Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Before claiming Netflix and/or the studios are conspiring to hold back streaming, maybe you'd better research their customer base.
What is a market penetration of streaming devices into the living rooms of households within the bottom 50% of incomes? Of DVD players?
How many are comfortable with their current DVD player setup and renting through Netflix or through a DVD kiosk at the grocery store?
How many can afford or are willing to spend money on high-speed Internet suitable for streaming purposes?
How many would replace a broken DVD player with a streaming appliance?
It's also the underlying reason why the two conservative health care panaceas of tort reform and selling insurance across state lines won't do squat to bend the cost curve.
Tort reform doesn't address the underlying problem (and only results in a piddling amount of savings across the board while screwing a lot of people who are legitimately harmed).
Selling insurance across state lines makes the problem worse because it allows the insurers and the middle-men to set up shop in the states with the least consumer protections, enabling them to inflate their costs even more.
However you seem to be forgetting that DOMA was a REACTION to something. It didn't come out of the blue. I wonder what that was... Oh yeah... the over-reaching decisions of SCOTUS... Tell me that the SCOTUS isn't part of the fed with a straight face and that DOMA wasn't a reaction to this. You have an interesting "view" of history. Accuracy doesn't appear to play a role.
OK, for the sake of accuracy...
DOMA was passed by Congress in 1996 in reaction to the possibility that Hawaii would make same-sex marriages legal following a state supreme court ruling on the subject. Hawaii never did because the issue was rendered moot via a state constitutional amendment. Congress decided to guard against future attempts by other states to do the same thing Hawaii had come close to doing.
The SCOTUS? They had nothing to do with Congress reacting to this issue.
This is all history. You should read up on it before you post.
Brilliance in your programming does not equate to a job offer. After all, we already got the work we needed done out of you.
So go back to your friends and get some specific data points. How many of them had non-elective procedures done in the US, and of those how many were covered by Canadian health insurance?
"It's just us Chinese hackers wanting to inspect your--"