The innovative GUI was bought. Innovation of the PDA wasn't innovative, there were many others. Innovative mp3 player was 'bigger hdd'.
Likewise, their innovative 1 button mouse is stupid. Their innovative integration of screen and computer is stupid. Their innovative drm is evil, and based on veridisk drm. Their TV sucked, pipin sucked.
The apple II was a good idea though. Props to steve Woz in 1977. Looks like pretty much every time they have innovated they've sucked horribly at it. So could you give some examples of Apple innovation? I'd be interested to hear. I'm not trolling, I'm just trying to lower the distortion field.
Just incase someone didn't get it parent is trolling. Bill Gates meant to lower birth-rate by improving quality of life/health. A fairly well understood causation, as quality of life improves and health improves, people have less children. Less children = sustainable populations.
"On the contrary, we've made doing it easier than ever before. Because insurance companies are no longer allowed to "discriminate" against me for preexisting conditions, it is actually better for me to not buy insurance until I get sick."
Insightful mod?... Uhhh, the problem with your plan is that it is going to be ILLEGAL. Which is what OP was referring to. If you are making 50k you pay 1250/yr in charges. So about 1/5th your current insurance costs (which are really high btw). You should note that your insurance will be lower since you make less than 88k/yr and the new system will likely drop costs generally, so it will be only marginally profitable to not have insurance. And sure, if you have something long term coming up then this system might save you some money. BUT there is a big issue of emergencies. If you get hit by a bus I doubt you could fill out and have accepted all those forms before the ambulance arrives. I do agree that the punishment should ramp up over time to ensure that people don't do this. But it is likely more than enough. If it proves to be not enough or too much, it is just a tweak.
True! But, I think that if the gop runs on a platform of illing this bill it won't help them too much. The die hards that will already vote republican won't matter. And i think whining about it makes them look like poor losers. It'd be like losing a hockey game and then a year later change the rulesand have yourself declared the winner.
ALSO I think much of the fearmongering will have gone stale by then. Healthcare is passed. It will have been passed for over a year. And we haven't all been killed by the roving death panel squads. Even the most stupid will realize this and say it isn't a threat. (The irony of course being that it is their stupidity not realizing that nothing has actually happened yet which would be keeping them safe). The stupid for once will be against the GOP on a repeal innitiative.
Welfare requires you be attempting to get a job (atleast in canada), and you have to show what you've been doing... joining find work programs or w/e is manditory. Housing isn't paid for, you can go live in a shelter... but that isn't really housing, you can't even stay there during there day and don't have a place to keep anything. But yeah healthcare would be free.
Kinda funny, but for someone in that position healthcare has always been free, just go get things done and don't pay your bills, you have no assets to lose. And medicaid would help you out. So you could have been doing this for years already!
Now what would this life mean? Eating the cheapest shitties food out there. Living in a home with bums. Smelling. Old getting used clothes that probably are terrible. Having to carry your life around with you at all times. No computer access or TV. No books. No educated conversation since the only people that you can talk to are social workers or bums. Risking sleeping on the street if your home fills up. Never sleeping in your own bed. Never being able to have things you want.
Who would choose to have a life like that? I think there is sufficient encouragement still for people to get a job. Even a minimum wage job completely changes that person's situation. Not only do I not think that it is a big problem I can prove it! Socialist countries have lower unemployment rates than the US. Where your belief (more support = less drive to work) shows to be bullshit.
1) Subsidies don't increase premiums... And it doesn't limit the dynamics, but this is mostly a good thing. So long as there is good competition (this bill aims to create a much healthier competitive market). Then prices will lower. I doubt a bill making a single payer system would have passed even when obama was really popular.
2) This will likely happen. There will probably be laws created as these issues come up. That said, there wasn't anything like that in the past system so it is still an improvement.
3) They wont. The US people would never pass anything coming close to that. BUT it does succeed in "Making sure 'everyone has something'" which is obviously better than some people having nothing. Over time that 'something' can be improved until everyone has decent healthcare. Which is a good goal.
If insurance wasn't manditory than how would the anti-discrimination on pre-existings work?
non-manditory + discrimination = people that change jobs and such can be fucked over, often to death because their rates jump 5x. (current system)
non-manditory + non-discrimination = people will only buy insurance when they get something bad. Which will make insurance cost an insane amount and end insurance as we know it.
manditory + non-discrimination = people have to do something they should do anyways. It is a sad increase in government power. However, many lives will be savd and improved, likey money will be saved over time.
"Unfortunately our government doesn't do change this year."
Yeah, he should have made a better single payer system! Which wouldn't have passed. While this isn't the hugest change, it is the biggest change possible. People seem to be pissed at him about the abortion thing too.... but without making that dealth this law would NOT have passed. Obama is doing a pretty good job, just a lot of people in congress suck, he's dealing with them best he can...
If it was expected for 2030 than 2011 or 2012 would be early. Not that it is the case... But technically it means, expect it in 2011/2012, but don't get pissed if it comes later since we said 'early as'. Which is perfectly reasonable. The fact that they have such high uncertainty is not though.
That is stated in a funny way. They are giving up 1.4 BILLION people to cater to. All to do what they think is right. THAT is fucking comendable. And no amount of rephrasing can change that.
If you've been getting a lot of penis enhancement ads.... You probably will be offended when you find out that google uses targeted ads. For example I get ads about weapons grade uranium, inactive volcanos and military satellites.
Rationing - a neccessary action when there is not enough of something.
I'm pretty sure being socialist doesn't reduce the number of ambulances. Likely it increases them.
Do you know what the alternative to rationing is? It isn't magically having more ambulances or being awesome. It is having more people die that did't have to.
Saying rationing is a bad thing is fucking stupid. Maybe we should ban triage in hospitals and on battlefields too. Lets not try to give jobs to only the best (rationing jobs for good employees) when we could just hand them out in order of application until all the jobs are gone. Seriously fallicious logic. And you aren't the only one I've seen railing against rationing.
Clearly the coders or whoever set it up that way fucked up. And you had me until the anti-government rant. Driving any vehicle at high speeds comes with danger so there are good reasons to lower the category. (Hong Kong has only 1 category and stats show that this is a shitty plan). Likely that they modified the system based on new information, incredibly well-established facts aren't always true.
UK - "The most critical emergency calls, referred to as "Category A" calls, have a response time requirement of eight minutes and zero seconds, with a 75% compliance requirement, and the additional stipulation that 95% of these calls must be reached within 14 minutes in urban areas and 19 minutes in rural areas. " US - "For life-threatening emer-gencies, providing a transport-capable unit within 8:59 with 90% reliability is the most common urban benchmark. Common rural and wilderness benchmarks are within 15/90% and 30/90%, respectively."
So, comparatively the two countries are similar in numbers. UK is arguably a bit behind, but if you've ever been to both cities it is obvious why. The US was designed for cars, the UK for people or carriages in many parts. In any-case it is insulting to say that they are behind due to government negligence. And this is just talking about ambulance response times, in many other metrics the UK is far far ahead with their socialized healthcare. So please refrain from the rhetoric. I think we can all agree we have enough of that already.
Thats a cheap dodge. I could use a bag of coccaine as a doorstop too but I doubt anyone will accept that.
And no, you can't use an ipod as an hdd without dling and installing itunes to enable use in that way. So only a smallminority of people do use it as a drive. If you just put files on the drive the ipod breaks itself and you have to format it (unlike any other mp3 player). And what percentage of people use their iPod to watch videos? I'd be surprised if that figure broke 5% for more than once per year use. I'm sure there are more people unaware that the ipod does video than people using the feature. So acting as if people are legitimately filling these things is overly optimistic or simply dishonest.
"What happens to fines from those who are charged with illegal file sharing? Does that all go to the government's general fund? Or any of that make its way back to starving artists? If not, that might be a better way to handle this."
That is a different issue all together. Keep in mind that Canada has more filesharers per capita than any other country in the world (and increasing). And not a single person has been charged in the entire country. Infact, laws has progressively allowed it more every few years. The tories were going to push something through bringing it in line with american laws and there were protests so the idea was dropped. Full legalization is coming, it is just a matter of when or if there are big setbacks. So to answer your question, I've no idea where the money goes since it hasn't happened. Likely though it would go to the government's general fund. When a conterfeiting ring gets busted the money doesn't go to Nike, so why would it go to musicians in this case?
The vast majority of Canadians want to see this legalized. I don't see why we shouldn't.
I'd say the vast vast majority of mp3 players involve piracy. Only a chunk of hard drives are though. So the tax there would be misguided. Feel free to build a usb stick to avoid it.
The law isn't perfect TRUE. But it sure as fuck is better than having the majority of Canadians commiting a crime. (If MOST of a population commits a crime it shouldn't be against the law). We can fix the details later, but for now file sharing should be legalized pretty much however it can get through.
MP3 players are pointless WITHOUT filesharing though. I mean most crowbars aren't used in break and enters. The vast vast majority of mp3 players are used with file sharing.
For example, iPod has a 160GB. If you buy from iTunes, songs cost $1.29. The cost of filling an iPod is then $52,838.40. If you think that people are sinking that much money into their mp3 players you would be really really wrong.
So the crowbar comparison is completely unfair. I'd be totally fine with taxing mp3 players, hell double the cost and make mp3 sharing totally legal. I'm sure the vast majority of people would be ok with that.
The softer the science the shittier the stats. Likely for the reasons you listed "the combination of controlling for a lot of variables as well as inadequate mathematics training". Not to offend any social science majors but they often are unable to or unwilling to learn the math required. Not that I think they are stupid, but that the mathematical mind and the social science mind are specced differently. This gap results in terrible stats.
It was to Athens. And no one with spears was chasing him. The Greeks beat the Persians at Marathon. And he was running back to bring the good news. He was just... like REALLY excited about it. As the story goes, after he arrived in Athens he died of exhaustion.
Slashdot Mirror
Like what?
The innovative GUI was bought. Innovation of the PDA wasn't innovative, there were many others. Innovative mp3 player was 'bigger hdd'.
Likewise, their innovative 1 button mouse is stupid. Their innovative integration of screen and computer is stupid. Their innovative drm is evil, and based on veridisk drm. Their TV sucked, pipin sucked.
The apple II was a good idea though. Props to steve Woz in 1977. Looks like pretty much every time they have innovated they've sucked horribly at it. So could you give some examples of Apple innovation? I'd be interested to hear. I'm not trolling, I'm just trying to lower the distortion field.
Just incase someone didn't get it parent is trolling. Bill Gates meant to lower birth-rate by improving quality of life/health. A fairly well understood causation, as quality of life improves and health improves, people have less children. Less children = sustainable populations.
"On the contrary, we've made doing it easier than ever before. Because insurance companies are no longer allowed to "discriminate" against me for preexisting conditions, it is actually better for me to not buy insurance until I get sick."
... Uhhh, the problem with your plan is that it is going to be ILLEGAL. Which is what OP was referring to. If you are making 50k you pay 1250/yr in charges. So about 1/5th your current insurance costs (which are really high btw). You should note that your insurance will be lower since you make less than 88k/yr and the new system will likely drop costs generally, so it will be only marginally profitable to not have insurance. And sure, if you have something long term coming up then this system might save you some money. BUT there is a big issue of emergencies. If you get hit by a bus I doubt you could fill out and have accepted all those forms before the ambulance arrives. I do agree that the punishment should ramp up over time to ensure that people don't do this. But it is likely more than enough. If it proves to be not enough or too much, it is just a tweak.
Insightful mod?
True! But, I think that if the gop runs on a platform of illing this bill it won't help them too much. The die hards that will already vote republican won't matter. And i think whining about it makes them look like poor losers. It'd be like losing a hockey game and then a year later change the rulesand have yourself declared the winner.
ALSO I think much of the fearmongering will have gone stale by then. Healthcare is passed. It will have been passed for over a year. And we haven't all been killed by the roving death panel squads. Even the most stupid will realize this and say it isn't a threat. (The irony of course being that it is their stupidity not realizing that nothing has actually happened yet which would be keeping them safe). The stupid for once will be against the GOP on a repeal innitiative.
Huh? The only way I read that is that you are a midgit and pissed you have to pay full price.
Can someone explain what he meant? Or was I spot on.
Welfare requires you be attempting to get a job (atleast in canada), and you have to show what you've been doing... joining find work programs or w/e is manditory. Housing isn't paid for, you can go live in a shelter... but that isn't really housing, you can't even stay there during there day and don't have a place to keep anything. But yeah healthcare would be free.
Kinda funny, but for someone in that position healthcare has always been free, just go get things done and don't pay your bills, you have no assets to lose. And medicaid would help you out. So you could have been doing this for years already!
Now what would this life mean? Eating the cheapest shitties food out there. Living in a home with bums. Smelling. Old getting used clothes that probably are terrible. Having to carry your life around with you at all times. No computer access or TV. No books. No educated conversation since the only people that you can talk to are social workers or bums. Risking sleeping on the street if your home fills up. Never sleeping in your own bed. Never being able to have things you want.
Who would choose to have a life like that? I think there is sufficient encouragement still for people to get a job. Even a minimum wage job completely changes that person's situation. Not only do I not think that it is a big problem I can prove it! Socialist countries have lower unemployment rates than the US. Where your belief (more support = less drive to work) shows to be bullshit.
1) Subsidies don't increase premiums... And it doesn't limit the dynamics, but this is mostly a good thing. So long as there is good competition (this bill aims to create a much healthier competitive market). Then prices will lower. I doubt a bill making a single payer system would have passed even when obama was really popular.
2) This will likely happen. There will probably be laws created as these issues come up. That said, there wasn't anything like that in the past system so it is still an improvement.
3) They wont. The US people would never pass anything coming close to that. BUT it does succeed in "Making sure 'everyone has something'" which is obviously better than some people having nothing. Over time that 'something' can be improved until everyone has decent healthcare. Which is a good goal.
If insurance wasn't manditory than how would the anti-discrimination on pre-existings work?
non-manditory + discrimination = people that change jobs and such can be fucked over, often to death because their rates jump 5x. (current system)
non-manditory + non-discrimination = people will only buy insurance when they get something bad. Which will make insurance cost an insane amount and end insurance as we know it.
manditory + non-discrimination = people have to do something they should do anyways. It is a sad increase in government power. However, many lives will be savd and improved, likey money will be saved over time.
So which would you pick?
"Unfortunately our government doesn't do change this year."
Yeah, he should have made a better single payer system! Which wouldn't have passed. While this isn't the hugest change, it is the biggest change possible. People seem to be pissed at him about the abortion thing too.... but without making that dealth this law would NOT have passed. Obama is doing a pretty good job, just a lot of people in congress suck, he's dealing with them best he can...
Nah the one for priests is:
- On the choir boy
If it was expected for 2030 than 2011 or 2012 would be early. Not that it is the case... But technically it means, expect it in 2011/2012, but don't get pissed if it comes later since we said 'early as'. Which is perfectly reasonable. The fact that they have such high uncertainty is not though.
That is stated in a funny way. They are giving up 1.4 BILLION people to cater to. All to do what they think is right. THAT is fucking comendable. And no amount of rephrasing can change that.
If you've been getting a lot of penis enhancement ads.... You probably will be offended when you find out that google uses targeted ads. For example I get ads about weapons grade uranium, inactive volcanos and military satellites.
Israel is an asshole?... I don't know how that proves china isn't being similar.
Rationing - a neccessary action when there is not enough of something.
I'm pretty sure being socialist doesn't reduce the number of ambulances. Likely it increases them.
Do you know what the alternative to rationing is? It isn't magically having more ambulances or being awesome. It is having more people die that did't have to.
Saying rationing is a bad thing is fucking stupid. Maybe we should ban triage in hospitals and on battlefields too. Lets not try to give jobs to only the best (rationing jobs for good employees) when we could just hand them out in order of application until all the jobs are gone. Seriously fallicious logic. And you aren't the only one I've seen railing against rationing.
Clearly the coders or whoever set it up that way fucked up. And you had me until the anti-government rant. Driving any vehicle at high speeds comes with danger so there are good reasons to lower the category. (Hong Kong has only 1 category and stats show that this is a shitty plan). Likely that they modified the system based on new information, incredibly well-established facts aren't always true.
UK - "The most critical emergency calls, referred to as "Category A" calls, have a response time requirement of eight minutes and zero seconds, with a 75% compliance requirement, and the additional stipulation that 95% of these calls must be reached within 14 minutes in urban areas and 19 minutes in rural areas. "
US - "For life-threatening emer-gencies, providing a transport-capable unit within 8:59 with 90% reliability is the most common urban benchmark. Common rural and wilderness benchmarks are within 15/90% and 30/90%, respectively."
So, comparatively the two countries are similar in numbers. UK is arguably a bit behind, but if you've ever been to both cities it is obvious why. The US was designed for cars, the UK for people or carriages in many parts. In any-case it is insulting to say that they are behind due to government negligence. And this is just talking about ambulance response times, in many other metrics the UK is far far ahead with their socialized healthcare. So please refrain from the rhetoric. I think we can all agree we have enough of that already.
Only rich old people are hurt.... hmmmm
Thats a cheap dodge. I could use a bag of coccaine as a doorstop too but I doubt anyone will accept that.
And no, you can't use an ipod as an hdd without dling and installing itunes to enable use in that way. So only a smallminority of people do use it as a drive. If you just put files on the drive the ipod breaks itself and you have to format it (unlike any other mp3 player). And what percentage of people use their iPod to watch videos? I'd be surprised if that figure broke 5% for more than once per year use. I'm sure there are more people unaware that the ipod does video than people using the feature. So acting as if people are legitimately filling these things is overly optimistic or simply dishonest.
"What happens to fines from those who are charged with illegal file sharing? Does that all go to the government's general fund? Or any of that make its way back to starving artists? If not, that might be a better way to handle this."
That is a different issue all together. Keep in mind that Canada has more filesharers per capita than any other country in the world (and increasing). And not a single person has been charged in the entire country. Infact, laws has progressively allowed it more every few years. The tories were going to push something through bringing it in line with american laws and there were protests so the idea was dropped. Full legalization is coming, it is just a matter of when or if there are big setbacks. So to answer your question, I've no idea where the money goes since it hasn't happened. Likely though it would go to the government's general fund. When a conterfeiting ring gets busted the money doesn't go to Nike, so why would it go to musicians in this case?
The vast majority of Canadians want to see this legalized. I don't see why we shouldn't.
I'd say the vast vast majority of mp3 players involve piracy. Only a chunk of hard drives are though. So the tax there would be misguided. Feel free to build a usb stick to avoid it.
The law isn't perfect TRUE. But it sure as fuck is better than having the majority of Canadians commiting a crime. (If MOST of a population commits a crime it shouldn't be against the law). We can fix the details later, but for now file sharing should be legalized pretty much however it can get through.
MP3 players are pointless WITHOUT filesharing though. I mean most crowbars aren't used in break and enters. The vast vast majority of mp3 players are used with file sharing.
For example, iPod has a 160GB. If you buy from iTunes, songs cost $1.29. The cost of filling an iPod is then $52,838.40. If you think that people are sinking that much money into their mp3 players you would be really really wrong.
So the crowbar comparison is completely unfair. I'd be totally fine with taxing mp3 players, hell double the cost and make mp3 sharing totally legal. I'm sure the vast majority of people would be ok with that.
aha, me and my gf have a point system that is totally arbitrary, completely imbalanced. But we kept track. She's got like 2million something points.
"And sooner or later, even that won't help."
You just aren't being creative enough.
The softer the science the shittier the stats. Likely for the reasons you listed "the combination of controlling for a lot of variables as well as inadequate mathematics training". Not to offend any social science majors but they often are unable to or unwilling to learn the math required. Not that I think they are stupid, but that the mathematical mind and the social science mind are specced differently. This gap results in terrible stats.
Only amusing because of the resurgence of piracy in Somalia over the last 10 years.... There has also been global cooling.
It was to Athens. And no one with spears was chasing him. The Greeks beat the Persians at Marathon. And he was running back to bring the good news. He was just ... like REALLY excited about it. As the story goes, after he arrived in Athens he died of exhaustion.