Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Can't live with/without them... (Score 1) 349

by SecurityGuy (#47416417) Attached to: Here Comes the Panopticon: Insurance Companies

I have family in Canada who aren't happy with the system there and had to come here (US) for treatment due to stupid long waits. I suspect health care is one of those things that works "fine" for the majority of people because the majority of people are "fine" and don't need it. A good friend of mine is permanently disabled and on Medicare, which works "fine" for her, too, aside from a month or so wait to get on it. After that, it appears that when she needs to go to a doctor, she does. When she needs meds, she gets them. When she needs to see specialists, she sees them.

If the US can't come up with an efficient-enough bureaucracy to make it work there, then it's really time to change how you guys do things.

Well, yeah, that's probably true, but even if we do, single payer still means no options. You're happy with your system now, but when it gets changed down the road and you're no longer happy with it, what are you going to do? I can switch plans at work once a year. If I want private insurance, I can pick up the phone and buy it. If I want to see any doctor, I can walk in and pay them. With single payer, what are you going to do? Change countries?

Comment: Re:Where the fault lies? (Score 1) 222

by SecurityGuy (#47416293) Attached to: Avast Buys 20 Used Phones, Recovers 40,000 Deleted Photos

True, it doesn't, but it does delete the key which is used to encrypt everything. With no key, it's gibberish, indistinguishable from random data. Or so claims Apple, anyway. If you have better data, I'd be most interested to see it (and freely admit it's possible ANY vendor is lying about their security precautions).

Personally, I find it quite possible that Joe RandomUser would "delete" pictures, etc, and not know how to do a proper wipe. Heck, I had to look it up, but it took knowing that in general "delete" means "remove the pointer to". Casual users mostly don't know that.

Comment: Re:Can't live with/without them... (Score 1) 349

by SecurityGuy (#47412677) Attached to: Here Comes the Panopticon: Insurance Companies

Exactly. There's one example where you say it works fine, and one where it's apparently pretty bad. Do you see why I don't want to take the crapshoot? It's hard to unwind. If people want to opt in, I don't have a problem with that, but don't compel everyone into the same boat and hope it actually floats. The VA is a concrete example that it might actually be worse.

Ice cream doesn't cause health issues. I eat ice cream. I also exercise 3-6 times a week. That won't stop politicians and their "sin taxes". Maybe your government is wonderful and all that tax money would go to make sick people well, but we mostly turn taxes into bureaucracy. I don't want more.

Comment: Re:Can't live with/without them... (Score 1) 349

by SecurityGuy (#47410231) Attached to: Here Comes the Panopticon: Insurance Companies

How's that working out at the VA these days?

That perfectly highlights the problem with having only one option. When that option is bad, you can't go somewhere else.

There's also absolutely nothing anywhere that keeps lawmakers from deciding that people who eat too much ice cream should be taxed on it, you know, to offset the increased healthcare costs they impose on "the system".

Comment: Re:dont care (Score 1) 150

This'd be one of those false dichotomies they talk about. You can actually care about both of these. I don't want anybody reading my email or listening to my calls. I also want my property wired to the gills with sensors only I can read. If I choose to share that data with a company, I want a big red button marked "Forget everything you know about me.", and I want them audited to prove that they actually do it.

I'm not so naive as to think I'm going to get those things any time soon, but if enough people want them, ask for them, and don't buy stuff from companies that do otherwise, we'll get them eventually.

Comment: Re:In the US, insurance is a racket (Score 1) 1314

by SecurityGuy (#47364721) Attached to: U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Religious Objections To Contraception

Is that because of the distoration insurance causes, though? We don't have to buy cars through intermediaries and they aren't ridiculously jacked up. We don't buy groceries through intermediaries and they aren't ridiculously jacked up. I think part of the reason medical costs have gone nuts, and to a degree education costs, too, is because people are separated from actually paying them. Most people don't pay for their medical costs, they pay for their medical insurance, or rather just a part of it. People don't care what things cost, they care if it's covered by insurance or not. Your premise seems to be that without insurance you'd be paying 3x as much. Maybe competition would drive the price down to what the insurance companies pay.

Comment: Re:Lots of people can't afford a movie a week (Score 1) 1314

by SecurityGuy (#47360193) Attached to: U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Religious Objections To Contraception

Vaccines, sure. I think you may misunderstand how insurance works. It's a risk pool. It exists so if you have a heart attack, you don't have to shell out $500,000 for treatment. That $500,000 is spread over all the people who MIGHT have a heart attack. Basically, you trade the low probability of a high expense for the certainty of a low expense. The insurance co. doesn't collect $500,000, they collect more to cover their own costs and profit. Everybody's happy.

Now, how does that work for things like vaccines, where there's a 100% chance of you getting them? Yup. No risk pooling. You pay the cost, plus the insurance company's costs, plus their profit, minus whatever discount they can negotiate as a big company, if they care to because you're ultimately paying for it anyway. Blood transfusions, not so much. I've never needed one, so I infer the risk is low. I'd rather pool that risk and pay a couple bucks a year because hey, maybe I'll need one someday. The years I don't, that money can pay for someone else's.

Birth control isn't much different. You have a high likelihood of needing an inexpensive thing. The cost is just tucked away in your premium where you won't notice it, you'll just be ticked off (again) that your premiums are so high, and wonder why they can't control costs better.

Comment: Re:Humanless cars are a Disease (Score 1) 61

by SecurityGuy (#47325575) Attached to: Making an Autonomous Car On a Budget

What is all this autonomous car crap spreading around like tumors and gout?

4 out of 5 days of the week, my commute is slowed down by an accident on a more or less straight highway. I can't figure out how people are having accidents on this road unless they're texting. Something like the car in front of them slows down, they don't notice because they're not looking at the road, and rear end someone. I had some idiot teenager total my car with 2 kids in it because he was fishing around for CDs on his floor. 40mph straight into the back of the car behind mine, which still hit mine with enough energy to total it.

WHAT is the reason for having this technology?

See above. I only have to look out the window of my car to see why I'd rather not share the roads with some drivers. I also feel like driving is a waste of my time the second a computer is better at it than I am. I'd rather read, make calls, or any number of other things.

Humans will never agree with this as an alternative to driving themselves.

I want one.

Comment: Re:Oh Joy! (Score 1) 61

by SecurityGuy (#47325515) Attached to: Making an Autonomous Car On a Budget

You have a situation where you either need to get every driver everywhere to actually be good at it, or produce a car where it won't matter if you're good at it. You think the former solution is better. I really couldn't possibly disagree more.

I think you're always going to have drivers who are inexperienced, or distracted, or intoxicated, or bored, or in some other way not driving very well. To ask people never to fail in those ways amounts to asking them not to be human.

Hey, wait a minute. That's exactly what those of us who think autonomous cars are a good idea are asking. Let the drivers not be human.

Comment: Re:Climate effect? (Score 1) 501

I think the point of the wall is to change the weather (short term, hours/days), not the climate (long term prevailing conditions). I think we agree that it's not likely to work that way. This will change both, if it works at all, that is. 1000' is a pretty short mountain. Then again, I'm not a meteorologist.

Is your job running? You'd better go catch it!

Working...