Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Why dont they screen doctors before they come b (Score 1) 346

by Reziac (#48231147) Attached to: NY Doctor Recently Back From West Africa Tests Positive For Ebola

If the choices boil down to "wall them off and let them die" or "spread the epidemic far and wide" -- yeah, I know which one I'd choose.

So far it appears that the more treatment is attempted, the worse it gets, because the caregivers are at such risk, and some will need treatment in turn... rinse and repeat until there are no caregivers left.

Quarantine may not be kind to the victims, but spreading it around so everyone can share isn't kind to anyone.

Comment: Re:And so therefor it follows and I quote (Score 1) 230

by squiggleslash (#48231143) Attached to: Italian Supreme Court Bans the 'Microsoft Tax'

If I'm reading this correctly, the logic is that he can demand a refund if using Mac OS means agreeing to a contract post-sale. It has little or nothing to do with third party PCs.

So, technically, Apple could be forced to determine a refund amount to give to people who buy a Mac without wanting to run Mac OS on it given you need to agree to the EULA when you turn on the machine for the first time. But they can also sidestep it in the majority of cases by using the control they have over the Mac sales chain to force sellers of Macs (including the Apple Store itself) to have the buyer accept the EULA at the time of purchase.

Comment: Re:Why dont they screen doctors before they come b (Score 1) 346

by Reziac (#48231011) Attached to: NY Doctor Recently Back From West Africa Tests Positive For Ebola

And if an individual's immune response is slow or poor, there may not BE any antibodies until too late for the test to catch.

The obvious solution is a 4 week quarantine (to make sure every case is discovered -- a few may incubate beyond the usual) everyone who's been in West Africa.

This isn't "denying a citizen entry"; it's delaying it due to sheer common sense.

Better, tho, would be to quarantine the affected parts of West Africa as best we can; let people in, but don't let them back out. Because what we're doing now is pretty much guaranteeing ebola's spread.

Comment: Re:Research in this area is probably a good thing. (Score 1) 145

by Reziac (#48230997) Attached to: Incapacitating Chemical Agents: Coming Soon To Local Law Enforcement?

You could also quickly and easily negate any sort of protest... including protests against using chemical restraint on the public.

Who are the "bad guys" is generally dependent on what laws you have and who enforces them. YOUR side won't always be in charge.

Comment: Re:A tragedy, but stretching the bounds of relevan (Score 1) 145

by Reziac (#48230977) Attached to: Incapacitating Chemical Agents: Coming Soon To Local Law Enforcement?

My first thought was -- what if it hits a kid or small adult? I'd guess their dosage assumes a roughly 150 pound adult, because that way it'll stop the "more dangerous" persons. I guess anyone under the presumed body mass had better not get hit, eh?

Comment: Re:Wow (Score 1) 191

by squiggleslash (#48228575) Attached to: Ballmer Says Amazon Isn't a "Real Business"

Yeah, we all forget that Microsoft peaked in 1982 and has subsequently been losing money ever since. You should see how much money they lost when they took advantage of the PC's success to bundle Windows with MS DOS.

It's a wonder they didn't go bankrupt in 1995.

(Yes, Microsoft was moderately successful prior to the 1990s. In the 1990s though they both used their high marketshare to establish an actual monopoly, squeezing out competitors like DR, and then used their monopoly to strangle potential future threats, such as Netscape. It wasn't pretty but it was highly profitable, especially the first part.)

Comment: Re:IBM no longer a tech company? (Score 5, Insightful) 191

by squiggleslash (#48228531) Attached to: Ballmer Says Amazon Isn't a "Real Business"

Only because they're trying to corner the market. And yes, I'm aware they kind of invented the type of cloud system that they are, but Bezos has been explicit from the beginning that he doesn't want competitors, and he'd rather see a few years of losses with the service underpriced than have a small share of the market.

I personally wouldn't invest in Amazon. That said, overall the company seems sustainable, it can afford to make losses like the one last quarter in part because it can easily reverse those losses if it ever becomes a serious problem. They're playing the "very long" game, everything they do seems to be aimed at ensuring they're a significant player 50 years from now. To me, that's absurd, you can't predict the future like that, but, hey, if they want to try - with other investor's money - then more power to them, it's that kind of attitude that moves us forward - usually.

Comment: Re:Those bastards? (Score 1) 107

Counterpoint: They invented FAT, which is where significant amounts of the royalties are coming from.
Counter-counterpoint: If they invented FAT, and Android Phones are feeling obliged to support it, they should probably be paying Android phone manufacturers $20 per unit...

(OTOH, FAT was a significant improvement on the CP/M file system, its biggest rival at that point, so there's that. Still, it says a lot that the actual FAT related patents they're collecting Android revenue on are actually for hacks to get around some of FAT's most stupid LIMITATI.ONS)

Lisp Users: Due to the holiday next Monday, there will be no garbage collection.

Working...