I really don't care. The risk of having my entire life ripped away because some company or other got hacked looms much larger in my mind...
And that is the core issue on this topic. Use whatever you feel more comfortable with. I am not going to convince you that your fear is seriously misplaced in comparison the the 1000 other riskier things you do on a daily basis.
So you keep paying in cash or whatever and I will keep using credit... and getting my cash back rewards.
Where do you travel? I have traveled all over the US and over 5 years, I have come across THREE locations that didn't accept plastic. Plenty of places that won't take Amex, & Discover. A few that didn't take MC, but that's about it.
Riding with neighbors and friends isn't how carpooling works anywhere. Usually for routine travel where the majority of the distance is the same, a bunch of random people meet/pick up at certain points and journey together. They come from close enough places and go to close enough destinations. Its a personal & predictable ride share.
Another form of this has actually been quite common for decades in most developing countries. There are "shared" taxis with extra seats that pick up and drop off people at various destinations. Like mini-buses. With cars becoming relatively common over the last two decades, people don't need to waste time hunting down shared taxis for routine trips.
My local city has a well funded ridesharing program. They provide free parking 15 miles outside the city, allow HOV usage, and companies provide vans for the trips. The passengers pay $100/person to the van company, form groups via a website, and meet up at places of their choosing. The van company gets ~$800 per month, each rider gets driven to work, and the designated driver pays less than the others. Gas is pumped by the driver and reimbursed by company.
You can also tug down giant floats that rise up, running the motors in reverse to generate electricity. They don't even need to come all the way up or go all the way down.
The Executive can bar based on country or affiliation*. But they can't do a blanket bar without severe justification. The President can bar ppl from Canada and Mexico but without a justification equivalent to "we are at war with them", it would be overturned pretty quicky because of the economic impact to the border states. The Gov failed miserably in showing immediately threat that the ban was curtailing.
The government also can't discriminate against religion in proxy nor results. They can't say "We are banning Buddhists" but they also can't say "We are banning Myanmar." because most ppl there are Buddhists and it unfairly impacts them. There is an "intent" aspect to this because maybe we are at war with Burma and want to ban them but they happen to be mostly Buddhists which we have nothing against. But the President's ongoing and past statements put that topic to rest.
Yes, these are severe restrictions. But they exist because of the danger of abuse if otherwise. Good guys have to play by the rules and have noble ideals... that's mostly what makes them good!
I doubt the Supreme Court will side with the President. I would be surprised if they take up the case. I easily see a majority voting against him. It would certainly be a fun read. Unless he has some major new argument and evidence.
* = We automatically bar people affiliated with terrorist organizes as recognized by a bunch of countries. We also expand on that list by our own classifications (i.e.: Mx cartels).
Dude, you can't pass crap like those bans. Any President doing so would have them blocked by judicial review. They aren't constitutional. They are so clear cut and dry that they shouldn't even be part of the discussion. It's a restriction the US has self imposed as powerful as Innocent until proven Guilty.
The band aren't exactly that hard to think up. I am sure they were thought up by prior Administrations. But in those cases, the President knew it wouldn't work or atleast his advisors did. For Trump, no one wants to speak their mind against him.
You HAD to pick ozone as part of your post? It was a huge problem a few decades ago. Because the world globally decided to ban CFCs usage, it is no longer a major problem. Thou it is still in the process of repairing itself. If we go back to using CFCs, we can mess it up again in 2-3 decades. Sooner since we have so much more industry.
It's pretty much THE perfect example of how humans can easily impact climate change on a global level AND also solve it if they approach it scientifically!
They had a computer randomly segment a piece of paper, plug in a random sampling of patterns, and then wrap the paper around a jar. Not exactly "replacing a designer team" (then again it is Italy).
I think more credit is due to the Marketing team that realized this could sell jars. Job well done.
They are talking about topping cars with these. That is a lot of power that you store up and at some percentage of capacity you boost X charge to a location in need. HVDC would be fine. It is current used for long haul between AC systems and systems with different phases.
Number3: You wouldn't convert DC power to AC just for transmission. It would make more sense to do HVDC for transmission and inefficiently convert to AC at destination where needed or where you are plugging back into the grid.
Cancer cures, global warming, Mars colonization. All those are pushing computer simulations to their max today. A better processor that could truely "multitask" would be a huge leap in toolset capability for any of those fields.
There was a 2015 Supreme Court ruling* that specifically addressed this, with arbitration, involved DirectTV, and a DirectTV clause that said "except where overruled by State". They ruled that Federal Law overruled California's** AND thus the exception clause in DirectTV's contract!!!
When it comes to Telecoms it's been extremely rare in the past 30 years that the politicians don't favor big business. Telecoms hate state by state regulations... unless it protects them against competition.
We had a very brief stint with Mr Wheeler as FCC chair. But something he swam upstream for years against a Republican majority is being washed away in mere months under Ajit. With Republicans owning the government there is no chance the arbitration issues will get corrected. They are also working on gutting the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau which is the only other organization that can address the issues via the unfair consumer contracts angle. I guess consumer contracts will get far worse in the next 4-6 years before the pendulum swings back and gets to partially fix it.
It's not so much as you are stuck with an epipen, so much as these are controlled substances, and can only be given out upon the guidance of a MD. If the doc doesn't prescribe the drug itself with a bunch of idiot friendly dosage instructions for each purmutation of the products on market, you won't get it. It is just easier for docs to pick the easiest to administer and popular ones. This applies to many other drugs. Most other countries have far more relaxed rules, putting part of the power in the hands of the Pharmacy. And the regulation isn't so much a safety issue in as much a liability issue. A misunderstood perscription means an expensive lawsuit for the hospital. Rx can dispense what they want too, but if they don't follow the doc to the letter, they are open for liability. Why take the risk, don't think, be a robot?
The regulations, education, equipment, and medicine make healthcare expensive but there isn't too much wiggle room there to cut costs. Some deregulation such as buying from Canada, Japan, or EU make sense. Some in provider liability limits. But most other stuff appears valid ROI; the labor is just expensive in the US.
But there is a LOT of paper pushing, overhead, and simple waste in the healthcare service field. And it's not about digitalization. The processes themselves are totally messed up here. There are many examples, but to have a simple 15 minute outpatient operation in the US, it takes 16 positions talking to the patient and 3-4 weeks to schedule. In countries like Canada, UK, and India (at international hospitals) it takes 1 week (not counting initial consultation) and 7-8 positions.
About 1/2 the extra positions are redundant database entry positions, and the other are backend billing & payment related. And each of these positions have multiple people in them (you might talk to one on day 1 and another day 2). Each person upon introduction goes through a standard safety checklist to reduce chances of mixups. Safe, but takes time => cost.
The data entry equipment is attocious! It was clearly designed for and focused on generating an invoice, seek payment, and avoid liability. There are tons of paper work that almost nearly all goes into different DBs collecting essentially the same exact information. And although you sign information release waivers at each provider, the systems don't talk to each other but actually pass through a meat bag, printer/fax, meat bag, and shredder/file cabinet. Liability waivers are the only diffs in the info gathering.
Then you add on the insurance industry and they are more inefficient. Most of the paper work above is for them. But imagine a store that charges $10 for a pen but says that it only costs $2 if you are lucky to belong to a set number of clubs (club will have you pay $0.25 of that) and live in certain states?!? No other market/industry has shit like this. Oh and you can't know how much the pen will cost you till 3 weeks after you buy it!! It could be $0.25 or $2 or $10! We live in a world where Amazon can tell me how much the 5 current Chinese vendors of a pen released yesterday will charge me AND the day it will be delivered before I pay. I can buy/sell millions of dollars worth of stocks and pay all my utility bills in minutes with literally a few clicks. But healthcare as a service is still... nonexistent.
But it is an even bigger cost on the whole to the rest of us to give up our freedoms and due process so that the very few victims can get better recourse. And I am assuming they actually get better justice, not just "feel good" justice.
Are you satirizing? If not, you have a very poor understanding of how the medical industry works in the US. Choice is among the last words one would use in healthcare here.
First it isn't a treaty. Second the former President is well within his power to agree to it. More so than this President is to get out of it (he still needs to exit within the rules of the agreement).
But this whole funneling money to other countries thing... the US does this ALL the time. We don't spend the more on military than the next 10 countries combined hiring people to wipe Generals asses. All those shipping lanes, ports, and trade routes we protect aren't used just by US ships. Iraq, Afganistan, and Iran don't self fund their reconstruction. We been giving a lot of corn, medicine, and wheat for many years to Africa. Then there is all the military planes, tanks, rifles, etc that we been giving many countries for decades.
The Paris Agreement's funding needs in its entirety are a drop in the bucket compared to any of the above's annual expenditure.
Well said. There are many cases that we just can't solve due to the restrictions of the system. The founding fathers knew this. And it is a small price to pay to have a just and fair system of justice.
That's not what people mean by a currency losing value... By that metric there isn't a currency in the world that won't become worthless given time. The only resolution of which is to bankrupt it, cancel all obligations, and start all over.
Losing value to worthless is usually meant by a prolonged period where people will not trade in it.
PS, the dollar's long term inflation rate is usually 3%. Which is really good. A healthy inflation is considered by most to be around 2%. Which the US attempts to get to but historically killed the average up with brief periods of high inflation.
No it won't. There is something called too much data or noise. If you had ALL the fingerprints in the world updating with time of death, it will make case solving worse! The entire database would become useless. You would have too many false leads to weed through. To keep a proper justice system, you would need a lot of man power to execute on the results. Resources that systems just do not have.
We are already at this level of information. This is why "all the signals were there" but ignored happens in these events. And ppl think the system is broken. Then they make the system worse by adding more shit.
The problem is that software vendors have lost customer trust and they aren't even working on getting it back. Historically, updates, upgrades, and new features were separate things. When companies started to think "How do we monotize our current user base?" that things went to shit.
Now features, mostly unwanted, are being shoved down the update channel. All it really accomplishes over time is making the update channel the same as a forced upgrade/feature channel. Something that most people just don't want.
Slashdot Mirror
I really don't care. The risk of having my entire life ripped away because some company or other got hacked looms much larger in my mind...
And that is the core issue on this topic. Use whatever you feel more comfortable with. I am not going to convince you that your fear is seriously misplaced in comparison the the 1000 other riskier things you do on a daily basis.
So you keep paying in cash or whatever and I will keep using credit... and getting my cash back rewards.
Where do you travel? I have traveled all over the US and over 5 years, I have come across THREE locations that didn't accept plastic. Plenty of places that won't take Amex, & Discover. A few that didn't take MC, but that's about it.
Riding with neighbors and friends isn't how carpooling works anywhere. Usually for routine travel where the majority of the distance is the same, a bunch of random people meet/pick up at certain points and journey together. They come from close enough places and go to close enough destinations. Its a personal & predictable ride share.
Another form of this has actually been quite common for decades in most developing countries. There are "shared" taxis with extra seats that pick up and drop off people at various destinations. Like mini-buses. With cars becoming relatively common over the last two decades, people don't need to waste time hunting down shared taxis for routine trips.
My local city has a well funded ridesharing program. They provide free parking 15 miles outside the city, allow HOV usage, and companies provide vans for the trips. The passengers pay $100/person to the van company, form groups via a website, and meet up at places of their choosing. The van company gets ~$800 per month, each rider gets driven to work, and the designated driver pays less than the others. Gas is pumped by the driver and reimbursed by company.
You can also tug down giant floats that rise up, running the motors in reverse to generate electricity. They don't even need to come all the way up or go all the way down.
In the real world, there aren't any races, religions, or cultures that want to harm us. Not ONE!
Well? What is next? We haven't started with this so we don't know what is next. We already privatized and profitized imprisonment.
The Executive can bar based on country or affiliation*. But they can't do a blanket bar without severe justification. The President can bar ppl from Canada and Mexico but without a justification equivalent to "we are at war with them", it would be overturned pretty quicky because of the economic impact to the border states. The Gov failed miserably in showing immediately threat that the ban was curtailing.
The government also can't discriminate against religion in proxy nor results. They can't say "We are banning Buddhists" but they also can't say "We are banning Myanmar." because most ppl there are Buddhists and it unfairly impacts them. There is an "intent" aspect to this because maybe we are at war with Burma and want to ban them but they happen to be mostly Buddhists which we have nothing against. But the President's ongoing and past statements put that topic to rest.
Yes, these are severe restrictions. But they exist because of the danger of abuse if otherwise. Good guys have to play by the rules and have noble ideals... that's mostly what makes them good!
I doubt the Supreme Court will side with the President. I would be surprised if they take up the case. I easily see a majority voting against him. It would certainly be a fun read. Unless he has some major new argument and evidence.
* = We automatically bar people affiliated with terrorist organizes as recognized by a bunch of countries. We also expand on that list by our own classifications (i.e.: Mx cartels).
Dude, you can't pass crap like those bans. Any President doing so would have them blocked by judicial review. They aren't constitutional. They are so clear cut and dry that they shouldn't even be part of the discussion. It's a restriction the US has self imposed as powerful as Innocent until proven Guilty.
The band aren't exactly that hard to think up. I am sure they were thought up by prior Administrations. But in those cases, the President knew it wouldn't work or atleast his advisors did. For Trump, no one wants to speak their mind against him.
You HAD to pick ozone as part of your post? It was a huge problem a few decades ago. Because the world globally decided to ban CFCs usage, it is no longer a major problem. Thou it is still in the process of repairing itself. If we go back to using CFCs, we can mess it up again in 2-3 decades. Sooner since we have so much more industry.
It's pretty much THE perfect example of how humans can easily impact climate change on a global level AND also solve it if they approach it scientifically!
I read it all. GP has good points. GASP.. are you wrong on the internet? Go go, log off right now, go hide.
They had a computer randomly segment a piece of paper, plug in a random sampling of patterns, and then wrap the paper around a jar. Not exactly "replacing a designer team" (then again it is Italy).
I think more credit is due to the Marketing team that realized this could sell jars. Job well done.
They are talking about topping cars with these. That is a lot of power that you store up and at some percentage of capacity you boost X charge to a location in need. HVDC would be fine. It is current used for long haul between AC systems and systems with different phases.
Number3: You wouldn't convert DC power to AC just for transmission. It would make more sense to do HVDC for transmission and inefficiently convert to AC at destination where needed or where you are plugging back into the grid.
Cancer cures, global warming, Mars colonization. All those are pushing computer simulations to their max today. A better processor that could truely "multitask" would be a huge leap in toolset capability for any of those fields.
There was a 2015 Supreme Court ruling* that specifically addressed this, with arbitration, involved DirectTV, and a DirectTV clause that said "except where overruled by State". They ruled that Federal Law overruled California's** AND thus the exception clause in DirectTV's contract!!!
When it comes to Telecoms it's been extremely rare in the past 30 years that the politicians don't favor big business. Telecoms hate state by state regulations... unless it protects them against competition.
We had a very brief stint with Mr Wheeler as FCC chair. But something he swam upstream for years against a Republican majority is being washed away in mere months under Ajit. With Republicans owning the government there is no chance the arbitration issues will get corrected. They are also working on gutting the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau which is the only other organization that can address the issues via the unfair consumer contracts angle. I guess consumer contracts will get far worse in the next 4-6 years before the pendulum swings back and gets to partially fix it.
* = http://www.latimes.com/busines...
** = States rights... I only need them for stuff my party doesn't like!
It's not so much as you are stuck with an epipen, so much as these are controlled substances, and can only be given out upon the guidance of a MD. If the doc doesn't prescribe the drug itself with a bunch of idiot friendly dosage instructions for each purmutation of the products on market, you won't get it. It is just easier for docs to pick the easiest to administer and popular ones. This applies to many other drugs. Most other countries have far more relaxed rules, putting part of the power in the hands of the Pharmacy. And the regulation isn't so much a safety issue in as much a liability issue. A misunderstood perscription means an expensive lawsuit for the hospital. Rx can dispense what they want too, but if they don't follow the doc to the letter, they are open for liability. Why take the risk, don't think, be a robot?
The regulations, education, equipment, and medicine make healthcare expensive but there isn't too much wiggle room there to cut costs. Some deregulation such as buying from Canada, Japan, or EU make sense. Some in provider liability limits. But most other stuff appears valid ROI; the labor is just expensive in the US.
But there is a LOT of paper pushing, overhead, and simple waste in the healthcare service field. And it's not about digitalization. The processes themselves are totally messed up here. There are many examples, but to have a simple 15 minute outpatient operation in the US, it takes 16 positions talking to the patient and 3-4 weeks to schedule. In countries like Canada, UK, and India (at international hospitals) it takes 1 week (not counting initial consultation) and 7-8 positions.
About 1/2 the extra positions are redundant database entry positions, and the other are backend billing & payment related. And each of these positions have multiple people in them (you might talk to one on day 1 and another day 2). Each person upon introduction goes through a standard safety checklist to reduce chances of mixups. Safe, but takes time => cost.
The data entry equipment is attocious! It was clearly designed for and focused on generating an invoice, seek payment, and avoid liability. There are tons of paper work that almost nearly all goes into different DBs collecting essentially the same exact information. And although you sign information release waivers at each provider, the systems don't talk to each other but actually pass through a meat bag, printer/fax, meat bag, and shredder/file cabinet. Liability waivers are the only diffs in the info gathering.
Then you add on the insurance industry and they are more inefficient. Most of the paper work above is for them. But imagine a store that charges $10 for a pen but says that it only costs $2 if you are lucky to belong to a set number of clubs (club will have you pay $0.25 of that) and live in certain states?!? No other market/industry has shit like this. Oh and you can't know how much the pen will cost you till 3 weeks after you buy it!! It could be $0.25 or $2 or $10! We live in a world where Amazon can tell me how much the 5 current Chinese vendors of a pen released yesterday will charge me AND the day it will be delivered before I pay. I can buy/sell millions of dollars worth of stocks and pay all my utility bills in minutes with literally a few clicks. But healthcare as a service is still... nonexistent.
Of course!!!
But it is an even bigger cost on the whole to the rest of us to give up our freedoms and due process so that the very few victims can get better recourse. And I am assuming they actually get better justice, not just "feel good" justice.
Are you satirizing? If not, you have a very poor understanding of how the medical industry works in the US. Choice is among the last words one would use in healthcare here.
Right! Because that sort of testing really worked in the auto emissions industry.
First it isn't a treaty. Second the former President is well within his power to agree to it. More so than this President is to get out of it (he still needs to exit within the rules of the agreement).
But this whole funneling money to other countries thing... the US does this ALL the time. We don't spend the more on military than the next 10 countries combined hiring people to wipe Generals asses. All those shipping lanes, ports, and trade routes we protect aren't used just by US ships. Iraq, Afganistan, and Iran don't self fund their reconstruction. We been giving a lot of corn, medicine, and wheat for many years to Africa. Then there is all the military planes, tanks, rifles, etc that we been giving many countries for decades.
The Paris Agreement's funding needs in its entirety are a drop in the bucket compared to any of the above's annual expenditure.
Well said. There are many cases that we just can't solve due to the restrictions of the system. The founding fathers knew this. And it is a small price to pay to have a just and fair system of justice.
That's not what people mean by a currency losing value... By that metric there isn't a currency in the world that won't become worthless given time. The only resolution of which is to bankrupt it, cancel all obligations, and start all over.
Losing value to worthless is usually meant by a prolonged period where people will not trade in it.
PS, the dollar's long term inflation rate is usually 3%. Which is really good. A healthy inflation is considered by most to be around 2%. Which the US attempts to get to but historically killed the average up with brief periods of high inflation.
Can you give us 2-3 situations where USD would fall 50% or more?
No it won't. There is something called too much data or noise. If you had ALL the fingerprints in the world updating with time of death, it will make case solving worse! The entire database would become useless. You would have too many false leads to weed through. To keep a proper justice system, you would need a lot of man power to execute on the results. Resources that systems just do not have.
We are already at this level of information. This is why "all the signals were there" but ignored happens in these events. And ppl think the system is broken. Then they make the system worse by adding more shit.
The problem is that software vendors have lost customer trust and they aren't even working on getting it back. Historically, updates, upgrades, and new features were separate things. When companies started to think "How do we monotize our current user base?" that things went to shit.
Now features, mostly unwanted, are being shoved down the update channel. All it really accomplishes over time is making the update channel the same as a forced upgrade/feature channel. Something that most people just don't want.