Needs a re-install every year is part of "just works"

My ten-year-old XP install, still running happily on its original MB and cloned to several VMs, just works.

It still has the most effective military on the planet.

An effective military is one that achieves political goals. By this standard, the US military has failed. It has not created a stable, democratic and unitary Iraqi State. It has not created "pacified" Afghanistan and enforced central authority.

It's possible that the most "effective" military is one that does not actually have to be used, but where the appearance of potential strength dissuades enemies from implementing action. In the late-1990s, and before the Bush II-era adventures into the Middle East and near-Asia, there was a lot of posturing about how a newer, leaner US military could intervene at relatively low financial cost using dramatically lower force numbers to implement rapid and enduring alterations in international balances of power and within States. The reality of the stalemate/withdrawal from Iraq and the escalating spread of the Afghan brushfire conflict into neighbouring States despite very high financial, materiel and troop costs has significantly weakened the global perception of the US military. Just as the Soviet military was considered quite effective *before* its Afghan quagmire...

His work with Apple(which obviously gooses the value of his stock holdings; but for which he doesn't get paid nearly what he easy could demand)

Yeah, about that famous "$1" salary that Jobs gets from Apple (a headliner news item he shares with other tech moguls). The purpose of drawing a low salary is to avoid paying the highest rate of 35% income tax and instead pay 15% capital gains on stock grants and qualified dividends. Steve Jobs is the 34th richest person in the U.S. and tied for 110th in the world with an estimated net worth at $5.5 billion (a respectable chunk of which comes from a 10 million stock grant from Apple in 2003 worth $3,350,600,000 today).

I always RTFA. The fact that you and I both seem to have read the same material, and are using the same language and grammer, yet are failing to communicate, is in a sense the essence of incommensurability in action. We are expressing different paradigms, which is ironic given the Polanyi-Kuhn comment. The fact that you say do not know who Polanyi or Kuhn were or what they said does not negate the fact that you used an argument very similar to theirs.

In your overly ornate categorical prescription of the "difference" between the reified 'Science' and 'Arts' as discrete and self-similar fields of human activity, you are conflating intentionality with ontology. You also ascribing a teleological direction to the "progress" of human activity, and authoring a moral judgement upon the "forces" that constrain "scientific progress" within medicine. Lastly, I suspect you are promulgating Polanyi-Kuhn incommensurablity between scientific paradigms, a notion that has many supporters, but also many detractors, and is in many areas orthogonal to your teleological framing. You fail to address the tension between these two theses. In short, your argument as presented, while possessing merit, does not produce a sufficient synthesis to derive a satisfactory conclusion especially when considering your moral focus.

"as much as 90 percent of the published medical information that doctors rely on is flawed"

I'm pretty sure there's a Sturgeon's Corollary out there someplace, where it is revealed that as each discipline begins to examine itself, it finds that the evolution of its episteme tends to approach Sturgeon's Revelation asymptotically.

Welcome to reality, where if you live long enough, everything you think you know *for sure* will turn out to be wrong. Or maybe just misguided. The real test is how you deal with new knowledge. Do you keep up and stay current, or do just relax and maintain an elaboration of a worldview and assumptions fundamentally frozen during your adolescence. Doctors are taught over and over in med school that what they are learning is provisional, rapidly changing, and contingent. Many fail to assimilate that important lesson, but many do not.

most people save them in Word documents on a shared drive, accessible by anyone in the institution and blatantly violating HIPAA

I've seen that happen. But you know what? You can make Word encrypt your docs quite securely with a single click. There's really no excuse for leaving world-readable docs lying about when it's so trivial to harden them.

Obviously there's regional variation for this. I'm also a med student who has worked in several hospitals, and I've yet to find one where HIPAA is *not* rigorously followed, even when this creates weird and novel situations. Such as when a white board for patient names, details, and staff assignments is visible to patient or public areas, and gets changed to entire list of last name's first two letters plus first initial. So everyone is Le or Je or Su or Ma, and basically it looks like the entire patient population is now Vietnamese.

In my experience, the issue is with people less educated about HIPAA's constraints and permissible information sharing instead taking it as a blanket ban about discussing *anything* about a patient - even when in non-public areas and among a treatment team. In point of fact, the JHACO regs around patient identifying information and public discussion tend to be stricter than HIPAA when it comes to medical centers.

1995's 3D Movie Maker - Nice UI, impressively fast realtime rendering, machinima... you know, for kids.

1995 also had MS VChat, which if you had a machine fast enough not to choke on it, gave you that whole Second Life avatar-ish vibe a decade early.

just look at the aptly named WinCE

Pretty much all the world's consumer GPS devices run as dedicated apps with custom skins on a WinCE backend. It's not a total disaster.