Minimal if any. Even if you only have 2-3 gigs a month - if not music, what ARE you moving on that connection?

I hate that left/right division - the reason most people come down "in the middle" is that there's no way to really identify an individual on that spectrum that is consistent - most people have opinions on both sides - sometimes very extremely. So -- for example -- you may be for legalisation of all drugs always, and think you're a libertarian, but hate banks and want them strictly regulated. I know this person - he doesn't see a conflict. Or, you could be hard-line anti-abortion and also pro-union - where the fuck does that put you? (other than old-school Irish Catholic - i.e. deeply in the Democratic party).

That would be against the law. Congress has regulated the procurement process for government software and IT projects to hell and back, that's why big incompetent companies like CGI win the contracts over and over, they know the system. It is designed to produce middling to poor results at modest cost - when it works we get competent tools, when it dosen't, costs balloon and the incompetent contractors make out like bandits taking extra pay to repair what they broke (again, can't withhold payment like any small business would do). SNAFU exists as a term because of the special kind of bureaucratic process that comes out of democratic government.

That is simply madness. It is divergent with reality to a degree incapable of repair. If this fails, there will be no further reform in our generation. The Republicans will gleefully roll back the ACA and do nothing. The Insurers will go back to denying coverage for pre-existing conditions and dropping coverage once you get sick. If this fails, the Democrats lose the next half dozen election cycles as well.

There is no world where Obama willingly allows the ACA to fail.

Due to the amazing amount of demand. You're talking about a substance people sell their homes/bodies/children to purchase - you willing to give a dude a blowie for a few rounds of ammo?

Smoking is different, when used properly and as intended, your smoking harms the person next to you. The ban on sodas was ruled unconstitutional. Try to keep up.

I can't tell if you're replying to my post or someone else? The post I replied to got modded down to -1, so maybe it isn't visible in your filters? I have no idea what you are even trying to say.

Your point is so nuts that the only appropriate response is to hold it up to the light for people to observe exactly how deep the well of objectivism can go.

You do not understand correctly, debt limit increase is next month. This is just funding to keep staff paid and lights on, Congress hasn't authorized the executive to spend money, and the executive can't spend money without authorization, hence, shutdown. Debt default is the end of the modern era.

Call an attorney - talk to your general counsel - don't ask me. Sorry, that's looking for specific advice, you need to find someone licensed to practice in your state and ask them.

Yes - that is referenced in my citation above - but the state isn't a "Business Associate" of the pharmacies.

That's a gross oversimplification. Only covered entities are governed by HIPPA. That's a definition with nuance. See, 45 CFR 160.103.

The lawyers for the government have an argument . . . whether its a good argument or not is up to a judge and the lawyers involved. If you have a specific HIPPA question or issue, you should speak to an attorney - I'm not giving you any legal advice here. IAAL, but not your lawyer.

But there are exceptions. Like when a medical provider is forced to turn over records by act of law. 45 CFR 164.512. Sounds like an unintended consequence of a state law. Hope the judge comes down on the ACLU's side.

Professionals - Lawyers, Bankers, Teachers, Priests, etc - aren't there to tell you what to do, they're there to help you do what you *want* to do. They study their field and have deep knowledge, but, I don't ever tell my clients (lawyer) how to run their business. We talk about what they want to do, I run some issue spotting for them, tell them where the law may be an issue, advise them what terms belong in a contract - which terms do not belong in contracts for that matter, and help them accomplish their goals. I do NOT tell them what to buy, who to go into business with, etc. I'm not there to make a contract - I'm there to advise them as THEY make a contract. My name isn't on the document, theirs is. I don't get named in the lawsuits when the deal breaks down. I don't own it - my clients own it. My job is to help. Your teacher doesn't own your education - your teacher has no stake in your success - you do. You own your education. You can pretend the teacher is responsible for your education, if you want, but it isn't true. Succeed or fail - you own it.

Cite your source? Or would that be homework?