Wrong. The lack of Flash made the iPhone a subpar product. A device that fails to run the software I want to run is a subpar product when compared to a device that does run the software.
There isn't. Those kinds of games universally suck for touch screens. The development language isn't the problem. The hardware you would be running on is.
We see the same thing in low deductible plans. My wife worked part time for the holiday season at a K-Mart a few years ago. Insurance through my work was VERY expensive ($2700/mo), so when we saw that they offered medical insurance, we thought "Maybe it would be worth working part time permanently just for the insurance". When reviewing their programs, what we found was that the deductibles were low. The premiums were low, but the yearly maximum payout was $200 less than the yearly premiums.
So, you are pretending like you won't ever need medical care that exceeds your premiums. Check.
You are just as much of a gambler as syscodon, as his medical care, like yours, have not exceeded his premiums. You are just bent that he is playing a different set of odds than you.
You might be right that socialized medicine is the best solution, but if you are it is in the 'stopped clock' sort of way.
Pricing could easily be determined based on the cost of installation and maintenance. Most municipalities have extensive experience in this field so, budgeting would be trivial. It would be particularly easy to start the process in any new housing divisions since that could be included in the required build out just like roads. And, since the roads have not been built yet, the only added cost is trenching and laying the conduit.
Obviously, you would want an engineer to do the final plans, but a system of conduit the same size as your typical storm drain system could easily handle hundreds of competitors. Sure, the number of cables wouldn't be infinite, but increasing the competition from 1 or 2 companies to 40 or 50 companies would be the different between a mono/duo/opoly and a competitive market where customers can vote with their feet.
Tell that to my child who was using a PC almost 2 years before he could read. Let me guess... Your one of those people that think children should have access to technology. (For whatever random year you have picked for 'technology' to count as technology)
Likely not. The start button is the best way to date for someone new to the system to discover the features of that system. I set my son up with his first computer just after his first birthday. I spent about 5 minutes showing him how moving the mouse would move the cursor on the screen, and how pushing buttons made letters appear. I then showed him how to load gCapris via the 'start menu' (It was Ubuntu, so technically it wasn't a 'start menu', but in practice it was the same thing).
After a couple of hours, I came back and spent about 10 minutes showing him how to expand, minimize, close applications and how to properly shut down and start up the computer and left him to his own devices on that machine.
Within a couple of days, he was proficient as a user. He could start the machine up, run his favorite applications, and shut the machine down. He what programs where there, and which ones he liked via discovery from the start menu. He didn't learn to read for almost another 2 years. There is no way that being able to type the name of the applications would have been usable.
While the benefits of discovery are exaggerated when discussing a 1 year old, they are still there for all users.
This isn't a failing of the parent. Most people in a business environment don't need a general purpose computer. The only reason the company should put them on one is that the general purpose computer can be turned from one custom computer to another without buying new hardware. Most corporate users only need a few programs. I don't use all of the inputs on my TV. I am glad they are there if I need them, but not using them when I don't need them is not a failing.
If you have less than a dozen applications that you use, and you use them all of the time, pinning to the taskbar is better. The icons will already be there since the applications will generally be open. Pinning them just becomes an improvement in consistancy. The start menu's benefit is in finding applications that you don't use daily, and you might not know the name of.
It doesn't surprise me. The start menu was never perfect for launching common apps. What it is good at is being a standard place for installers to put a bookmark. For applications that you don't know the name of, the Start menu is the best we have seen. For applications that you do know the name of but don't use every day, the search box is pretty good. For applications that you use every day, pinning to the task bar is best.
MS's failing is that they don't realize that just because an action is done less often, it doesn't mean that it isn't important.
Requiring health insurance companies to function like other insurance companies would solve much of the pre-existing condition problem. If you get cancer while you are insured by company X, then company X is responsible for your treatment until the condition no longer exists. The current system (both pre and post this ruling) where getting sick means you can't work, so you lose your job, so you can't continue to pay your insurance premiums, so you have no coverage is absurd.
We have been working under a system where you pay for insurance until you really need it, then it gets cancelled, and you can't use it.
Given the number of people that can't tell the difference between a "Health Insurance Cost", and a "Health Care Cost", I would say that your wrong about 'people' being able to tell the difference between different subject matter and weight them separately. The vast majority of people don't realize that much of the thing the call "Medical Insurance" isn't insurance at all. Do YOU realize it?
So, you think forcing syscodon to pay for your medical ailments is "a good thing"? I'm not saying your wrong. I am just calling you out on what you are saying.
The biggest problem I see with 'ObamaCare' is that it is a lie. And because it is a lie it leaves the wholes open for those that can and will abuse the system. It is an attempt to bring socialized health care to the US. That is not inherently bad. In fact, I would support that. The problem is that by mandating only the behavior of the consumer, and not the behavior of the provider, it creates an even bigger imbalance than what we had before.
Another big problem with the whole debate is that most people don't even know what insurance is. They will say that they do. When you ask them to explain what it is, they will describe insurance. The thing is that the health 'insurance' that they have does not match what they will have just described as insurance. What they have is health insurance, and health payment plans rolled into one policy that is labeled 'insurance'.
Analogy: My home insurance will pay for replacement of the structure and my belongings if my house burns down. My house is unlikely to burn down, and thus the cost of replacement is spread across the pool of insured. If my insurance company started selling the service of paying my garbage collection bill, that would NOT be insurance. You can also be assured that my garbage collection costs would be more than if I paid directly to the garbage collection service. Until we can discuss health insurance honestly, things will only get worse.
Your post makes no sense. A high deductible plan is no more of a 'gamble' than a low deductible plan. Sycodon has a means to pay his bills whether he has minor or major ailments. Insurance on non-catastrophic ailments are not "more responsible".
Of course the rest of the people in the insurance pool would be on the hook if he came down with a catastrophic illness. That is the premise of insurance, and that is what Sycodon pays for. The only difference is that Sycodon is less likely to come down with a catastrophic illness, and more likely to have paid for someone else's ailment. You on the other hand are MORE likely to come down with a cold, and put other people on the hook for something you could easily pay out of pocket.
The vast majority of OBGYN services are not even insurance related. They get paid out on a plan that is sold as 'insurance', but that doesn't mean it is. If the chance of you needing the service is 100%, it isn't insurance. Calling a payment plan that pays for an annual pap smear 'insurance' is like calling the purchase of T-Bills 'gambling'.
Health care can be privatized. It can be socialized. There are pros and cons to each system. What we have now is the worst of both worlds. We have socialized the minimum requirements, while privatizing the price.
If we want to socialize the bare minimum, then we should have just expanded Medicad to cover all ages.
The fact that the tax doesn't apply to those who have sold their soul to the company store is worse than if he had raised taxes on everyone. We are already a nation of sharecroppers. This just reenforces that path.
Not around here. I have 12mbs Comcast Business Class internet with 5 static IPs and no filtering to my home at for $70/mo. The real world speeds usually run around 22mbs, and I have only seen it drop below 12mbs ~6 times in the last 3 years. We regularly stream multiple Netflix streams with no problem at all.
Comcast is evil, and I do feel dirty for doing business with them, but as an ISP, they have been better than they usually get credit for.
Do you really need that explained to you? 1) In many places, the cables are run on poles. Thus, there is no tearing up of city streets. 2) In places that there are, you use the same system that is used for all other utilities that tear up streets. It isn't like cable companies are upgrading the buried wires every year.
Of course, the best choice would be for the cities to install conduit. Nice big pipes like the ones used for the sewer systems. This way, even if you had 20 cable companies in a city, there would be no need to dig up the streets to add another. In fact, there would be LESS digging than there is today, as today, telephone and cable each dig their own trenches. With conduit, the phone could run in the same pipe as the cable and internet.
Yeah, We used to play space invaders with the TV turned off to see how many levels we could get through without looking. One person would play, and the other one would turn the TV on about every 2-3 minutes just long enough to see if the game was over.
Slashdot Mirror
Wrong. The lack of Flash made the iPhone a subpar product. A device that fails to run the software I want to run is a subpar product when compared to a device that does run the software.
There isn't. Those kinds of games universally suck for touch screens. The development language isn't the problem. The hardware you would be running on is.
Yeah! Flash was the worst, except for every other alternative out there.
Only if they wanted to make less money.
We see the same thing in low deductible plans. My wife worked part time for the holiday season at a K-Mart a few years ago. Insurance through my work was VERY expensive ($2700/mo), so when we saw that they offered medical insurance, we thought "Maybe it would be worth working part time permanently just for the insurance". When reviewing their programs, what we found was that the deductibles were low. The premiums were low, but the yearly maximum payout was $200 less than the yearly premiums.
So, you are pretending like you won't ever need medical care that exceeds your premiums. Check.
You are just as much of a gambler as syscodon, as his medical care, like yours, have not exceeded his premiums. You are just bent that he is playing a different set of odds than you.
You might be right that socialized medicine is the best solution, but if you are it is in the 'stopped clock' sort of way.
That is single payer? Are you forgetting to count an employers side of the cost?
Pricing could easily be determined based on the cost of installation and maintenance. Most municipalities have extensive experience in this field so, budgeting would be trivial. It would be particularly easy to start the process in any new housing divisions since that could be included in the required build out just like roads. And, since the roads have not been built yet, the only added cost is trenching and laying the conduit.
Obviously, you would want an engineer to do the final plans, but a system of conduit the same size as your typical storm drain system could easily handle hundreds of competitors. Sure, the number of cables wouldn't be infinite, but increasing the competition from 1 or 2 companies to 40 or 50 companies would be the different between a mono/duo/opoly and a competitive market where customers can vote with their feet.
Tell that to my child who was using a PC almost 2 years before he could read. Let me guess... Your one of those people that think children should have access to technology. (For whatever random year you have picked for 'technology' to count as technology)
Or the air bags in your car that you haven't used since you bought it....
Likely not. The start button is the best way to date for someone new to the system to discover the features of that system. I set my son up with his first computer just after his first birthday. I spent about 5 minutes showing him how moving the mouse would move the cursor on the screen, and how pushing buttons made letters appear. I then showed him how to load gCapris via the 'start menu' (It was Ubuntu, so technically it wasn't a 'start menu', but in practice it was the same thing).
After a couple of hours, I came back and spent about 10 minutes showing him how to expand, minimize, close applications and how to properly shut down and start up the computer and left him to his own devices on that machine.
Within a couple of days, he was proficient as a user. He could start the machine up, run his favorite applications, and shut the machine down. He what programs where there, and which ones he liked via discovery from the start menu. He didn't learn to read for almost another 2 years. There is no way that being able to type the name of the applications would have been usable.
While the benefits of discovery are exaggerated when discussing a 1 year old, they are still there for all users.
And MS not understanding that obvious statement is their failing.
This isn't a failing of the parent. Most people in a business environment don't need a general purpose computer. The only reason the company should put them on one is that the general purpose computer can be turned from one custom computer to another without buying new hardware. Most corporate users only need a few programs. I don't use all of the inputs on my TV. I am glad they are there if I need them, but not using them when I don't need them is not a failing.
If you have less than a dozen applications that you use, and you use them all of the time, pinning to the taskbar is better. The icons will already be there since the applications will generally be open. Pinning them just becomes an improvement in consistancy. The start menu's benefit is in finding applications that you don't use daily, and you might not know the name of.
It doesn't surprise me. The start menu was never perfect for launching common apps. What it is good at is being a standard place for installers to put a bookmark. For applications that you don't know the name of, the Start menu is the best we have seen. For applications that you do know the name of but don't use every day, the search box is pretty good. For applications that you use every day, pinning to the task bar is best.
MS's failing is that they don't realize that just because an action is done less often, it doesn't mean that it isn't important.
Who's insurance costs $3000 a year?
Requiring health insurance companies to function like other insurance companies would solve much of the pre-existing condition problem. If you get cancer while you are insured by company X, then company X is responsible for your treatment until the condition no longer exists. The current system (both pre and post this ruling) where getting sick means you can't work, so you lose your job, so you can't continue to pay your insurance premiums, so you have no coverage is absurd.
We have been working under a system where you pay for insurance until you really need it, then it gets cancelled, and you can't use it.
And with that, expect fewer entrepreneurs, as the cost of quitting the company store and starting your own business just went up.
Given the number of people that can't tell the difference between a "Health Insurance Cost", and a "Health Care Cost", I would say that your wrong about 'people' being able to tell the difference between different subject matter and weight them separately. The vast majority of people don't realize that much of the thing the call "Medical Insurance" isn't insurance at all. Do YOU realize it?
As long as you understand the difference between "Health Insurance Costs" and "Health Care Costs".... You do understand the difference, right?
So, you think forcing syscodon to pay for your medical ailments is "a good thing"? I'm not saying your wrong. I am just calling you out on what you are saying.
The biggest problem I see with 'ObamaCare' is that it is a lie. And because it is a lie it leaves the wholes open for those that can and will abuse the system. It is an attempt to bring socialized health care to the US. That is not inherently bad. In fact, I would support that. The problem is that by mandating only the behavior of the consumer, and not the behavior of the provider, it creates an even bigger imbalance than what we had before.
Another big problem with the whole debate is that most people don't even know what insurance is. They will say that they do. When you ask them to explain what it is, they will describe insurance. The thing is that the health 'insurance' that they have does not match what they will have just described as insurance. What they have is health insurance, and health payment plans rolled into one policy that is labeled 'insurance'.
Analogy: My home insurance will pay for replacement of the structure and my belongings if my house burns down. My house is unlikely to burn down, and thus the cost of replacement is spread across the pool of insured. If my insurance company started selling the service of paying my garbage collection bill, that would NOT be insurance. You can also be assured that my garbage collection costs would be more than if I paid directly to the garbage collection service. Until we can discuss health insurance honestly, things will only get worse.
Your post makes no sense. A high deductible plan is no more of a 'gamble' than a low deductible plan. Sycodon has a means to pay his bills whether he has minor or major ailments. Insurance on non-catastrophic ailments are not "more responsible".
Of course the rest of the people in the insurance pool would be on the hook if he came down with a catastrophic illness. That is the premise of insurance, and that is what Sycodon pays for. The only difference is that Sycodon is less likely to come down with a catastrophic illness, and more likely to have paid for someone else's ailment. You on the other hand are MORE likely to come down with a cold, and put other people on the hook for something you could easily pay out of pocket.
The vast majority of OBGYN services are not even insurance related. They get paid out on a plan that is sold as 'insurance', but that doesn't mean it is. If the chance of you needing the service is 100%, it isn't insurance. Calling a payment plan that pays for an annual pap smear 'insurance' is like calling the purchase of T-Bills 'gambling'.
Health care can be privatized. It can be socialized. There are pros and cons to each system. What we have now is the worst of both worlds. We have socialized the minimum requirements, while privatizing the price.
If we want to socialize the bare minimum, then we should have just expanded Medicad to cover all ages.
The fact that the tax doesn't apply to those who have sold their soul to the company store is worse than if he had raised taxes on everyone. We are already a nation of sharecroppers. This just reenforces that path.
Not around here. I have 12mbs Comcast Business Class internet with 5 static IPs and no filtering to my home at for $70/mo. The real world speeds usually run around 22mbs, and I have only seen it drop below 12mbs ~6 times in the last 3 years. We regularly stream multiple Netflix streams with no problem at all.
Comcast is evil, and I do feel dirty for doing business with them, but as an ISP, they have been better than they usually get credit for.
Do you really need that explained to you? 1) In many places, the cables are run on poles. Thus, there is no tearing up of city streets. 2) In places that there are, you use the same system that is used for all other utilities that tear up streets. It isn't like cable companies are upgrading the buried wires every year.
Of course, the best choice would be for the cities to install conduit. Nice big pipes like the ones used for the sewer systems. This way, even if you had 20 cable companies in a city, there would be no need to dig up the streets to add another. In fact, there would be LESS digging than there is today, as today, telephone and cable each dig their own trenches. With conduit, the phone could run in the same pipe as the cable and internet.
Yeah, We used to play space invaders with the TV turned off to see how many levels we could get through without looking. One person would play, and the other one would turn the TV on about every 2-3 minutes just long enough to see if the game was over.