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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Is more education, better education . . . ? (Score 2) 495

They're the result of the "everyone gets a trophy" policies.

And who demanded the trophies? Not the millenials as kids. They were handed the trophy no matter what they did, lose or win. If this is the 'normal' that they're taught (again, by whom?) then what are they to expect in adulthood?

The boomers created their own disaster by raising kids to believe they could do anything they wanted and they'd get a participation trophy for their efforts, no matter how little.

Comment Re:America hates Hillary Clinton (Score 4, Informative) 1069

We sort of do, just not on national popular vote. We elect them, in general, based on state popular votes. While states are technically allowed to choose their electors any way they want, most choose the group affiliated with the ticket that won their state popular vote (apart from Maine and Nebraska who partition the votes). While they could if they wanted to, none of the states do crazy things like choosing electors based on a mouse race or paintball fight or any such nonsense. Barring some drastic change in the future, the way the majority of your state votes is the way your electors vote for the most part.

Comment Re:Irony? (Score 1) 181

Only a tiny portion of our readers give. If everyone reading this right now gave $3, we wouldn’t need to fundraise for years to come.

Odd, I seem to remember them promising the same thing last year, too. It seems the Washington Post remembers as well. I guess if the price hasn't changed, they either are woefully underfunded/overbudgeted (discussed in plenty of comments above but I'm assuming not), are drastically miscalculating for inflation, or it's just pure greed.

Comment Re:Pay for Amazon Video? (Score 1) 65

On the contrary, I find Prime Video's selection better than Netflix in most cases, especially for movies. In addition, whereas Netflix' rotating catalog means I miss out completely if I don't watch a movie in time, with Amazon I can always pony up the $3 or so it costs to rent for the night to watch. Having the option, in addition to a better catalog selection (Amazon's partnership with HBO really helps here, plus their increasing library of originals), makes Prime Video an overall better choice.

Comment Re:Patients controlling their OWN information? (Score 1) 69

You wouldn't say the government is responsible for storing your money safely right? I rest my case.

As a counterpoint for the sake of argument, there are many countries who do have a national bank which does just that (and successfully). I do agree on the philosophical level that government entities are not always the most trustworthy, and yet on the otherhand they're also the ones responsible for enforcing the laws and protections we're complaining about being violated here.

Comment Re:Patients controlling their OWN information? (Score 4, Interesting) 69

Well, your options boil down to three (or four) choices.

1. You own your data and control its access entirely. Every time physicians, clinics, pharmacists, researchers, etc need or want access to your data, you must authorize them (to whatever extent you wish, for however long, etc). This feels like the holy grail of data access and privacy, but it also puts the legal culpability entirely on you. Give someone bad access? You're responsible. Lose the data/access device? You're responsible. Forget to bring it to your visit? You're responsible. It's like carrying around your medical data like cash, it's irreplaceable without a lot of hard work, vulnerable to theft or misplacement, but affords you the most tangible method for control.

2. Your data is held in escrow by a third party. This would be like a hybrid of the above and the system we have now. Imagine that the store you shopped at also held your bank account. Obviously, that sounds like a recipe for disaster. Our banks and credit systems are the escrow parties for our financial means (or you could use cash as in option #1). A similar system could be adopted for medical data in which hospitals, clinics, pharmacies, etc must plug into a third party in order to access your data, by your control and authorization. It creates one more link in the chain, which can aid (or also detract) in security measures, decrease personal liability (if someone steals the data from the escrow party, you're not liable and can sue for damages), but also probably costs a fee for access to your own data, either by you or the clinic.

3. The government acts as an escrow party. Enter the libertarians and anarchists to rip this option to shreds.

4. The clinics own your data and share it with others/copy it to you upon your request or authorization. The status quo.

Slashdot Top Deals

A rock store eventually closed down; they were taking too much for granite.

Working...