Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: |||newspam||| on 20 Nov 2006 05:40 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > In article <1163689355.822964.185390(a)k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > |||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk wrote: > > > >So who are you then? > > My moniker is in some listings. JMF's is in all the listings. On that basis BAH = Barb Huizenga of the DEC PDP-10 TOPS group then. (isn't the WWW amazing!) And your knowledge of computing seems to have stagnated about two decades ago. Seriously you should buy a new computer and enter the twenty-first century. They are consumer items now and (by comparison with Win 3.xx) relatively trouble free. Regards, Martin Brown
From: jmfbahciv on 20 Nov 2006 07:18 In article <MPG.1fca6f73545ed89f989bf4(a)news.individual.net>, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >In article <455DDBAA.13888084(a)hotmail.com>, >rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... >> >> >> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> > >> > >I can just see it...lobbying groups like People Against Treatment of >> > >Appendicitis will spring up all over the place. You are truly loony. >> > >> > This kind of thing is happening. Look at any stem cell research >> > politics. >> >> None of which has anything to do with any 'NHS'. > >Actually it does have to do with the 'N' part. The "stem cell >research" flap is all about *federal* funds for this research. >There is no law that says a corporation can't do this research, but >for some reason they don't. Hint: not one person has been cured >using fetal stem cells but thousands have been treated using adult >stem cells. I wonder why the money is following the latter and the >politicians are driving the former? I've wondered about that. My current idea is that the fetal is an effective way to keep the ideologues from thinking. You just mention the word and everyone under the tent will agree with everything else you say. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 20 Nov 2006 07:26 In article <MPG.1fca7ea27b52fc8b989bfa(a)news.individual.net>, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >In article <ejk8cc$8qk_001(a)s922.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com says... >> In article <MPG.1fc6fd7540cb3520989bba(a)news.individual.net>, >> krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >> >In article <ejhoi9$8qk_002(a)s938.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com says... >> >> In article <MPG.1fc5b8c43468d032989b90(a)news.individual.net>, >> >> krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >> >> >In article <ejf4nd$8qk_002(a)s792.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >> >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com says... >> >> >> In article <MPG.1fc3bbe568ee60e1989b38(a)news.individual.net>, >> >> >> krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >> <snip> >> >> >> >The machine shop where my dad worked had a pipe die set. They'd >> >> >let me use it (with supervision) for a project I was doing. After >> >> >I was all done the bastards showed me the power threader (similar >> >> >to what HomeDespot has now). ;-) >> >> >> >> I never saw a power threader operate. >> > >> >Get thee down to the HomeDespot and wait around. It's an amazing >> >beast. I don't think they even charge for it, >> >> Huh...I've been giving them quite a bit of money lately. > >You and me both. I think my bank has a direct connection to their >computer (thousands of dollars of the past six months). <GASP> I'm not that generous. > >> I don't >> remember seeing nor hearing something like that. Although one >> does need a horse to get around that place. I'll try to find >> it next time I need to make a contribution to them. > >Look back in the plumbing department in the aisle with the pipe >stacked from floor to ceiling. I discovered the plenum and stuff my last trip. I'll try to browse in the plumbing next time. > >> They >> were the only ones who had 1"x1"x42" A/C sponge stuff at this >> time of year. And they weren't charging $5/packet. > >Sponge stuff? Filters? No. The stuff you put around the A/C for insulation. I have replacement windows. This means that a frame and window was built inside the house's window frame. The last wind storm had two of them providing very fresh air into the house. So I expended five caulk containers on the outside and took the windows apart to the point that the gaps between the two frames were exposed. I then stuffed more of that sponge stuff around the inner frame. The traffic is not as loud as it was. >> >> What was your project? >> > >> >I built a wind-powered land cruiser (think ice-boat with wheels). >> >> Kewl. > > >> >It was marginally successful. I really didn't have enough space to >> >use it. ...and it turned out to be quite heavy. Lotsa education >> >though. >> >> What state were you in? Did you have a hill to get a jumpstart? > >150mi. South of Chicago. Not a hill within a day's drive. ;-) Oh, but you could get a circular boost if you timed it right. Were those things used in olden times to get around? /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 20 Nov 2006 07:45 In article <ejr4o4$k7c$3(a)blue.rahul.net>, kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >In article <ejhpc1$8qk_001(a)s938.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, > <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>In article <ejckm3$mf9$1(a)blue.rahul.net>, >> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>>In article <ejcg0c$8ss_016(a)s858.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>>[.....] >>>>I see the consequences just fine. Forcing, by law, everyone >>>>to have insurance is the latest idiocy. >>> >>>If you are going to have an insurance based system and not let the dead >>>bodies of those without insurance clutter the streets, you really need to >>>make sure everyone has insurance. If you don't then an irresponsible >>>fraction of society can become a burden on the rest. >> >>The same problems will still exist. > >No, the irresponsible people will not longer be a burden. > > >> So everybody has a piece >>of paper that says "insurance". That will not create any >>infrastructure needed to deliver the services. > >Agreed but if you wish to hang onto an insurance based system rather than >a NHS like system, this is a completely seperate problem. I don't want either. Insurance should be only for extraordinary circumstances. Instead what we have is a "insurance" that is expected to pay for everything. As a result, it does pay for everything and becomes a Ponzi scheme. > You have moved >from the subject of paying for services provided to the providing of >services. In an insurance based system, ensuring that the services are >provided requires that the payment from the insurance company to the >doctor is large enough that market forces will attract providers in. What happens is all payments get padded. Every bureaucratic layer adds a little bit. The more layers, the more tithes the cost increases. This is what happens when the small business model is no longer used. Patients are no longer treated as individuals. Things such as chemo, etc. become production line delivery services. People who receive medical treatments are no longer customers but consumers; the slogan easily becomes "one size fits all"; this is impossible with medical treatments. >> It's a smoke >>and mirrors political game. > >No, you are confusing solving one of two problems with solving zero >problems. > > >>>So long as the US doesn't have a NHS, that's the best you can do. You can >>>ensure that the money to pay for the survices is not the problem. You >>>can't ensure that services can be had without something like a NHS. >> >>You can if you stop forcing all medical services to be government- >>mandated, govenrment-sponsored and govnerment-funded. > >How do you expect the services to be provided to those who can't pay for >them? Which services are we talking about? > > >> That >>forces all decisions to made by bureaucrats and non-medical personnel. > >No, it does nothing of the kind. The only thing that an insurance company >or even the NHS can decide is what to pay for. If I want to pay for >something out of my own pocket, my insurance company won't stop me. In >England, the NHS doesn't stop people from paying outside the system. The >big difference between the insurance and the NHS in this respect is that >the insurance company has to take about 20% off the top to pay for its >running costs. What percentage do you think the government has to take? It is a much larger organization and it has to soothe political feathers. The politics is the number one goal. > > >>Look at how this happened in the HMOs. These are small organizations >>compared to one that is a single-payer. > >In the HMO case, the insurance company is in the business to make a >profit. HMO? That wasn't insurance when it got started. They were non-profits. > It only provides the care needed to cause there to be a profit. >A NHS system is quite different in this regard. Right. Instead of profits, the extra monies are called graft or payoffs. There is no accounting involving these monies so nobody has an idea of what the real cost of delivery service is. > >[.....] > >>Doctors are dropping out because they cannot make money to cover >>their living expenses; they cannot make judgements without big >>brother's OK; they spend 65% of their time doing paper work instead >>of providing medical services to each individual patient. They >>are forced to dispense medical treatments in a production line >>model. > >That is a problem with the current situation. You are arguing against >changing the situation but have just provided a good reason why that >system should indeed be changed. It will only get worse if the administration of the biz becomes centralized in a national center. I am arguing that the administration needs to go the other way. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 20 Nov 2006 07:54
In article <MPG.1fcaf59b31109dd7989c07(a)news.individual.net>, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >In article <ejkcem$8qk_018(a)s922.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com says... >> In article <MPG.1fc685e22bf7d88a989ba5(a)news.individual.net>, >> krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >> >In article <ejhv75$8qk_016(a)s938.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com says... >> >> In article <MPG.1fc51b4bef154b2c989b82(a)news.individual.net>, >> >> krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >> >> >In article <455B40A5.79F0C308(a)hotmail.com>, >> >> >rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> krw wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> > rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... >> >> >> > > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> >> > > > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >Well, Eeyore, this would belie the assertion that she lives too >> far >> >> from a >> >> >> > > > >population center to get decent DSL. >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > I live in a town. There is no DSL line strung. >> >> >> > > > You people are starting to get really annoying. >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > DSL comes down an ordinary telephone line ! >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Only if you're within 17K' of the CO. >> >> >> >> >> >> I make that just a fraction over 3 miles. >> >> > >> >> >I'm about four miles from the CO according to the crow. How the >> >> >telco snakes things is another issue. On the line that went back >> >> >to the CO I couldn't get better than about 26K. The other one went >> >> >to a SLC in the neighborhood and I could get 49-53K reliably on >> >> >that line. DSL was still unavailable. >> >> > >> >> >> It works over longer distances overr here, albeit not flat out. >> >> > >> >> >It falls off fast. They're not willing to even try it. >> >> >> >> I'm talking to you both--towns are trying to get themselves >> >> wired. It will be a few years (I think it will be years and not >> >> months) before the laws and permissions and telcos and FCC >> >> sort all of this out). >> > >> >Some of the outlieing towns where even 56K isn't available are >> >going with wireless Internet to get around the FCC tariffs. >> >> I keep wondering how Congress is going to stick it to us >> when that avenue to our pockets dries up. >> >> But are the towns allowed to own the stuff or do they >> have contract out to a telco? > >I don't know if the towns will own it or there is a not-for-profit >coop that owns the equipment, but the towns are organizing the >effort at doing the required permits. They're also paying the tab. It is beginning to look like internet, or rather, web access, is becoming a town utility service, like water, power, and road plowing. > >There are no poles to rent, thus no "last mile" so it's not under >the tariff of the telcos. I thought they were trying change that so they would have control?? There was something on CSPAN but I didn't understand the implications; it didn't help that that Nancy person was kept saying two opposite meanings in one sentence. > BTW, Burlington was going to do their >own cable TV. The socialists there spent *$millions* on studies >and it's gone nowhere. That was the goal. > There is nothing that says a municipality >can't compete in this arena, just that it's usually a dumb idea. Unless the provider service becomes a town utility. /BAH |