Most people Do Not need MS OSes any longer. There is no "value add" to them at this point for Home/Small Office. The Lone exception is perhaps Excel needs. Everything else can be substituted with other platforms and software options.

There are use cases for specific software products, but with containers taking off, those will become less platform specific.

The Nursing Program at our local University requires BS degree just to get in. It's two years after that.

Residency is after 4 years of Med School, after completing Doctorate. It is technically supervised practice of Medicine, not education.

And if you wanted, you could tack on specialization studies for those that require even MORE.

Yeah, six years vs eight years .... "pales in comparison"

In my fantasy land, we'd have a variety of medical professionals with levels of expertise that all can be called "Doctor". My best example is the modern RN, whose knowledge and skill exceed that which were called Doctors 70 years ago. Literally better suited to be Doctoring than those of yesteryear.

In 90% of my health care needs, I'd rather have a RN than a Doctor. But the laws and regulations say I can't because they are not "doctors". (Nurse Practitioners are exception to SOME of those rules).

My point is we need regulation and yet that regulation gets in the way of advancement. We need to constantly revisit those rules to see where improvement can be made.

It's not socialism, because it wasn't compelled. The transaction was 100% free will gift and not demanded by anyone and no vote was ever taken, short of the Lady Dr herself.

THIS is free enterprise (not capitalism) and thus is okay. The benefits of Free Enterprise is that people can do what they want with their money, free from dictates from others. Socialism demands compliance and fails when people can opt out. It eventually fails anyway, because people can't opt out.

See also "Charity" (in the classical definition).

And it's not getting better... there are only 58 across the US and Canada right now, and some are closing soon: https://www.hydrogeninsight.co...

Fellow Bolt owner here. Took a recent vacation, 180 miles each way. Wanted to use the EV but drove the old pickup instead, because the cute California vacation town had all of six chargers, none near our hotel. I don't take it camping either, for the same reason. The Bolt is my happy daily driver, but I can't cut out the gas pump entirely yet.

I think that it will be an attractive feature for some, and required by city governments for new construction in other cases. To read the news, this country has a history of not building cheap affordable basic housing but instead targeting the high-earners and the luxury market. So if they install chargers, they can get the Tesla and Polestar drivers to consider renting from them. If you can afford a pricey car, maybe you can afford a pricey apartment. Not everyone will do it, but it can happen.

Remember Psystar? Back in 2008 they started manufacturing an Intel based system with Max OS X preinstalled. Apple sued them into the ground.

The recent announcement was simply a piece of code that allows AMD hardware to be compatible with CUDA. It doesn't replace CUDA, which is still required. Any company including that code is likely to go the way of Psystar.

That's not what the article is about. You're looking at it from the user's point of view: to you, using service X from your home is easy because it's SaaS and you don't need a VPN. Cool.

However, the article refers to the enterprise side: if that service X that you're using runs on a cloud provider (AWS, GCP, Azure...) then they're probably see higher costs in areas such as mass storage or computing power and it would be cheaper to run their own infrastructure on a datacenter.

From your point of view as a user it doesn't matter whether the service runs on a cloud provider or a datacenter somewhere.

Don't get Medicare Advantage or let your aging relatives buy it. There are cost advantages but they come with major disadvantages.

The biggest issue (by far) is that once you sign up with a Medicare Advantage plan you no longer access standard Medicare. You are completely dependent on the company you selected which gets a flat fee from Medicare to take care of your coverage, medications and how long you get to spend in the hospital. This means that they have a large incentive to minimize your care, and they do.

The companies have no problem refusing to cover beyond their estimate, regardless of what your doctor says you need. Just ask my dad who signed up with a large nationally known company. He had surgery for cancer and the insurance company determined he should be in the hospital for four days. There were complications and the surgeon recommended two more days. The insurance company would not pay more than their estimate. Even worse, they had a limit on a how much they would pay for pain medication so my dad ended up paying the difference on both the hospital stay and the additional pain medication. No amount of talking to agents or filing grievances with the company would budge them from their very firm estimates. From what I've read, this seems this is the norm for MA plans.

Medicare Advantage is less expensive than traditional Medicare coverage, but the cost savings will easily be lost if you actually need care. The insurance companies spend very heavily on advertising these plans because they make a crap ton from them.

Telco's can and ought to clean up their CallerID lists. Those Telcos that are suspect get marked as SPAM.

The Legit Telcos won't let their customers spoof CID that isn't theirs. Those that do should be labeled as SPAM or at least "Unverified" or CID Blocked or whatever, I don't care. The Robodialers from India et al get automatic label, as the calls come in. Legit Telcos can label the spammy VOIP providers as exactly that.

The problems are fixable if the TELCOs wanted to really fix the problem. It's just too much effort without any rewards.

Because Robocalls are still a thing even AFTER all the laws passed to stop such a thing from happening.

No doubt that Politicians will exempt themselves from this law as well.

This isn't a SCOTUS problem, it is a problem that TELCOs could have solved decades ago, and haven't. This is a problem the Congress Critters could have solved decades ago. This is a problem the Voters could have solved decades ago. It just isn't a hill that many are willing to die upon. Yes, it is annoying, but so are every other law that starts with "There ought to be a law ...."

See also: "Where Karens Come From"

I can think of a number of possible options, especially for vulnerable people. Biggest one would be an option for notification of family and an automatic one day delay for certain transactions. Legit transactions can withstand non-immediacy scenarios.

Troll Mod is "I disagree, a lot"

And as an aside, I happen to agree with the general premise that if it is the person's own fault, the banks shouldn't be responsible. But when Identifies are stolen, which is why DATA breaches are so problematic, Banks OIUGHT to be responsible for THEIR mistakes.

As for your use case scenario, I would hope the bank would recognize the old lady pulling all funds out to hand to young dude, and pull them aside for a few minutes to ask a few more questions. I would hope, but I also know that is largely not happening.