I don't think insurance coverage entirely explains the high price of hearing aids in the US. A significant portion of the customer base for hearing aids are elderly people who are insured through Medicare and Medicare doesn't cover hearing aids. Many state Medicaid plans don't cover hearing aids. Many private plans don't have coverage for hearing aids, or coverage is very limited. They're considered to be in the same class as eye glasses. My insurance plan, which is pretty good in most other respects, doesn't cover hearing aids. It would be interesting to see nationally what percentage of hear is born by individuals vs insurance. Without knowing that I would think it's difficult to determine the likelihood that insurance coverage is what is causing hearing aid prices to be so high.
"Deem and Pass" Is Not "Without a Vote", and both parties use it. The Republicans used it to pass a budget bill in the House recently. The Dems used it in the House for healthcare legislation. The Republicans used it to pass the Bush tax cuts. There are plenty of examples of both parties using it. Both sides cry about the other side using this technique, but they both use it when it's to their advantage.
Becoming a PV manufacturer isn't cheap. What new competitor wants to enter a market where they know their main competitor can lower prices at will below the cost of production, and sustain that reduction long enough to drive most other companies out of business? So long as that uncertainty is hanging there it will severely restrict who is willing to enter the market.
Even with more efficient vehicles I think a lot of people will find they are priced out of the personal transportation market. Either because they can't afford a new high efficiency vehicle, price a plug in Prius, or even with one of these the cost of fuel is still too high. I've recently seen some articles that describe how young people today are not as interested in owning cars as previous generations were. The high cost of ownership compared to likely earning potential was one of the reasons.
This new source of energy may not come cheap. If you think the cost of gasoline and diesel is too expensive now, this new source of fuel may be much more expensive. As the article notes, this gas may not be worth recovering until we see "vastly higher energy costs, perhaps as high as $200 (per barrel) or more." If you can't afford to operate your car with $150/bbl oil you are even less likely to be able to be able to run it with $200/bbl equivalent natural gas. Vast reserves of recoverable methane might spur research into developing a practical methane fuel cell. If one were to be developed it could dramatically change a lot of things. I have no idea whether we'll see a practical methane fuel cell before we see practical fusion power, though.
Thank goodness the possibility of someone flying commercial aircraft into a building and killing thousands wasn't used as a reason for killing flight as a common means of transportation.
Easy formula: No bomb threats are credible. Actual bombings are in the vast majority of cases not preceded by threats. You might as well evacuate a building every time a squirrel shits on the lawn, because the correlation between that event and an actual bombing is about as strong as it is between bombings and bomb threats.
I have no idea what the ratio of warnings of bombings to actual bombings is, but there are certainly examples of groups that issued warnings before they bombed. The US group the Weather Underground did.
The bombing attacks mostly targeted government buildings, along with several banks. Most were preceded by evacuation warnings, along with communiqués identifying the particular matter that the attack was intended to protest. For the bombing of the United States Capitol on March 1, 1971, they issued a communiqué saying it was "in protest of the U.S. invasion of Laos." For the bombing of the Pentagon on May 19, 1972, they stated it was "in retaliation for the U.S. bombing raid in Hanoi." For the January 29, 1975 bombing of the United States Department of State building, they stated it was "in response to escalation in Vietnam."
The IRA frequently sent warnings before it bombed.
The bombing of the King David hotel in Jerusalem on July 29, 1946, was allegedly preceded by warnings. Menachem Begin claimed that three warnings were sent out on July 22nd 1946 about the planned attack to keep casualties to the minimum. Warnings were sent by telephone, including one to the hotel's own switchboard, which the hotel staff decided to ignore, but none directly to the British authorities. A possible reason why the warning was ignored was that hoax bomb warnings were rife at the time. The British did not evacuate the hotel and the bombing killed 91 people and injured 45. Imagine the repercussions for the University of Pittsburgh if it ignored a bomb warning and 91 people died and 45 were injured.
Politicians killing science in the American south. I wonder what they'll try to make controversial next. Gravity, perhaps?
The Theory of Relativity. It limits God to the speed of light. God could not have created the entire universe in seven days, with things being separated by millions of light years, if he was limited to moving at the speed of light.
Areas differ geologically. What happens in one area won't necessarily happen in another. Some areas are amenable to the disposal of fracking fluid through deep well injection and others are not. It seems a reasonable assumption that this activity could cause different reactions in different areas.
Science brought us modern transportation, modern medicine, nuclear power, computers, the internet, awesomely cool military hardware, and myriad other things that are a blessing or a curse. Things that people interact with on a daily basis and which modern society is dependent are the result of science. It's not hard to see why people would have faith in science without knowing much science themselves. Religion, on the other hand, basically asks for blind faith without much in the way of evidence.
100-Year Old Wonder Drug Now Shown To Prevent Cancer and Heart Attacks
Hmmm, that's odd, this "news" story reads like one of those ads trying to sell me something. Is this ancient Chinese secret or midwest housewife research?
The NY Times also reported on these studies. Some of the findings of these studies found were that after five years the risk of dying of cancer was reduced by 37 percent among those taking daily aspirin, that over six and a half years, on average, daily aspirin use reduced the risk of metastatic cancer by 36 percent and the risk of adenocarcinomas by 46 percent, daily aspirin use reduced the risk of progressing to metastatic disease in patients with colorectal cancer.
It was found that the risk of bleeding in aspirin users diminished over time, and that the risk of death from brain bleeds was actually lower in the aspirin users than in the comparison group.
In years gone by, manufacturing plants employed a large proportion of STEM graduates in what was essentially manufacturing engineering. I used to know all sorts of engineers who worked in manufacturing plants that no longer exist in the US. And not just working in the plant, but also for the companies that manufactured the equipment that the manufacturers used to make their products. Most of those jobs went away in the '80s and '90s as manufacturing was off shored. I decided to go into a STEM field because of a low level technician job I as a young person. I went to work in the quality assurance lab of a local chemical manufacturer. In this job I got to work with chemical engineers. These guys were always willing to explain why different testing procedures were done and why we looked for various results. I was also encouraged to go to college and pursue a technical degree. I did. Across the US many communities had manufacturing plants and associated facilities that provided opportunities for young people to become exposed to people in STEM occupations. Not just exposure, but often the companies would pay tuition for technicians who were pursuing BS degrees part time. My first year at university pursuing a chemistry degree was paid for by a small chemical manufacturer. Did they have a job waiting for me? No, but they could write off my tuition because it was in a field related to their business. What kind of jobs are young people get exposed to today? Retail and service. Maybe construction. Manufacturing much less so. Who do they get as career role models? Everything but engineers. They're much more likely to run into some low level manager with a degree in business administration with a concentration in retail sales who is hoping to get their MBA and move up the company ladder. So that's what they do. When the US off shored its manufacturing, it exported more than just low skill jobs. It also exported the path by which many young people entered engineering.
- have to drive the burned-out ones to the landfill (thus increasing carbon footprint) (and no I don't CFL or battery recycling where I live)
I take all my used CFLs to one of the area hardware stores when I go to purchase new ones. Lowes and Home Depot both accept used CFLs for recycling. I don't use any more energy to dispose of used CFLs than I used to use for incandescents.
- have to ship them in from China (again increasing the carbon footprint)
I'd like to see the math for that. Seriously. I also wondered why would cheap throw away items like incandescents be any more likely to be made in the US than any other cheap throw away item?
- they don't last long in my fixtures because they are upside down (trapped heat kills CFL electronics)
I just replaced a CFL that had been hanging upside down a lighting fixture in my kitchen for, as best as we can determine it, seven years. The ones in my bathroom fixtures above the mirror have been there for at least two years. I've started writing the date I install CFLs on the base so I can tell how long they last.
- or startup when outside (subfreezing temps)
I've used both halogens and LEDs for my outside lamps. I eventually ended using LEDs because they won't need to be replaced as often, and it's a pain in the butt to have to take those fixtures apart and replace the bulbs when they burn out in freezing weather.
Does the constitution say what constitutes a declaration of war? Is war with another nation only permissible when congress passes a resolution with the words 'declaration of war' in it? Is the explicit allocation of funds for an armed conflict with another nation adequate? When Jefferson and Madison, both of whom knew a thing or two about the constitution, oversaw the first and second Barbary wars without explicit declarations of war, do you think they thought those war were in violation of the constitution? Was the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, any less legitimate a declaration of war than the congressional authorizations for the first and second Barbary wars?
Re:That's why I like the basic Kindle
on
The eBook Backlash
·
· Score: 2
I bought a few e-books in the beginning but found myself often wishing I could lend the book to someone and share it. That meant in some cases I had to buy a second book.
This is my biggest problem with my Kindle. I enjoy giving away and lending books that I found worthwhile and think someone else may also find worth reading, the Kindle doesn't provide a convenient means of doing this. Yes, I've used Calibre to strip away DRM, but it really shouldn't have to work like that. Additionally, I frequently give books away to people who aren't prone to reading books on the computer. When my Kindle was new I purchased books for it. After a while I grew frustrated with not being able to give them away. These days I rarely purchase books for my Kindle; most of what I have on it is free public domain works. I enjoy my Kindle, I think it's great for reading fiction, I just don't care to purchase books for it.
Even in Europe sales people can put on a lot of miles. However, the vast majority of people in the US don't have to drive those sorts of distances. They mostly live in urban or suburban areas that, while maybe not as dense as Europe, are still pretty dense. Most people drive less than 40 miles per day.
Back in the 90's Chrysler produced the Eagle which was the a re-branded Mitsubishi Mirage. It was literally off the same assembly line with some branded one and some the other.
Consumer reports ranked the Eagle as unreliable with many defects and the Mirage as highly reliable with few defects.
Back then the general feeling was that Asian cars were better quality but based on this I always wondered how much was reality and how much unconscious bias.
The same thing happened with Toyota and GM cars manufactured at the jointly operated Fremont, California, plant. There were times that the Toyota versions of the cars produced there got higher ratings in the Consumer Reports reader surveys. When I became aware of this I started wondering how trustworthy the reliability ratings from Consumer Reports were.
The America that people around the world generically use to refer to the United States of America. It might have something to do with America being the largest word in the country's name. When Iranians chant 'death to America', they're referring to the USA. Not Canada. Not Brazil. Not Mexico. Just the USA. Everyone gets this reference except people who have to ask 'WHICH America? North or South?' They're so fucking dense they go around wondering if Iranians want death for all countries in the Americas or just in North or South America. Maybe if Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, or any other major country in the Americas had America in its name there might be some confusion. But they don't, and there isn't.
I've never owned a Scottevest vest or jacket, but I do own a great travel vest with more zippered, buttoned, and velcroed pockets than I've ever counted. It's got zippered pockets inside of velcroed pockets. I love the thing for traveling. When traveling everything has a place and I know where each item or type of item is stored. When I sit down in my seat on a flight I usually roll it up and shove it under the seat in front of me. Since it's got all those pockets everything is nice and compartmentalized and I can quickly access something if I need it. Yeah, when fully loaded it does tend to give me a nerdish look, but so what.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think insurance coverage entirely explains the high price of hearing aids in the US. A significant portion of the customer base for hearing aids are elderly people who are insured through Medicare and Medicare doesn't cover hearing aids. Many state Medicaid plans don't cover hearing aids. Many private plans don't have coverage for hearing aids, or coverage is very limited. They're considered to be in the same class as eye glasses. My insurance plan, which is pretty good in most other respects, doesn't cover hearing aids. It would be interesting to see nationally what percentage of hear is born by individuals vs insurance. Without knowing that I would think it's difficult to determine the likelihood that insurance coverage is what is causing hearing aid prices to be so high.
"Deem and Pass" Is Not "Without a Vote", and both parties use it. The Republicans used it to pass a budget bill in the House recently. The Dems used it in the House for healthcare legislation. The Republicans used it to pass the Bush tax cuts. There are plenty of examples of both parties using it. Both sides cry about the other side using this technique, but they both use it when it's to their advantage.
Becoming a PV manufacturer isn't cheap. What new competitor wants to enter a market where they know their main competitor can lower prices at will below the cost of production, and sustain that reduction long enough to drive most other companies out of business? So long as that uncertainty is hanging there it will severely restrict who is willing to enter the market.
This is more like becoming unemployed due to structural changes in the economy.
Even with more efficient vehicles I think a lot of people will find they are priced out of the personal transportation market. Either because they can't afford a new high efficiency vehicle, price a plug in Prius, or even with one of these the cost of fuel is still too high. I've recently seen some articles that describe how young people today are not as interested in owning cars as previous generations were. The high cost of ownership compared to likely earning potential was one of the reasons.
With the state of things in the UK some wonder whether it can afford the one it has now.
Does fracking have to use toxic chemicals, or are those used because it's the cheapest alternative to industry?
This new source of energy may not come cheap. If you think the cost of gasoline and diesel is too expensive now, this new source of fuel may be much more expensive. As the article notes, this gas may not be worth recovering until we see "vastly higher energy costs, perhaps as high as $200 (per barrel) or more." If you can't afford to operate your car with $150/bbl oil you are even less likely to be able to be able to run it with $200/bbl equivalent natural gas. Vast reserves of recoverable methane might spur research into developing a practical methane fuel cell. If one were to be developed it could dramatically change a lot of things. I have no idea whether we'll see a practical methane fuel cell before we see practical fusion power, though.
No, but some of us would like to know in Library of Congress units how much data these black boxes will hold.
Thank goodness the possibility of someone flying commercial aircraft into a building and killing thousands wasn't used as a reason for killing flight as a common means of transportation.
Easy formula: No bomb threats are credible. Actual bombings are in the vast majority of cases not preceded by threats. You might as well evacuate a building every time a squirrel shits on the lawn, because the correlation between that event and an actual bombing is about as strong as it is between bombings and bomb threats.
I have no idea what the ratio of warnings of bombings to actual bombings is, but there are certainly examples of groups that issued warnings before they bombed. The US group the Weather Underground did.
The bombing attacks mostly targeted government buildings, along with several banks. Most were preceded by evacuation warnings, along with communiqués identifying the particular matter that the attack was intended to protest. For the bombing of the United States Capitol on March 1, 1971, they issued a communiqué saying it was "in protest of the U.S. invasion of Laos." For the bombing of the Pentagon on May 19, 1972, they stated it was "in retaliation for the U.S. bombing raid in Hanoi." For the January 29, 1975 bombing of the United States Department of State building, they stated it was "in response to escalation in Vietnam."
The IRA frequently sent warnings before it bombed.
The bombing of the King David hotel in Jerusalem on July 29, 1946, was allegedly preceded by warnings. Menachem Begin claimed that three warnings were sent out on July 22nd 1946 about the planned attack to keep casualties to the minimum. Warnings were sent by telephone, including one to the hotel's own switchboard, which the hotel staff decided to ignore, but none directly to the British authorities. A possible reason why the warning was ignored was that hoax bomb warnings were rife at the time. The British did not evacuate the hotel and the bombing killed 91 people and injured 45. Imagine the repercussions for the University of Pittsburgh if it ignored a bomb warning and 91 people died and 45 were injured.
Politicians killing science in the American south. I wonder what they'll try to make controversial next. Gravity, perhaps?
The Theory of Relativity. It limits God to the speed of light. God could not have created the entire universe in seven days, with things being separated by millions of light years, if he was limited to moving at the speed of light.
Almost all US citizens over 65 are on Medicare, which is not the same as Medicaid. Some elderly are on both Medicare and Medicaid, but most are not.
Areas differ geologically. What happens in one area won't necessarily happen in another. Some areas are amenable to the disposal of fracking fluid through deep well injection and others are not. It seems a reasonable assumption that this activity could cause different reactions in different areas.
Science brought us modern transportation, modern medicine, nuclear power, computers, the internet, awesomely cool military hardware, and myriad other things that are a blessing or a curse. Things that people interact with on a daily basis and which modern society is dependent are the result of science. It's not hard to see why people would have faith in science without knowing much science themselves. Religion, on the other hand, basically asks for blind faith without much in the way of evidence.
100-Year Old Wonder Drug Now Shown To Prevent Cancer and Heart Attacks
Hmmm, that's odd, this "news" story reads like one of those ads trying to sell me something. Is this ancient Chinese secret or midwest housewife research?
Maybe you like it straight from 'The Lancet': Short-term effects of daily aspirin on cancer incidence, mortality, and non-vascular death: analysis of the time course of risks and benefits in 51 randomised controlled trials, Effect of daily aspirin on risk of cancer metastasis: a study of incident cancers during randomised controlled trials, and Long-term effect of aspirin on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: 20-year follow-up of five randomised trials.
The NY Times also reported on these studies. Some of the findings of these studies found were that after five years the risk of dying of cancer was reduced by 37 percent among those taking daily aspirin, that over six and a half years, on average, daily aspirin use reduced the risk of metastatic cancer by 36 percent and the risk of adenocarcinomas by 46 percent, daily aspirin use reduced the risk of progressing to metastatic disease in patients with colorectal cancer.
It was found that the risk of bleeding in aspirin users diminished over time, and that the risk of death from brain bleeds was actually lower in the aspirin users than in the comparison group.
In years gone by, manufacturing plants employed a large proportion of STEM graduates in what was essentially manufacturing engineering. I used to know all sorts of engineers who worked in manufacturing plants that no longer exist in the US. And not just working in the plant, but also for the companies that manufactured the equipment that the manufacturers used to make their products. Most of those jobs went away in the '80s and '90s as manufacturing was off shored. I decided to go into a STEM field because of a low level technician job I as a young person. I went to work in the quality assurance lab of a local chemical manufacturer. In this job I got to work with chemical engineers. These guys were always willing to explain why different testing procedures were done and why we looked for various results. I was also encouraged to go to college and pursue a technical degree. I did. Across the US many communities had manufacturing plants and associated facilities that provided opportunities for young people to become exposed to people in STEM occupations. Not just exposure, but often the companies would pay tuition for technicians who were pursuing BS degrees part time. My first year at university pursuing a chemistry degree was paid for by a small chemical manufacturer. Did they have a job waiting for me? No, but they could write off my tuition because it was in a field related to their business. What kind of jobs are young people get exposed to today? Retail and service. Maybe construction. Manufacturing much less so. Who do they get as career role models? Everything but engineers. They're much more likely to run into some low level manager with a degree in business administration with a concentration in retail sales who is hoping to get their MBA and move up the company ladder. So that's what they do. When the US off shored its manufacturing, it exported more than just low skill jobs. It also exported the path by which many young people entered engineering.
- have to drive the burned-out ones to the landfill (thus increasing carbon footprint) (and no I don't CFL or battery recycling where I live)
I take all my used CFLs to one of the area hardware stores when I go to purchase new ones. Lowes and Home Depot both accept used CFLs for recycling. I don't use any more energy to dispose of used CFLs than I used to use for incandescents.
- have to ship them in from China (again increasing the carbon footprint)
I'd like to see the math for that. Seriously. I also wondered why would cheap throw away items like incandescents be any more likely to be made in the US than any other cheap throw away item?
- they don't last long in my fixtures because they are upside down (trapped heat kills CFL electronics)
I just replaced a CFL that had been hanging upside down a lighting fixture in my kitchen for, as best as we can determine it, seven years. The ones in my bathroom fixtures above the mirror have been there for at least two years. I've started writing the date I install CFLs on the base so I can tell how long they last.
- or startup when outside (subfreezing temps)
I've used both halogens and LEDs for my outside lamps. I eventually ended using LEDs because they won't need to be replaced as often, and it's a pain in the butt to have to take those fixtures apart and replace the bulbs when they burn out in freezing weather.
Does the constitution say what constitutes a declaration of war? Is war with another nation only permissible when congress passes a resolution with the words 'declaration of war' in it? Is the explicit allocation of funds for an armed conflict with another nation adequate? When Jefferson and Madison, both of whom knew a thing or two about the constitution, oversaw the first and second Barbary wars without explicit declarations of war, do you think they thought those war were in violation of the constitution? Was the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, any less legitimate a declaration of war than the congressional authorizations for the first and second Barbary wars?
I bought a few e-books in the beginning but found myself often wishing I could lend the book to someone and share it. That meant in some cases I had to buy a second book.
This is my biggest problem with my Kindle. I enjoy giving away and lending books that I found worthwhile and think someone else may also find worth reading, the Kindle doesn't provide a convenient means of doing this. Yes, I've used Calibre to strip away DRM, but it really shouldn't have to work like that. Additionally, I frequently give books away to people who aren't prone to reading books on the computer. When my Kindle was new I purchased books for it. After a while I grew frustrated with not being able to give them away. These days I rarely purchase books for my Kindle; most of what I have on it is free public domain works. I enjoy my Kindle, I think it's great for reading fiction, I just don't care to purchase books for it.
Even in Europe sales people can put on a lot of miles. However, the vast majority of people in the US don't have to drive those sorts of distances. They mostly live in urban or suburban areas that, while maybe not as dense as Europe, are still pretty dense. Most people drive less than 40 miles per day.
Back in the 90's Chrysler produced the Eagle which was the a re-branded Mitsubishi Mirage. It was literally off the same assembly line with some branded one and some the other. Consumer reports ranked the Eagle as unreliable with many defects and the Mirage as highly reliable with few defects.
Back then the general feeling was that Asian cars were better quality but based on this I always wondered how much was reality and how much unconscious bias.
The same thing happened with Toyota and GM cars manufactured at the jointly operated Fremont, California, plant. There were times that the Toyota versions of the cars produced there got higher ratings in the Consumer Reports reader surveys. When I became aware of this I started wondering how trustworthy the reliability ratings from Consumer Reports were.
WHICH America? North or South?
The America that people around the world generically use to refer to the United States of America. It might have something to do with America being the largest word in the country's name. When Iranians chant 'death to America', they're referring to the USA. Not Canada. Not Brazil. Not Mexico. Just the USA. Everyone gets this reference except people who have to ask 'WHICH America? North or South?' They're so fucking dense they go around wondering if Iranians want death for all countries in the Americas or just in North or South America. Maybe if Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, or any other major country in the Americas had America in its name there might be some confusion. But they don't, and there isn't.
I've never owned a Scottevest vest or jacket, but I do own a great travel vest with more zippered, buttoned, and velcroed pockets than I've ever counted. It's got zippered pockets inside of velcroed pockets. I love the thing for traveling. When traveling everything has a place and I know where each item or type of item is stored. When I sit down in my seat on a flight I usually roll it up and shove it under the seat in front of me. Since it's got all those pockets everything is nice and compartmentalized and I can quickly access something if I need it. Yeah, when fully loaded it does tend to give me a nerdish look, but so what.
Plus, the end game is to strap guns to these things and cut out a lot of the human element altogether.
One of my first thoughts when I saw the video was a ground based drone.