No, no, no, he wants to run a file system check on them. Something's hanging a boot time.
And how do you propose to get 7 billion people to agree on any one thing? It can't be done. You'll have a hard enough time doing it with just 100 people, let alone the entire population of a region. This is why we have leaders. Leaders can make decisions that get followed. When that breaks down, that leader ceases to be such. Majority rule is the only thing that really makes any kind of sense.
The ability of a government to enforce its will is the root of its power, but I challenge you to come up with a sustainable circumstance under which a broad population of humans can exist without organizing somehow, whether voluntarily or involuntarily. Even a Commune requires a hierarchical structure. Stripped of government, people will still group together. Some of those groups will be dominated by the most aggressive member, while others will organize themselves more amicably (and eventually dominated by the member with the most ideal ratio of charisma to ambition).
You can suggest that we all live without rule, but how can deliberate action be taken to prevent rule, without inherently becoming rule?
Any government of a large territory and population will necessarily be large, but it really can't be large by contrast to the population it governs. I absolutely agree that it is an important role of any government to build and improve infrastructure, and even funding research that could spawn dozens of new technologies that improve our lives is within the purview of a good government. But it doesn't have to be large to accomplish these things. Perhaps more importantly, our government is far from focused on things like building infrastructure and funding research. We're spending a great deal of money, and it really isn't making our people any better. I don't have the requisite information to make any detailed decisions, but I can certainly point out one thing-- we'd all be a lot better off if Congress could at the very least, develop a budget that spends less than the treasury collects in taxes each year.
I'm unclear on the relationship you have in mind. In this case, the patient has difficulty staying still and focusing, so the doctor is prescribing an activity which will require him to stay still and focus. Even without using specially designed games, video games tend to engage the player's attention, and endeavor to hold it. It makes sense to me that this could teach habits that improve concentration, and extended attention span.
Typically insulin pumps deliver insulin in two modes: Basal and Bolus. While a bolus is a large injection provided as quickly as reasonable, the Basal is a rate of delivery which can be instructed to vary over the course of the day. I would imagine that the device described in the article likely organizes injection in this fashion, with the added feature that if your blood glucose spikes, it will react to that automatically.
I had an insulin pump for a number of years (from the same manufacturer that made the device in this article, in fact), so I am familiar with the usage. I, personally, had problems using it (I sweat too much for the catheter to stay in reliably), but I think that they're a great technology for those who can use them. This growing automation is certainly a good thing.
Fascism = totalitarianism + racial superiority complex.
Fascism is a system of government in which a dictator controls military, industry and commerce (and whatever other aspects of his nation that happens to become important to him), and takes tyrannical measures to maintain his control. Racism is often used as a tool, but is not necessarily a required quality for something to be "fascist". Fascist regime is necessarily Totalitarian, but a Totalitarian regime is not necessarily Fascist. Therefore, your formula should read:
Fascism = totalitarianism + dictatorship
Now, a Communist system is not necessarily Totalitarian, but Totalitarianism becomes the method of choice for maintaining Communism when a meaningful portion of the population does not wish to be under Communist rule. I suppose there may be some other way to enforce Communism on a large scale, but I don't know what that might be.
We generally don't eat fertilized eggs, dude.
Not to mention that calendars on PCs don't work in the way that Y2k was described. I've no doubt that a great deal of industrial machines legitimately did have a problem, but the "Y2k Patch" that a lot of PCs were getting in those days really was entirely superfluous, as the calendar on the motherboard ended some time in 2036.
I wouldn't feel too sorry for them. Most of those guys make more money than I do, working 50 hours a week. Ask the staff at Macy's about the pan handler that shows up every morning in a Lexus.
The prisoners may be free men again some day, and have the same right to health that everyone else does. Free men are able to leave the dangerous areas as they please. Prisoners don't have that choice.
And video games. Don't forget video games.
I cannot conceive of a circumstance where I would be intimidated by the abundant presence of guns, while in the absence of belligerent people. The presence of belligerent people on the other hand, may intimidate me without the presence of guns. It's clear to me that guns are not what make a place dangerous.
Ah, but all people should be equally valued in the eyes of the law. That's the point. Laws should not favor the rich over the poor, or one ethnicity over another. While one person may be born into wealth, and their possession of it, therefore a given, another person born into poverty should not be barred from obtaining wealth through hard work and careful planning. When laws exist that effectively preclude the poor from gaining wealth, we now have inequality in the law, and that is what the article describes.
A quick couple of searches doesn't seem to immediately turn up a definition for "countant", but a Count is in charge of a County.