Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment ICD10 codes for shark related injuries (Score 1) 107

Since we are talking about sharks, let's talk about how one reports shark and other sea creature related injuries. Here are the ICD10 codes for ocean related injuries, mostly related to being bitten by stuff that lives in the sea. The shark ones are pretty funny. The primary code for shark bite is: W56.41XA - Bitten by shark, initial encounter http://www.findacode.com/icd-1... Here are all the codes related to injuries from sea creatures: http://www.chirocode.com/medic...

Comment Re:You have no idea... (Score 1) 425

One word: lawsuits. The first autonomous vehicle that runs down and kills little Sally will result in a legal settlement that is so large that even the mighty Google will not be able to stay in the business. After the lawsuits start flying, Google's insurance costs to stay in this business will go through the roof. With an autonomous vehicle, the manufacturer will be liable for everything that goes wrong. Whether it is their fault or not. Google has deep pockets, and juries will make them pay. That will inevitably lead to the end of Google's foray in to autonomous vehicles.

Comment Re:You have no idea... (Score 1) 425

The demand for cars was reduced to a level that the sales no longer permitted the auto manufactures to cover their considerable fixed costs. The demand for cars does not need to be reduced to zero to effectively strangle the manufacturers. Back in the 30s, Ford stopped making cars for a year, because the losses from selling too few cars was greater than the losses from selling no cars. We did not get to that point the last time.

Comment Re:The reason is private insurance (Score 1) 786

That's good.

Everybody should lose their employee-sponsored plans. Everybody should make their own choices and buy their own insurance Tying health coverage to employment is idiotic, and has become a modern-day form of feudalism.

I would have liked to see the democrats propose this and then listen to the howls from their unions supporters who all have employer provided health insurance.

btw: In the US, the tie between employment and healthcare dates back to WWII. Wages and Prices were frozen, so if I wanted to convince workers to come work at my munitions factory, I couldn't offer them more money. I could offer them healthcare. Back then, the factory had doctors, and occasionally dentists, on site and employees and their families went to the company doctor for health care. After the war, companies opted to pay for insurance rather than on-site, and on-staff, physicians. So, the tie between employment and health coverage is Franklin Delano Roosevelt's fault.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The value of marriage is not that adults produce children, but that children produce adults." -- Peter De Vries