His father may be at the point where he can no longer take advantage of those laws as they require multiple requests from the patient, verbal and written, multiple doctors providing diagnosis. If he's suffering dementia and is not lucid most of the time, it could be very difficult to meet the requirements. Also it's possible that the current providers may not release him if they know that the intent is to move the patient somewhere the patient can end their own life. Not sure about the legality around that.
It's not about comas. It's about terminal illnesses where there is no chance of recovery and the only thing for the patient and family to look forward to are pain, loss of dignity, loss of autonomy, and significant emotional, personal and financial burdens. Assisted, end of life suicide already legal in Washington and Oregon and some parts of Europe.
Why do you hate Google? WHY?
Seriously though, way to stay on message Vint. Eric will be proud.
Can you honestly say this website is an actual replacement for the failed Federal website? I know it's a bit of a fashion in the FOSS world to look at a screen shot of something and then recreate the product based on that screen shot while knowing very little of the actual workings of the product being copied. Then going out and touting how they've created a free replacement for the evil closed product. And more or less 99% of the time it's not only not a replacement but doesn't even have the advertised functionality.
So what I want to know is does this site really do what the Federal site is supposed to do and can it carry the load of the 300 million visitors and as people proceed through the site are they allowed to enroll in the plans? Etc.
I don't think I disagree with that you're saying here, but it doesn't seem responsive to my comment.
Are you levitating your platters? Heat comes from the mechanical and electronic components, not from friction with the air.
I don't think I'm getting 5 drives for the price of 1. I think I'm buying five years worth of hard drive storage. If that means that they have to send me five (or ten) hard drives to deliver that amount, then that's their problem. If they have shitting engineering or shitty manufacturing, that's not my problem.
I think you're confused as to the purpose of those checksums. They are to tell when the disk is corrupting your data. If I log into your server and write zeros over all of your files, when you read those zeros back BTRFS will be perfectly happy to tell you that it is reliably returning your zeros to you.
Not to mention that the world hasn't standardized on 1920x1080. I've got half a dozen computers / tablets and the only one that is 1080p is the Surface Pro. The MacBook Pro with Retina Display is 2880x1880. Both of my 27" monitors are 2560x1440. I don't have any idea what this dipshit is thinking, but his assumptions are completely wrong.
I've no idea what the parent is talking about. Windows -- for several versions -- marks downloaded executables as having been downloaded and will warn you when you attempt to run them.
What the hell are you talking about? The 65816 in the IIGS has more capacity/capability than the machines Ken Thompson did his work on. What it primarily lacks is an MMU.
If you've spent much time on the site, you'd realize that they operate with a very special kind of stupid around here. And by special kind of stupid, I mean about 1,000x the normal human amount.
Did you actually read what you quoted? Seems like either you didn't or you want to define "social welfare" in your own special way. It doesn't mean charity and it doesn't mean "agrees with your political views."
See, for example a social welfare organization: Organizing for Action, aka Organizing for America, aka. Barack Obama 2012 re-election campaign, aka Barack Obama 2008 election campaign. Same organization restructured repeatedly and finally into a 501(c)(4) tax exempt entity.
Additionally, you don't just get to claim to be a 501(c)(4) and start acting under that umbrella, you have to apply and get granted that designation. So your whole paragraph about organizations abusing this status is BS, not to mention the falsity when you suggest both "tea party and progressive" groups were equally targeted. The delays and intrusions were almost exclusively against conservative groups.
It's clear though that you're not actually interested in the truth, merely trying to obscure malfeasance and leverage the power of the state to manipulate the results of elections. I'll just finish by pointing out you are a partisan liar, your posts have the barest relation to reality, the IRS targeted conservative groups, it likely affected the 2012 election, and here is Wikipedia's summary of the scandal.
You are so insistent on maintaining your view that you intentionally avoid learning anything. I linked to a page on wikipedia that describes the different types of 501(c) tax exempt organizations. One of those types is a charity, 501(c)(3) which is religious and charitable organizations. Another one is 501(c)(4) which is not charitable. Organizing For America (the left-overs of Obama's campaign organization) is of this type. And it is exactly this status the the various groups you are castigating applied for.
Repeat to yourself as many times as necessary: A tax exempt organization is not necessarily a charitable organization.
Whether you agree with the organizations or not, it should outrage you and make you want to throw up a little bit that federal government workers are using their power to influence the outcomes of elections.