SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Castle -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Joe NYC who wrote (3552)8/2/2004 9:06:21 AM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 7936
 
The MPAA wants close to total control over any digital (and to the extent they can get it analog) video content.

Some people in the TV industry even consider fast forwarding through or otherwise skipping commercials to be theft.

Tim



To: Joe NYC who wrote (3552)8/2/2004 6:36:22 PM
From: TimF  Respond to of 7936
 
An odd coronation

townhall.com



To: Joe NYC who wrote (3552)8/3/2004 8:38:33 PM
From: TimF  Respond to of 7936
 
An Environment of Freedom

by Jo Kwong

townhall.com



To: Joe NYC who wrote (3552)8/19/2004 10:40:47 PM
From: TimF  Respond to of 7936
 
Why Is There No Car Insurance Crisis?

capmag.com

There are other reasons for the difference between health care insurance costs and care insurance costs but they don't totally invalidate his point.



To: Joe NYC who wrote (3552)8/25/2004 9:30:31 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 7936
 
Common Sense
Kevin MD links to this article by a CEO of a Massachusettes HMO:

FOR THE SIXTH year in a row, health care costs are rising at rates that far exceed the rate of general inflation. Studies continue to suggest that health care delivery is uneven at best, and in some cases, harmful, and everybody's got a financing scheme or a policy proposal to shift the cost and quality burden onto someone else.

But most of these ideas won't solve the problem.

The real problem is about much more than high drug prices or corporate profiteering. It rests with the lack of credible, publicly available -- and understandable -- information around the cost and quality of health care. If the whole thing is just a big black box, why should we be surprised if it isn't as effective or efficient as we might like it to be?

When someone buys any other product or service, he or she knows the price of that product, and has some ability to determine if its quality is worth the cost. In recent years, the Internet has made consumers even better purchasers than they were before, driving down prices, improving knowledge and enhancing value.

But not in health care. As consumers, we don't know the price of any common medical procedure. We don't know the price of an appendectomy at South Shore Hospital, knee surgery at the New England Baptist, or having a baby at Brigham and Women's. We don't know if it costs more or less to have an MRI at UMass Memorial or Worcester Medical Center, or if bypass surgery at the Beth Israel Deaconess costs less than bypass surgery at Massachusetts General Hospital. We also have no clue about how much it actually costs at either institution: $5,000? $15,000? $25,000? $50,000?

Kevin agrees that this is a good idea. I don't think it's a good idea so much as I think it is so common sensical that we should ask why things are the way they are. Easily obtainable pricing and quality information is one of the fundamnetal qualities of a functioning free market. It is one free-market reform that I am confident even Graham and Cameron can (and do) buy into.

However, it is only one side of a two-sided coin. Consumers only want and seek the information if the benefits of such information exceed the costs of finding it. Part of the reason things stand as they do is that patients do not save from finding this pricing information. This is the fundamental problem with third-party payers, whether they be HMOs in a employer-based insurance structure or governments in a national health care system. Why would anyone ever have the incentive to seek price information, and more importantly, to act on that information, if the benefits acrue to a third party?

The author in the above article wants patients to shop for best prices because he will see better profits. The government wants patients to shop for best prices so it can spend tax money on other things. But consumers don't care because, for the most part, higher prices only come from their pockets indirectly (higher taxes and premiums). Such information is useless without the incentive to use it.

trentmcbride.blogspot.com



To: Joe NYC who wrote (3552)9/2/2004 9:20:58 PM
From: TimF  Respond to of 7936
 
Have They No Shame?

catallarchy.net

August 30, 2004 Soviet Chic

This weekend, I spoke on panel to a group of kids in the Arsalyn program, which is a kind of honors seminar aimed at getting 16-22 year olds more involved in politics.

Reason's Nick Gillespie and I held the libertarian banner, NRO's Jonah Goldberg and two others spoke for the conservatives, and The New Republic's, Peter Beinhart took issue for the left, along with one other woman who works in the Georgia Statehosue whose name escapes me, and a guy running for the Illinois Statehouse from the Green Party.

The afternoon's drama came toward the end of the panel, with this skinny kid sitting in the front row, who happened to be donning a bright red t-shirt with the Soviet hammer and sickle. I wanted to call him out from the start. I just felt a little crass about it. But as the panel wore on, it continued to gnaw at me. It dawned on me that I or the lefists on the panel would have had no problem calling the kid out if he'd been wearing a t-shirt with neo-Nazi regalia. And he applauded vigorously when the lefties spoke, and sat on his hands when the rest of us spoke, meaning of course that he wasn't wearing the shirt with any sense of irony.

So when he finally raised his hand during the Q&A, I decided that --what the hell -- I might as well point out how silly he looks advertising a belief system rooted in slavery and murder. He asked an unrelated question, which I think the Green Party guy answered. I then chime din, recommending to the kid that he read Anne Applebaum's Gulag, the Pulitzer winning book which documents the horrors of the Soviet work camps. He didn't seem to get it.

So I added, "I know Soviet chic is hip right now, particularly on college campuses. But you really ought to think about the message you send by wearing that shirt. It has all the charm of a swastika."

With that, Hillsdale poly sci Professor David Bobb added, "you're associating yourself with the deaths of 100 million people..."

The kid then interrupted Bobb, with obvious agitation, "Yes, I know all about the history of the Soviet Union."

To which Bobb replied, "Oh, so you know that you're being insulting."

Boos and jeers flited up from the crowd.

By the time we had dinner, the kid had thrown a sweater over the t-shirt.

Maybe it was boorish to call the kid out. But there's something really aggravating about these middle class kids born into the most privileged conditions in all of human history suddenly finding it trendy to carry water for a belief system that murdered hundreds of millions of people, and enslaved billions more.

Me, I just wanna' smack 'em a few times.

theagitator.com



To: Joe NYC who wrote (3552)10/4/2004 9:01:28 PM
From: TimF  Respond to of 7936
 
You Call This Health Insurance?

One of the most serious impediments to rational debate on health care is the misuse of the term "health insurance." What we call health "insurance" in this country was never designed to insure the consumer. Instead, its purpose is to insure steady, reliable incomes for health care providers. True health insurance is the economist's equivalent of a unicorn -- we can describe it, but none of us has actually seen it.



Split the Check



What Blue Cross and Blue Shield pioneered was a "split-the-check" approach to health care. An equivalent plan for restaurant meals would be that instead of paying for your meal, you would pay an annual premium to "Blue Eats," which would in turn reimburse restaurants for their costs, plus a profit margin. Every individual member of "Blue Eats" would have an incentive to eat out a lot and order the most expensive items on the menu, because the cost is shared among all of the members of "Blue Eats."



"Blue Eats" would be a great marketing ploy by restaurants, because it would get people to eat out more and spend more at restaurants. Similarly, John C. Goodman argues that what we call "health insurance" originated as a marketing ploy by physicians and hospitals. It worked really well, too...

techcentralstation.com

Blue Eats Restaraunt Insurance

catallarchy.net



To: Joe NYC who wrote (3552)12/22/2004 10:18:23 PM
From: TimF  Respond to of 7936
 
My Local Paper Channels the Onion

Headline from the Friday edition of the St. Catharines (sub)Standard: Province vows to keep out U.S. health services company. Yes, how dare those damn Yanks try to invade our borders with their superior health care services! Don't they know we don't want any of that here?

This country is demonstrably insane in its blinkered attachment to a socialist health care system, no matter what the negative consequences. The slightest whiff of anything resembling private health care is immediately squashed. An American company called Life Line Screening wants to send a couple of mobile clinics around southern Ontario, providing "non-invasive ultrasound screening for strokes, abdominal aneurysms, peripheral arterial disease, and osteoperosis -- for a fee." But fear not, good citizens of Canada -- your government is ever-vigilant in protecting you from the corrupting influence of American private health services, and has "moved to stop that," accoring to my local MPP, Jim Bradley. Well thank the heavens.

"I'll meet them at the border or confront them where they are," says our macho health minister George Smitherman. "We send that message to that provider, and any other." I can't describe how reassuring it is to know that our bureaucrats are taking such a non-nonsense, zero-tolerance approach to those unscrupulous, money-grubbing health-care peddlers. How dare they try to take advantage of our ill so brazenly! They might tolerate that kind of despicable practice down south, but up here we insist on our 2-24 week waiting lists for an ultrasound, thank you very much!

"We have determined it not to be legal because they are offering services for a cost that are covered by OHIP," says Bradley. "That is not legal." Ahhh, I see. So rather than allowing those who can afford it the ability to get their screening service done sooner and thereby shorten the waiting lists for everyone else, we're sticking with the time-honoured egalitarian method of the queue. Let it not be said that our system is unfair: it punishes both the wealthy and poor equally...

godco.net



To: Joe NYC who wrote (3552)3/23/2005 11:22:12 AM
From: TimF  Respond to of 7936
 
Two Years

It has been now two years since the United States, UK and other countries invaded our nation. It has been two years since Iraqis have had to live with daily violent attacks and rampant terrorism. It has been two years since our nation began being turned upside down. It has been two years since the road to democracy began.

It has been a very hard two years. So many people have died, so much has been destroyed, so many drops of tears and blood have been shed, so many have been robbed of loved ones, and so many words have been spoken about Iraq, it's future, and this war.

Two years...seems like yesterday that I was awoken by bombs going off in Baghdad, and the realisation that my life and that of my country was going to change. That very day I remember being scared that my house might be destroyed by a bomb, or that my relatives who were forcibly put into the Iraqi army might be killed.

Two years since Saddam came on TV, and pledged that Iraq would never fall. Little did he know, he surrendered like a rat in a whole only months later. Two years since my father had a heart.

Two years is about 730 days. In those days what have I seen. My eyes have seen more than I had ever hoped, more blood, more death and more pain, then I ever imagined or hoped I would have seen.

In those days I have seen the worst of humanity, the animal that lives in all humanity, the ability of humanity to destroy at will others, and rob the life given to others by God almight himself.

So you ask me, Husayn, was it worth it. What have you gotten? What has Iraq acheived? These are questions I get a lot.

To may outsiders, like those who protested last year, who will protest today. This was a fools errand, it brought nothing but death and destruction. I am sheltered in Iraq, but I know how the world feels, how people have come to either love or hate Bush, as though heis the emobdiement of this war. As though this war is part of Bush, they forget the over twenty million Iraqis, they forget the Middle Easterners, they forget the average person on the street, the average man with the average dream.

Ask him if it was worth it. Ask him what is different. Ask him if he would go through it again, go ahead ask him, ask me, many of you have.

Now I answer you, I answer you on behalf of myself, and my countrymen. I dont care what your news tells you, what your television and newspapers say, this is how we feel. Despite all that has happened. Despite all the hurt, the pain, blood, sweat and tears. These two years have given us hope we never had.

Before March 20, 2003, we were in a dungeon. We did not see the light. Saddam Hussain was crushing Iraq's spirit slowly, we longed for his end, but knew we could not challenge him, or his diabolical seed who would no doubt follow him and continue his generation of hell on Earth.

Since then, we now have hope. Hope is not a tangible thing, but it is something, it is more than being blinded by darkness, by being stuck in a mental pit without any future.

Hope has been the greatest product of the last two years. No doubt, many have died, many have died by accident or due to crimes. But their sacrifices are not, and will not be for nothing. I refuse to let it be, and my countrymen stand with me.

Our cities are smoking, our graveyards full, and terrorists in our midst. But we are not defeated. We are not down, we are not regretful. We are not going to surrender. For all that the two years have brought, the greatest thign they have given us is a future, and a view of the finish line.

Iraqis see the finish line, the finish line of freedom and democracy and a functioning nation. We can smell it, taste it, and like a sprinter, one who has broken his legs, but who has a heart full of passion, we will crawl there no matter what the cost. No matter what we must endure, we have realized what we can become, and that is the biggest result of the last two years.

Noone can take that from us. Not the terrorists, not those who want to question the good of the removal of Saddam, not those who want to reduce our glory for politics, none.

We have been brought from darkness to light. And not only has the future been made better for Iraq, but the martyrs of our nation, their blood is watering the roots of democracy across the world. We are watching our neighbors come closer to the light, and this only pushes us more, and makes us stronger in our burning desire to reach the finish line, to realize the dream that our people have had for so long.

No, we will not give up, and we will not say that the last two years were a waste. They for all their trouble have been momentus. They for us, have been a turning point in history. Whether or not you agree, this is how it looks from Iraq.

democracyiniraq.blogspot.com

Message 21160404



To: Joe NYC who wrote (3552)4/15/2005 3:58:46 PM
From: TimF  Respond to of 7936
 
China's Strategic Direction
By James J. Na
realclearpolitics.com

Message 21231579



To: Joe NYC who wrote (3552)8/3/2005 8:20:01 PM
From: TimF  Respond to of 7936
 
Windows offers new vistas of spending
By Sam Varghese
August 3, 2005 - 1:42PM

People wanting to upgrade to Windows Vista are likely to need not only a new computer with more robust hardware, but a new monitor as well.

A US tech consultant says technology in the new version will fuzz protected digital content unless it is viewed on a monitor which has High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection (HDCP).

Stephen Speicher, who writes a weekly column for the tech blog engadget, said: "If you're one of those rare people whose display is equipped with HDCP, you're fine. However, in the world of computers, such users are few and far between."

The technology is known as PVP-OPM, or Protected Video Path - Output Protection Management.

Speicher said while HDCP had become a de facto standard for display copy-protection in televisions, its penetration in the computer display market was very low.

"Whether you're plunking down money for one of the new ultra-fast LCD displays with 4ms response times or you're becoming the envy of the neighbourhood with Dell's UltraSharp 2405FPW widescreen display, you're buying a monitor that won't play nice with premium content in Longhorn (the code name for Windows Vista)," he said.

"The bottom line is that Microsoft is beginning to incorporate some of the same standards that commercial entertainment devices are using. In the case of PVP, this means that HDCP will be used."

Speicher said this was not surprising as the specifications for HD-DVD, one of the next-generation DVD standards being pushed by the US-based DVD Forum, called for HDCP. "Blu-ray (the opposing next-gen DVD standard) will probably follow suit," he said.

A Microsoft official confirmed this, saying: "Current computer monitors will work even with high-value content, although the resolution of displayed images might be lower than what you might get with a protected monitor link."

Marcus Matthias, Windows Digital Media product manager in Redmond, said this was nothing new as some existing DVD players required HDCP protection to "upsample" their source to higher resolution.

"Digital outputs of any system need some form of copy protection, as without it, digital protection upstream has much less value," he said. "The consumer electronics world has adopted content protection very broadly, with the bulk of high-definition TVs today supporting monitor copy protection."

smh.com.au

Microsoft Vista means you need new monitors

theinquirer.net



To: Joe NYC who wrote (3552)8/10/2006 4:42:08 PM
From: TimF  Respond to of 7936
 
Universal Digital Interface favoured over HDMI

Except with copy protectionists, natch

theinquirer.net