[...] if your new experimental thing isn't at *least* an order of magnitude better than current production, there's little point pursuing it in commercial directions [...]
You have to take into account the potential of the new technology as well. Consider the transition from DC to AC power - initially there wasn't much in it, because voltages were low and transmission distances were short. It was only after the whole electricity industry scaled up that AC really showed its strengths... but the potential was there and so it was a worthwhile investment even early on.
Birth control pills are rather more expensive, and also more effective at preventing pregnancy, but don't do anything as far as protecting from disease. I can understand people not being able to afford those, but I see no reason why society should pay for them.
According to some handouts I got at a panel on Obamacare, the entire Obamacare premium for a family of 3 earning $78,000 would be $600 a month. So if they dropped Obamacare and got Major Medical instead, they wouldn't save $600 a month
Major Medical is fine for people who are healthy and won't get sick. Any insurance is fine for people who are healthy and won't get sick.
The problem comes when people get sick. If you develop multiple sclerosis, your medical costs will go up enormously. You could easily spend $100,000 in the first year. You could be spending $500 and $1,000 on specialist visits.You could get a dozen MRI scans at $10,000 apiece. Your medical savings account won't cover it..
Even if you did get sick and used your entire deductible on a Major mediical plan, your maximum out of pocket would still be cheaper than just the premiums on a typical health plan, and that is before all of the copays, coinsurance and deductibles which are also included on a typical health plan.
Because the US only tracks people in their jurisdiction right? Remember you have no rights if your not american because american's are the new aryans. Sieg hiel!
I know this is difficult for one-track minds like this AC to understand, but many issues are in fact nuanced and complex. Shockingly, law appears to be one of those. Just to name a single example: data retention laws. They vary by jurisdiction.
If they'd shut off at the same time, then kaboom. If they'd shut off after the plane dropped off radar, then maybe some electronics was battery backed or whatever and was still transmitting until it got waterlogged and sank. But shutting off 20 minutes before the plane dropped off radar would indicate deliberate sabotage.
If they start poisoning search with for-profit results Google will be quickly reminded that they are not the only search engine in town.
As long as the ads are marked somehow, a user script will be able to suppress them.
It's sad I need to mangle the web to make it usable, but not as sad as not having a mangling facility would be.
As someone who runs NoScript, Adblock Plus and various other user scripts, I think it's a good thing to be able to take control over your own experience. It's good not to be passive. It's good to see only what you want to see. The more people do this, the more these companies have to comprehend that this is the nature of the network in which they have chosen to participate. The Web would lose most of its appeal to me if it were entirely corporate controlled like television.
What's really sad is that other mediums like television, radio, and periodicals are one-to-many, heavily centralized, and don't include such great control over what you see. They're package deals that require you to accept the crap along with the content and are often not worthwhile.
That's as bullshitty a term as it is in your supermarket. There *are* no "organic" results when they're calculated based on your tracking history, ad clicks and social connections.
Friends don't let friends get tracked. Use the quack that doesn't track!
I use startpage.com myself. I like the idea of getting actual Google search results without any sort of Google tracking. They don't even log your IP address and they're outside of US jurisdiction.
By the way I hope our federal legislators appreciate that. I hope they are proud that now, "outside of US jurisdiction" has become a selling point.
BAD MOD: Not everyone will agree with this, but that doesn't mean it's flamebait.
Anyone who needed to have that explained to them is demonstrably resistant to facts and so-called "common sense" and is therefore a lost cause. Mass numbers of non-individuals agreeing with you bandwagon-style is the only thing they would find persuasive.
I know! When I drove across town the other day I only saw like 500 small businesses! It must be like that because they are so hard to start!
Starting them is easy. Transforming them into a business that pays a livable wage with decent hours is something else entirely. Just like every citizen is a criminal, every business is also acting illegally, and there are a whole host of regulations and laws out there to prevent competition from rising up through the ranks.
The government can and they should just set across the board prices for medical procedures in line with the medicare prices.
If they were to do that, then it would become an issue trying to get certain procedures done because doctors won't find it worth the effort. This is already happening even with insurance company contracted rates. I ran into this issue trying to get shots for my kids so they could go to school. My insurance covered the shots, but the doctors don't feel that the contracted rate is worth the money so they simply won't do them.