Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re: The problem is the doctors. (Score 1) 66

by jimbolauski (#49781255) Attached to: Insurer Won't Pay Out For Security Breach Because of Lax Security
All the doctors I have been to have an accounts person or people that handle the claims and billing. It may be the case that the person they hired is not qualified to manage healthcare claims and billing as the process has changed a great deal over the last 10 years, but I would not stick this on the doctors.

Comment: Re:Lots of other stuff swirling around Common Core (Score 1) 284

by jimbolauski (#49683981) Attached to: Bill Gates Still Trying To Buy Some Common Core Testing Love
The common core teacher evaluation works just fine, the way it works is simple the students all had to take the tests the year prior and can be given a percentile rank. If the majority go down the teacher is not performing, the variations in performance from class to class are normalized with the prior year's performance it's not as big an issue as the teachers unions make it out to be.

Charter schools are the way to go for one simple reason, if they perform poorly they can be shut down, when a public school performs poorly they are generally given more money to fix the problem. The cost per student is much higher at public schools then private/charter schools. Public schools spend $13,041 per student per year while nonreligious private spends $8,549, charter $8,001, and Catholic $6,018. On top of that charter schools outperform their neighboring public schools even though there is not a difference in demographics. I still don't understand why people think poor performing over funded public schools are the answer.

Comment: Re:This is not a matter of neutrality (Score 1) 438

by jimbolauski (#49586299) Attached to: Rand Paul Moves To Block New "Net Neutrality" Rules
The problem with making the internet a tier II common carrier is that it will get all the regulations and control of a tier II common carrier along with a right of way to telephone poles and net neutrality. A much better solution would be to allow the internet right of way access and net neutrality, unfortunately this requires congress to create another classification which doesn't seem likely to happen in the current political climate.

Comment: Re:Libertarianism, the new face of the GOP? (Score 1) 441

by jimbolauski (#49484409) Attached to: Republicans Introduce a Bill To Overturn Net Neutrality

Oh, I see the problem. You think local government owns the telephone poles. Nope. The *electric power company* (or sometimes the phone company) owns the poles. It's not the gubmint, it's a single private company with the power to control who gets to compete, because it owns the poles and there's no room on the street to put in more.

The government use right of way laws to force private land owners to have telephone poles on their property, they did this as the poles were for a common good. The right of way laws allowed telephone, cable and power companies all access to the poles but not ISPs. Essentially they allowed a third party confiscate property and only forced them to share with two other groups as a condition of letting them confiscate it. Then a third party comes along and can make the same common good argument but was not granted right away access.

Comment: Re:Libertarianism, the new face of the GOP? (Score 1) 441

by jimbolauski (#49469151) Attached to: Republicans Introduce a Bill To Overturn Net Neutrality
It's not a natural monopoly ISPs are not allowed to run fiber on the telephone poles simply allowing them the same access to telephone poles as telecos and cable providers would be a hug step. That issue is the #1 problem with Google fiber moving in to many areas.

Comment: Re:Libertarianism, the new face of the GOP? (Score 1) 441

by jimbolauski (#49469125) Attached to: Republicans Introduce a Bill To Overturn Net Neutrality
Because of how access to telephone poles is regulated there is a government controlled monopoly on the last mile. Reclassifying the internet as a common carrier utility allows IPS's access to those poles and lines to run fiber they can no longer be closed out telecos and cable providers. This is the only good to come from the reclassification. If either party truly wanted to protect the internet from government regulation and censoring while fostering competation they would create a another type of carrier classification that would severely limit the scope of government regulation while allowing ISPs to run fiber on poles.

Comment: Re:And it's not even an election year (Score 1) 407

There are more then enough qualified Americans to fill the jobs, it's not about lack of training it's about diluting the market and making the labor cheaper so that Bill Lumbergh's stock will go up a quarter of a point. When ever someone says that are not enough qualified Americans to do a job just remember to add at the current price point.

Comment: Not harsh enough (Score 1) 360

by jimbolauski (#49386995) Attached to: Why More 'Star Wars' Actors Don't Become Stars
Anakin went from wanting to protect his family to slaughtering children and killing his wife in a few scenes. He should have drifted to the dark side over the three movies not went from squeaky clean good guy to super villain in the last 30 minutes of the 3rd film. The character development was a joke no actor could have shined that turd enough to make it passable.

Comment: Re:Interesting double edge sword there. (Score 2, Insightful) 337

by jimbolauski (#49301925) Attached to: German Vice Chancellor: the US Threatened Us Over Snowden
If you simplify it you can understand the US's point, in the eyes of the US government Snowden is a spy. An allied country harboring a spy would be a serious betrayal and it's not that unreasonable to no longer trust that country. These US response is probably a standard response part of a boilerplate agreement on sharing intel.

Comment: Re:Nipples and terrorism? (Score 1) 134

You are getting caught up in rhetoric which has blinded you to the issue. Money is not free speech but saying money can't be used to disseminate speech is limiting/abridging speech.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech ...

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." - Bert Lantz