399 karma · joined August 8, 2011
Anyone know of any examples?
People paying to sleep on a bus clearly shows the problem here is ridiculously bad.
Most of the formally homeless people I know are now in the food industry. That is because at the shelter I worked at they would rotate who cooks the meal, so all homeless 'in the program' learned to cook, and now they all work at the cheesecake factory.
Which pays enough to live comfortably in my hometown. Don't know how viable it is here in the valley, though, with both higher expenses and more competition.
That was in Idaho
Here in the valley I make a typical dev salary and have 2 dependents but still save 1k, invest 1k and put 1k down against my principal every month.
Tech jobs pay well and if you can't easily save large amounts of money as a developer you'd better be having a whole lot of fun.
Clothing is a lot easier to judge, though.
Instead of using socketio I rewrote the client side code in pure js. It was not difficult at all, and nearly all browsers support websockets now anyway.
Anyway - if you've written a twisted server before then writing a websocket backend is trivial, and the frontend is not much more difficult. I might do a full writeup when the project is complete.
answer 1
EEM: raw.toLowerCase is not a function - Try again.
And I don't consider one worse than the other, each will be biased in a different way.
`Vote in national elections` is the most common value of X when comparing OECDs to China, but it is not a very useful one.
The more important political freedoms (free speech, freedom of assembly, free press) are all restricted in China, but the general trend is toward less restriction, albeit with more monitoring. (The insightful will point out we are restricted and monitored in every country, but I respond there is an order of magnitude difference)
Economic freedoms are being relinquished at a much faster pace, and since that is what most people encounter in the day-to-day the average Chinese citizen will think you are pretty silly for saying he or she is not 'free'.
But the big issue for quality of life of the citizens of every country is transparency and the rule of law. And while China has been making major strides forward in the rule of law it still has abysmal transparency.
And that is a much more worrying thing than any voting metric.
It makes me sad that this position is justified by the threat environment.
It makes me sad and frustrated, but people cannot seem to understand the numerous important immigration issues which have nothing to do with Mexicans jumping over fences.
Personally I think the legal immigration nonsense is much more important, but the masses and the media disagree.
Not just broken on IE7, apparently . . . .
Y'all know this is inefficient. I spend at least 20 hours of work filing my taxes each year, and as a fairly intelligent citizen I always make a mistake anyway.
Pyladies is an educational group. Don't assume that because it is a group for women it is any more 'feminist' than any other group.
I'd be interested to see a graph of materialism to happiness (though both are fuzzy and difficult to measure) I'd guess there is a negative correlation, but I don't have the data!
There was no such time.
Yes an in order to become wealthier you do not have to take someone else's wealth away. A brief look at history will show this to be true
Back in 2006 I pulled the latest WHO data and looked at % of medical industry privatized vs overall health of the populace (an function of factors such as infant mortality and lives lost to communicable diseases) in OECD countries.
As best I could tell there was a negative correlation between privatization and quality of care. As I recall the USA was the worst (by far), Australia's hybrid system put them near the middle, and Japan was on top.
Sure the sample data is small and the USA is very very far from a pure market at this point, but it was enough of a wake-up call for me that I stopped blindly believing in economic models.
After all it is only a model, not reality.
Health care may in fact be a 'natural monopoly' such as water or power, or it may be better as a government controlled industry such as education or defence. Only a few radicals think the government should not run or regulate any industry.
Some things to consider:
> Is is better that people always visit the doctor when they have a minor concern? (like 'if they sneeze . . .') because if people are paying out of pocket even at $100 many will not go.
> Many rural areas have only one hospital. Their emergency room is a monopoly. In a perfect market they could charge whatever they wanted and people would still go.
> Can the average person 'make sure a doctor is good?' Do they know how to make such a judgement?
> If doctors needed to compete, would it necessary be a sill-based competition? Is there a correlation between customer satisfaction and early detection for things like annual physicals?
> Do we want to have a society where you level of income determines your quality of care (and probably life expectancy)
I agree that the current US system is close to the worst thing possible, virtually no competition due to insurance being tied to employers, and also virtually no safety net.
I was uninsured for two and a half years. When I went to the hospital and asked how much things cost no one knew. Twice I was misinformed by more than a hundred dollars.
So yeah I think the model you propose may well be better than what we currently have, but I sincerely doubt it is the best possible.
Getting into _that_ industry, I mean.
I was wondering specifically if it might be possible to get some existing medical devices to communicate via bluetooth with a central server; to build an adapter so everything that sent out a vital signal was logged on disc and remotely accessible in real time.
I was in a hospital recently, and the vital signs were logged on paper, and abnormalities were signaled by a loud alarm, to be audible at the nearby nurses station.
But I don't know how I can 'weekend hack' this sort of thing. Perhaps I can grab some medical surplus, a bluetooth adapter and start hacking?
Ideally such a study would be published in a medical journal, and other researchers would then perform studies to corroborate or disprove the original; After a sufficient amount of evidence is gather a systematic review would be published, and the results of that would be distributed to doctors and health advice reporters, who would present the information to the general public in a clear, unified and easy-to-understand manner.
In a perfect world.
The reporting of every study only leads the general public to believe that nothing is certain (because dissenting views are published) and not take any of the advice seriously. It is almost as bad as politics.
The reality is knowledge is even cheaper than food these days, and books are backbreaking whenever you move. A rational cost/benefit analysis will tell you to rid yourself of books before clothes. A favourite shirt is nearly irreplaceable, a favourite book can be replaced in a day.
still puts me off the brand though, the should use a different brand for their cheap stuff, not a different series. customers (like me) will lose their brand loyalty.. .
I know it is just anecdotal, but it put me off the brand (which I was bullish on before).
>"Any headline which ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."