Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:This is supposed to be the *WAY* they do their (Score 1) 181

Obamacare seems to have only helped a little under 3% of the people who did not have coverage previously.

The NBC News article says that 5 million people had insurance who did not have it before. If that's only 3% of the people who didn't have insurance, it would require that approximately 166 million people--half of the country--not have insurance before.

What happened was there was a drop in the uninsured rate of about 3% from around 15% to around 12%. That's about 20% of the people who did not have insurance before now having it. As the penalties go up, the uninsured rate is expected to go down even further.

Comment: Re:This is supposed to be the *WAY* they do their (Score 1) 181

ERs generally cannot turn away emergency patients or deny them care under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). Even if it appears that they have shown up in a non-emergency state, they still have to be assessed, and they are sometimes turned away for minor things, or at least given prescriptions that they have to pay for and which the hospital is not required to provide. The goal was to combat patient dumping that hospitals were doing for patients that couldn't pay even though they had been severely wounded or were in the midst of labor.

The issue the AC was talking about it a bit different, though. People with insurance (or some other means to pay) can generally go to a doctor when symptoms start to arise instead of only going to the ER when it becomes an emergency situation. This isn't someone who has a sore throat for a few days, but people who have cancer or other illnesses, and by the time the ER becomes a viable option, they're often too far along to treat, and can't pay for the emergency care they do get to stabilize them, which can require ICU or CCU. That cost then gets absorbed by the hospital and passed on to everyone else instead of a much lower cost being covered earlier on when early access might have saved the patient at lower cost.

Comment: Re:Obvious solution ... (Score 1) 108

by golgotha007 (#47955805) Attached to: Star Wars Producers Want a 'DroneShield' To Prevent Leaks On Set

Typical drone ground stations w will use circular polarized, directional antennas for live video signal, however you won't have a CP directional on the drone (for obvious reasons) and will use omni directional instead (not very directional). This means that it's pretty easy to disrupt a 1.3, 2.4 and 5.8GHz signal (or even 900MHz) with simple, cheap hobby gear when you're closer to the drone than the operator.

For control (usually 433MHz or 2.4GHz), you won't be using directional antennas on either end-point. Therefore, it's pretty simple to disrupt that signal using cheap, hobby gear as well.

You're right about the GPS when using autopilot and waypoints, that's another story. GPS receivers on most drones can only be disrupted when there's a strong RF signal (or resulting harmonic) in the drone's near vicinity. I'm not sure what kind of gear you would need to blast a point in the sky with ~1500MHz to disrupt the GPS.

Comment: Re:Obvious solution ... (Score 1) 108

by golgotha007 (#47954715) Attached to: Star Wars Producers Want a 'DroneShield' To Prevent Leaks On Set

Commonly used GPS units on drones rely on GPS lock to function. These are also radio frequencies which can be overwhelmed in small areas. I know this because using an overpowered 1.2GHz transmitter on the drone will negatively effect GPS satellite lock. Knock the sat lock down to below 6 and you got yourself a lost drone.

Comment: Re:Obvious solution ... (Score 1) 108

by golgotha007 (#47954555) Attached to: Star Wars Producers Want a 'DroneShield' To Prevent Leaks On Set

You can detect the drones by monitoring commonly used radio frequencies, like 433MHz, 900MHz, 1.3GHz, 2.4GHz and 5.8GHz. It's not hard to flood those frequencies with plenty of noise to disrupt control as well as video stream. I would guess these drones are not flying LOS, therefore disrupting video and telemetry would make it very difficult for a drone operator to effectively maneuver, make any interesting video, and even return the drone back to safety.

They probably don't want drones simply because people will start taking drone footage to leak the activities happening on the ground.

Comment: Re:I hate to be this guy... (Score 1) 186

Corruption as part of the culture is an enormous part of it, especially in Africa and Asia and to a lesser extent in South America. That's a problem that you can't really throw money at because it tends to just add to the issue.

There are economic complications, too. Simply delivering food and water outside of a disaster situation undermines the local food economies: why buy food from the local farm if someone else is giving it away for free? Farms go under, leaving more people reliant on handouts.

War is another major issue. We hear about a million refugees in Gaza, but they're largely just a few kilometers from their homes, so delivery isn't that difficult. There are other cases where refugees in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan end up hundreds of kilometers from home, and these present bigger challenges. But in Africa, there are millions of people who have been moving over thousands of kilometers through war zones that have been akin to the areas controlled by the Islamic State for decades. No one really notices because no one reports on it. Even the Rwandan Genocide took weeks for most people in the West to notice despite on-scene reporters providing detailed reports.

There's a great deal of research going into what works. Solving economic issues is a big start. Reducing infant and childhood mortality rates by directly (i.e., not through the local government) fighting malaria with sterile releases and mosquito bed nets has helped dramatically in some locations. Teaching farmers how to more efficiently tend their crops, and opening them up to international markets has also helped.

The space program helped, too, mapping climate changes that provide hints on where to help, when to change to different crops, and how to handle desertification.

There will be no time that all earthly problems are solved so that we can concentrate on space. Trying to divert all of the money spent on it would be devastating to industry anyway, and no other nation will join in because, like it or not, we now all rely on space.

Comment: Re:news for nerds? (Score 1) 215

by Martin Blank (#47847751) Attached to: New US Airstrikes In Iraq Intended to Protect Important Dam

You've missed my point. Even if 50%+1 of the voting-age population (we'll leave out those not eligible to vote due to lack of citizenship, felony conviction, dishonorable discharge, etc.) voted for him, it still wouldn't be a majority of all Americans. There were about 313 million people in the US in 2012; half of that would be more people than voted, and would require 77% of the voting-age population. No president is known to have gotten that vote level, let alone overall preference. Washington might have, but no popular vote totals are available before 1824, and women were blocked from voting, as were most blacks, so rendering a majority support virtually impossible anyway even if every person legally allowed to vote did so.

Comment: Re:Stop making sense. (Score 1) 215

by Martin Blank (#47845755) Attached to: New US Airstrikes In Iraq Intended to Protect Important Dam

I find that it's not so much ideology as a desire to boil down the situation to the simplest form in an effort to win the argument. Sometimes this works when certain nuances aren't significant, but it's easy to go too far. The most common one I see is treating all Syrian rebels as if they're part of the IS, when it's a patchwork of groups with many goals.

Comment: Re:Eurasia vs. oceania (Score 1) 215

by Martin Blank (#47845743) Attached to: New US Airstrikes In Iraq Intended to Protect Important Dam

I'm not talking about those supporting US military action. That's a separate list. I'm talking about those who have participated in some form of engagement. The only one that is perhaps in doubt is Russia, but they are providing intelligence support, if only relaying information between the US and Syria since neither of those countries wants to admit cooperating with each other.

Those entities above known to be actively fighting the IS:
- Iraq
- Syria
- Hezbollah
- Free Syria Army
- United States
- Iran
- al-Qaeda (via al-Nusra Front)

Those entities providing military and/or financial aid to those fighting the IS:
- United States
- Britain
- Iran
- Saudi Arabia

Those entities providing intelligence support:
- Syria
- Jordan
- Free Syria Army
- United States
- Britain
- Iran
- Saudi Arabia
- Russia

Money can't buy happiness, but it can make you awfully comfortable while you're being miserable. -- C.B. Luce

Working...