrain, cell tower site availability, population density and cell phone usage. *rolls eyes*
I guess you want there to be fifty cell phone towers per person in the Alaskan wilderness, I wonder which cell tower builder you work for.
If you have no experience then you're either incompetent or lazy. No summer internships? No summer research? No side projects for a professor? Ho hobby work? No github account? Nothing?
Unemployed? What have you been doing with all that free time? What have you been learning? What have you been building? Nothing? Why would a company hire someone who is that apathetic about what they do?
Just 8 hours a week for a year building a toy project that uses X data on amazon ec2 using hadoop will likely you get you more 100k+ offers than you can sort through.
So yes, entry level people are getting hired if they've shown they've got more drive and intelligence than the average zombie. Most people don't.
An incompetent worker is a liability, they cost the company money through their actions and cause competent workers to flee.
Because then 80% of the internet websites you love to see for free will cease to exist as their advertising revenue stream dies. I'm sure you'll have no problems paying for all those sites, right? Just like slashdot users just loved it when the NY Times put up a paywall.
Also, a million rows of data? Most any decent web startup that does data is probably running at a million rows of data per day. Minimum. Maybe closer to a 100 million once they get around to collecting everything and got a few companies or users on board. Especially once you remove silly idiotically low restrictions on scaling and storage (unless you spend $$$$$). Got more data? Add more nodes, problem solved, get on with running the company. And they want to run complex analysis over the last year of data including, potentially, resource intensive machine learning. And they want to do it easily with maximum flexibility.
Like I said in another post, I've dealt with both worlds and you can keep your utterly limited systems if you want. When I want to do something with the data and the answer is "No" for any non-legal reason, well that's a show stopper. I don't care if there's a more "elegant solution" to some problem, if Hadoop solves the bottle neck most easily then Hadoop is the best tool for the job unless there's other issues it causes. I want to get work done, not play armchair philosopher.
Hadoop is a decent technology and is one approach to dealing with "Big Data" problems. There are other products out there, and for the most part they have all been around a lot longer than Hadoop. The problems all these products address have been around for quite some time, as most people know.
So what are these alternatives? I like how people keep mentioning "alternatives" but never state them by name. Afraid of their actual flaws being ripped apart I guess. Always a vague "other options" statement.
Hadoop is inexpensive, flexible and well supported. It's cheaper overall than paying for some silly clustered RDBM licence which is optimized to solve a problem you don't actually care about. If you don't realize the specific set of problems Hadoop excels at solving then, frankly, you really don't understand the space. The fact that you think Hadoop is being used to solve the same problems as an RDBM pretty much says everything about your experience in this area. Hint: Hadoop is not a database, it's a batch processing system/data warehouse.
My bet is that most of Hadoop's growth is due to the marketing and "me too" effects rather than true technological need.
Keep thinking that if you want to, I'll take my actual experience with these companies and their problems.
Really, so what would you use to deal with 10Petabytes of data while going through 1Petabyte of it per day? I'm sure Google, Ebay, LinkedIn, Twitter, Yahoo and Facebook have no idea what they're doing. Hahaha. Get back to me when you're running a multi-billion dollar company.
That just indicates you lack the skills and knowledge to deal with big data sets.
Keep thinking that, I'm going to be over here enjoying my guaranteed job security with occasional breaks to beat hordes of recruiters away. No, seriously, keep thinking it, more idiots like you out there the better my job security will be.
See, I've actually got experience dealing with big data which I'm guessing is a lot more than you can say. I've talked to companies that think like you, it's downright hilarious to watch their jaws drop when you casually mention how trivial going through data is for us on Hadoop. A month long data project for them is a ten minute query for me that I let run for a few hours. I've personally played in both worlds, you can keep the alternative while I get actual work done.
So you don't actually know of any that are competitive. Got it, thanks for playing.
As someone who actually uses Hadoop, you're so far off the mark you've hit a bystander in the head. Dealing with large amount of data is a major PITA. If you don't understand that then you must never have worked with anything but trivial data sets. Hadoop fixes much of it, period. Without having to spend insane amount of money on databases, DBAs and still not being able to scale properly. It's not optimal but it works, it scales and it's flexible.
That's why companies are moving to it.
Regarding Hadoop, I'm always surprised by its popularity given the relative fragility of HDFS (the NameNode is a single point of failure; other distributed filesystems have beaten this problem) and the dubious, beta-like quality of the tools built on top of it (Pig, etc.)
So what's the alternative you recommend?
No, that's the asshole part. The second piece was just an observation and me insulting you. Glad you noticed both.
Or do you just suck at communicating your thoughts effectively?
I do but since that's the only deficiency I seem to share with you I've never had trouble getting my boss to listen to me.
So basically you suck at office politics and you suck at dealing with people. Frankly you sound like an asshole without great technical chops which would explain why you suck at those things. Then you blame your problems on everyone else and don't realize that the one common variable across the board was you.
Yes, spend $20 billion on a Moon program instead of $100million launching a couple ICBMs to show you have them. Great use of resources. More to the point, cold war era nukes were neither big nor heavy. The W56, 1.2 MT yield, from 1963 was 17 inches wide by 47 inches long and weighed less than 700lbs.
Earlier space missions you can argue about as they did use modified ICBMs and showed the reliability of the rocket. However by the time of the Moon program neither of those applied or mattered.
And many other projects have delivered so your whole argument is rubbish. It's not a guarantee but you accept that going in and the likelihood of return is high.
And how did the Apollo program help the US win the Cold War? Why did Americans care so much about winning the space race? After all, it had no real military or economical advantages.
Honestly though there's no point in continuing this conversation. Your question shows you have no concept of nationalism either person or theoretical. Which is in some ways rather sad regarding the state of whatever country you live in.