I think you miss his point. For routine maintenance (i.e. the stuff you won't die from) you are supposed to pay out of your own pocket. For sudden, unexpected, or emergency issues, your insurance should kick in.
Instead, under our current system (in America), your insurance readily pays for routine maintenance stuff (doctor's visit, diagnostic imaging, routine blood tests, etc.)... But the moment you have a sudden serious illness, or an accident or some other stuff you actually DO need insurance for, you insurance company will object strongly and will try to wiggle out of paying for any it.
Sure, catastrophic-only insurance is available in theory, but people are actively penalized for using those plans (a hospital would bill you $3000 for something like a CAT scan if you pay for yourself (cash), yet if you have insurance they would bill them just $400 (+ $20 copay passed on to you) for exactly same treatment.
You can't even play devil's advocate and say that they're doing anything good. Of course they are doing heaps of good as long as sex follows a legal marriage, and as long as the parents and the child consent to such union. Look, kids are gonna fuck around anyways, so you might as place sex in confines of a holy matrimony and with an experienced and loving husband instead of the backseat of dad's car or behind bushes with a drug-infested dumbass.
Young marriage can strengthen Family. For example, a lot of Muslims can marry girls as young as 4 as long as they wait until she's 9 before having sex. Similar practices are true for some fundamentalist Christian sects, Orthodox Jews, and many other religions. Young girls "grow into it" if you like, instead of accepting promiscuity and infidelity as the norm becoming insecure slutty whores.
Late marriage, on the other hand, leads to high divorce rate, lack of trust amongst partners, a feeling of transiency and general insecurity of the relationship. Sexual diseases are at an all-time high in promiscuous late marriage societies encouraging random sex. Currently, 1 in 4 teenage girls in America has an STD: how's that for "Think of the Children" for you?
Traditionally, early marriage is the norm. For most of human history 12-14 was the acceptable marriage age for girls, and certainly some of your ancestors had sex with children by modern definition: girls would be introduced by the time they are 13-14 and married off to an older man within half a year of that. If the girl was single at 16 she was considered to be too old. By 20, an old-maid destined to remain alone forever (read Pride and Prejudice or War and Peace or some other older books for examples of that; notice how some of the characters were pregnant at 15, and certainly mature enough for it. Both books are in the public domain right now).
Also consider that people advocating against marriage to young girls are the very same people that oppose abstinense, chastity, and morality of any sort in general. These tend to be the abortion/homosexualism zealots with their beliefs rooted in devil-worship, bestiality, and occult/nazi practices of yesteryears.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. " A couple of things: i) notice how it says "against unreasonable searches and seizures," which means that unreasonable searches OR seizures are perfectly legal so long as you do one but not the other. ii) persons, houses, etc. does not include electronic data or transmission thereof. iii) all of the above is trumped by Article 2 anyways, which says the Prez can ignore the Constitution in order to uphold the Constitution iv) if you got nothing to hide you are not a paedophile. v) would you rather the Govt collected your emails or your dead bodies? terrorists LOVE the Constitution vi) think of the children
It's only ironic if you believe the stated reasons for these conflicts. Also, two wrongs don't make right (regarding your hate of the blanket/agent orange soldier).
What if they did have petabyte-level holograms and optical storage 12,000 years ago but the whole lot got eaten by a fungus because of the organic die or something? And all that survived were those fingerpaints up in a French cave originally made by a Down syndrome kid...
The United States has the largest share of all internationally authored papers of any single country, and its researchers collaborate with counterparts in more countries than do the researchers of any other country. U.S.-based authors were represented in 44% of all internationally coauthored articles in 2003 and collaborated with authors in 172 of the 192 countries that had any internationally coauthored articles in 2003.
And here: US ranked #1 at 3 times the number of papers than any other countries, and 5 times greater in number of citation (five times!)
Doing almost 50% of World's research isn't bad considering we have only 5% of the World's population. Guess that anwers my previous question: at 25% of World's population China was bound to discover something of use sooner or later...
I am more interested as to why American scientists weren't the first in on this, and why such cutting-edge research is being done in China (a poor third-world country).
As a science/tech major from a Liberal Arts university, you have a well-rounded, well-grounded education. You might not have quite as much in-depth knowledge as a guy from a tech school, but that's absolutely irrelevant (some on-the-job training or time at a library will fix that within weeks). What counts is whether you have a good background knowledge, are able and willing to learn, be receptive to aquiring new skills, and never resting on your laurels.
That being said, I would pay attention to your transcript much more than to the name of your university: a guy failing (or even acing) blowoff courses from a top school is not worth as much as a guy willing to take on a lot more challenging courses from an average school.
To remain at the top, any country would need huge investments in R&D, breakaway technologies, education, hi- and hum-tech... America is still very much at the top, but the dynamics don't look very good:
1) Our academic institutions are the absolute best (probably 90 of top-100 spots are ours) but most Americans stay away from science and math. 2) Our researchers are most productive in the world (based on the number of publications, citations, impact factors, patents, etc) but research funding is shaky. 3) We still attract the best and the brightest, but due to public opposition to immigration this is likely to change. Once a smart educated person can no longer work with us, she will work against us . This trend is doubly alarming because formerly xenophobic contries such as Ireland, Canada, Germany, or Japan now actively solicit skilled immigrants. 4) Our high tech companies, both giants and startups, still post record sales and profits, but current business conditions are becoming crappier by the day: we are aproaching just about the highest taxes in the First World, labor conditions are declining (drops in both native skill availability and in visa quotas), patent and IP protections favor trolls and infringers but give ever less protection to proper research investors, and so on.
I have a sinking feeling that we dropped the ball at some point, and that once we are no longer No.1 and cannot leverage our leadership position, the decline will accelerate ever faster.
As for the folks passing through Ellis Island, they had to pass strict checks to ensure they were fit to be allowed entry. Since you seem to have no clue as to what these actually were, let me enlighten you as to the admissions criteria: 1) Not be a prostitute 2) Not be a slave 3) Not be infected with TB 4) Not be a Chinese worker (since mid-1800 due to xenophobic reasons) 5) Be literate enough to pen in a cross next to once's name (circle allowed for jews).
Anyone meeting the above conditions was allowed to immigrate. "Strict checks" my ass...
If these farmers don't like the new genetically modified seeds, they can keep planting the old garden variety ones. Research is not cheap, and any commercial company is in the business of making money. Is copyrighting and DRMing (GRMing?) seeds ethical? Millions of dollars are needed to design the original transgenic, so unless farmers are willing to buy these once for the full price (say 1000 seeds for $20,000 each) it makes perfect business sense.
You DO know that Linus Torvalds is an immigrant (i.e. one of those people who you think is stealing your job)?
Google, transistor, telephone, AC motor/generator, GPS, nuclear reactor, nuclear bomb, rocket engine, space program, radio transmitter... all invented by immigrants.
So yeah, Bill Gates is the man, and having him as president would be a great idea (though he's more liberal than a tapeworm).
No trouble enforcing privileges at all... until you needed to run that setuid script to mount a floppy!
I seriously doubt you actually have experience using linux in the early days (pre-2000): masochists and the brainfuck geeks sure loved it, but nobody else did.
And no, linux+GUI was never (and still isn't) as memory-efficient as Windows. You could have win95+explorer, IE3-4, word97, and Borland IDE running all side by side on a machine with P1-133 Mhz, 16 MB of RAM. That's the level of efficiency you could not get from linux at that time (from OS/2 or BeOS yes, linux NO) but you paid for it by giving up security.
I am sure you remember the last "Candidate for Change" that ran in 2000.
A Washington outsider, a uniter able to bridge across party lines, a new man bringing change to Washington corruption, George W. Bush accomplished all this, and so much more.
Given how well that worked out, I too am thinking of supporting Obama.
How about a giant hamster ball with the user inside? No need to maintain dynamic equillibrium, so much easier to control one would think.
But even better than that would be to tie your user's feet to 3-d force feedback actuators: pretty much model it after an elliptical trainer, but with an independent drive for each leg with an added ability to perform lateral translations.
Presumably one could use NMR (MRI) to look for certain isotopes produced in a reactor explosion such as Cesium-137 or tritium. Getting the spectra out would be very easy for tritium, but an absolute bitch for cesium (1/2 vs 3 1/2). But I am still not sure why you'd do it that way rather than using a much cheaper scintillation detector (for example).
I agree it would be interesting to have some links, so I hope GP isn't just talking out of his ass.
In your hosts file, point "pc-on-internet.com" to 66.35.250.150, then each time a window pops up treat it as a helpful reminder to take an ergonomic break.
Slashdot Mirror
Sharapova.
I think you miss his point. For routine maintenance (i.e. the stuff you won't die from) you are supposed to pay out of your own pocket. For sudden, unexpected, or emergency issues, your insurance should kick in.
Instead, under our current system (in America), your insurance readily pays for routine maintenance stuff (doctor's visit, diagnostic imaging, routine blood tests, etc.)... But the moment you have a sudden serious illness, or an accident or some other stuff you actually DO need insurance for, you insurance company will object strongly and will try to wiggle out of paying for any it.
Sure, catastrophic-only insurance is available in theory, but people are actively penalized for using those plans (a hospital would bill you $3000 for something like a CAT scan if you pay for yourself (cash), yet if you have insurance they would bill them just $400 (+ $20 copay passed on to you) for exactly same treatment.
I suppose your suggestion that I "stuff my head in a woodchipper" fits the "modern lifestyles" all too well.
Regardless, you best remember that arrogance cannot remedy ignorance.
Young marriage can strengthen Family. For example, a lot of Muslims can marry girls as young as 4 as long as they wait until she's 9 before having sex. Similar practices are true for some fundamentalist Christian sects, Orthodox Jews, and many other religions. Young girls "grow into it" if you like, instead of accepting promiscuity and infidelity as the norm becoming insecure slutty whores.
Late marriage, on the other hand, leads to high divorce rate, lack of trust amongst partners, a feeling of transiency and general insecurity of the relationship. Sexual diseases are at an all-time high in promiscuous late marriage societies encouraging random sex. Currently, 1 in 4 teenage girls in America has an STD: how's that for "Think of the Children" for you?
Traditionally, early marriage is the norm. For most of human history 12-14 was the acceptable marriage age for girls, and certainly some of your ancestors had sex with children by modern definition: girls would be introduced by the time they are 13-14 and married off to an older man within half a year of that. If the girl was single at 16 she was considered to be too old. By 20, an old-maid destined to remain alone forever (read Pride and Prejudice or War and Peace or some other older books for examples of that; notice how some of the characters were pregnant at 15, and certainly mature enough for it. Both books are in the public domain right now).
Also consider that people advocating against marriage to young girls are the very same people that oppose abstinense, chastity, and morality of any sort in general. These tend to be the abortion/homosexualism zealots with their beliefs rooted in devil-worship, bestiality, and occult/nazi practices of yesteryears.
i) notice how it says "against unreasonable searches and seizures," which means that unreasonable searches OR seizures are perfectly legal so long as you do one but not the other.
ii) persons, houses, etc. does not include electronic data or transmission thereof.
iii) all of the above is trumped by Article 2 anyways, which says the Prez can ignore the Constitution in order to uphold the Constitution
iv) if you got nothing to hide you are not a paedophile.
v) would you rather the Govt collected your emails or your dead bodies? terrorists LOVE the Constitution
vi) think of the children
It's only ironic if you believe the stated reasons for these conflicts. Also, two wrongs don't make right (regarding your hate of the blanket/agent orange soldier).
If you scientists are so smart, how come you can't spell Hadron?
But if this is done with taxpayers' money, won't the copyright/trademark belong to the taxpayers (i.e. public domain in US of A)?
What if they did have petabyte-level holograms and optical storage 12,000 years ago but the whole lot got eaten by a fungus because of the organic die or something? And all that survived were those fingerpaints up in a French cave originally made by a Down syndrome kid...
No it wouldn't. You are making lots of assumptions if you think so. To point out just one, the unconvertable 50% might cost money to dispose of.
Beggers can't be chosers.
Foreign-born scientists. There's a big difference here since it doesn't actually matter where they were born so long as they work for us now.
And here:
US ranked #1 at 3 times the number of papers than any other countries, and 5 times greater in number of citation (five times!)
Doing almost 50% of World's research isn't bad considering we have only 5% of the World's population. Guess that anwers my previous question: at 25% of World's population China was bound to discover something of use sooner or later...
I am more interested as to why American scientists weren't the first in on this, and why such cutting-edge research is being done in China (a poor third-world country).
As a science/tech major from a Liberal Arts university, you have a well-rounded, well-grounded education. You might not have quite as much in-depth knowledge as a guy from a tech school, but that's absolutely irrelevant (some on-the-job training or time at a library will fix that within weeks). What counts is whether you have a good background knowledge, are able and willing to learn, be receptive to aquiring new skills, and never resting on your laurels.
That being said, I would pay attention to your transcript much more than to the name of your university: a guy failing (or even acing) blowoff courses from a top school is not worth as much as a guy willing to take on a lot more challenging courses from an average school.
To remain at the top, any country would need huge investments in R&D, breakaway technologies, education, hi- and hum-tech... America is still very much at the top, but the dynamics don't look very good:
1) Our academic institutions are the absolute best (probably 90 of top-100 spots are ours) but most Americans stay away from science and math.
2) Our researchers are most productive in the world (based on the number of publications, citations, impact factors, patents, etc) but research funding is shaky.
3) We still attract the best and the brightest, but due to public opposition to immigration this is likely to change. Once a smart educated person can no longer work with us, she will work against us . This trend is doubly alarming because formerly xenophobic contries such as Ireland, Canada, Germany, or Japan now actively solicit skilled immigrants.
4) Our high tech companies, both giants and startups, still post record sales and profits, but current business conditions are becoming crappier by the day: we are aproaching just about the highest taxes in the First World, labor conditions are declining (drops in both native skill availability and in visa quotas), patent and IP protections favor trolls and infringers but give ever less protection to proper research investors, and so on.
I have a sinking feeling that we dropped the ball at some point, and that once we are no longer No.1 and cannot leverage our leadership position, the decline will accelerate ever faster.
1) Not be a prostitute
2) Not be a slave
3) Not be infected with TB
4) Not be a Chinese worker (since mid-1800 due to xenophobic reasons)
5) Be literate enough to pen in a cross next to once's name (circle allowed for jews).
Anyone meeting the above conditions was allowed to immigrate. "Strict checks" my ass...
If these farmers don't like the new genetically modified seeds, they can keep planting the old garden variety ones. Research is not cheap, and any commercial company is in the business of making money.
Is copyrighting and DRMing (GRMing?) seeds ethical? Millions of dollars are needed to design the original transgenic, so unless farmers are willing to buy these once for the full price (say 1000 seeds for $20,000 each) it makes perfect business sense.
You DO know that Linus Torvalds is an immigrant (i.e. one of those people who you think is stealing your job)?
Google, transistor, telephone, AC motor/generator, GPS, nuclear reactor, nuclear bomb, rocket engine, space program, radio transmitter... all invented by immigrants.
So yeah, Bill Gates is the man, and having him as president would be a great idea (though he's more liberal than a tapeworm).
No trouble enforcing privileges at all... until you needed to run that setuid script to mount a floppy!
I seriously doubt you actually have experience using linux in the early days (pre-2000): masochists and the brainfuck geeks sure loved it, but nobody else did.
And no, linux+GUI was never (and still isn't) as memory-efficient as Windows. You could have win95+explorer, IE3-4, word97, and Borland IDE running all side by side on a machine with P1-133 Mhz, 16 MB of RAM. That's the level of efficiency you could not get from linux at that time (from OS/2 or BeOS yes, linux NO) but you paid for it by giving up security.
I am sure you remember the last "Candidate for Change" that ran in 2000.
A Washington outsider, a uniter able to bridge across party lines, a new man bringing change to Washington corruption, George W. Bush accomplished all this, and so much more.
Given how well that worked out, I too am thinking of supporting Obama.
Ah, I was wondering how the goatse guy got to become the vice-speaker of their Parliament.
How about a giant hamster ball with the user inside? No need to maintain dynamic equillibrium, so much easier to control one would think.
But even better than that would be to tie your user's feet to 3-d force feedback actuators: pretty much model it after an elliptical trainer, but with an independent drive for each leg with an added ability to perform lateral translations.
Presumably one could use NMR (MRI) to look for certain isotopes produced in a reactor explosion such as Cesium-137 or tritium. Getting the spectra out would be very easy for tritium, but an absolute bitch for cesium (1/2 vs 3 1/2). But I am still not sure why you'd do it that way rather than using a much cheaper scintillation detector (for example).
I agree it would be interesting to have some links, so I hope GP isn't just talking out of his ass.
In your hosts file, point "pc-on-internet.com" to 66.35.250.150, then each time a window pops up treat it as a helpful reminder to take an ergonomic break.