×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

L.A. Science Teacher Suspended Over Student Science Fair Projects

drnb Re:Its the anti-gun agenda, seriously, read articl (157 comments)

The problem with this theory is that it sets bad policy that persists and that can affect good teachers at a later date.

8 hours ago
top

L.A. Science Teacher Suspended Over Student Science Fair Projects

drnb Re:Its the anti-gun agenda, seriously, read articl (157 comments)

... it's a stupid policy created by people that don't own guns ...

There is nothing wrong with not owning guns. Its a personal choice, OK for some, not for others.

However creating policy and regulations when you are completely ignorant and misinformed about firearms, that is something else. Some non-owners are quite well informed and not hysterical. Some owners are quite ignorant and in dire need of instructions and education.

8 hours ago
top

L.A. Science Teacher Suspended Over Student Science Fair Projects

drnb Progressives are *not* anti-gun ... (157 comments)

... it is about tje progressive anti-gun stance ...

Progressives are *not* anti-gun, neither are environmentalists, etc. Ex. Teddy Roosevelt was known to be a fan of target shooting and hunting.

Call it what it is, the radical left. Don't let the radical left redefine and despoil the term "progressive" and they did "liberal".

9 hours ago
top

L.A. Science Teacher Suspended Over Student Science Fair Projects

drnb Its the anti-gun agenda, seriously, read article (157 comments)

Lets burn the lawyers offices down. Everyone is so freaking terrified of a lawsuit that nothing happens.

Its not fear of lawyers, its an anti-gun agenda. I'm not kidding, from the article:
“supervising the building, research and development of imitation weapons.”

Things that look or function remotely similarly to a gun are not to be tolerated. If you let kids shoot marshmallows at stacked plastic cups they might have fun, take pride in their mastery of ballistic trajectories, and you never know where that might lead ... nerf ... airsoft ... a .22.

11 hours ago
top

Heartbleed Coder: Bug In OpenSSL Was an Honest Mistake

drnb Re:He's sorry now ... (445 comments)

The above cannot be challenged in court. No court in the Universe holds jurisdiction over this. The contributor didn't sell you OpenSSL, he didn't force you to use it, it didn't tell you to use it, he didn't make any guarantees about its functionality, you have no contract, no warranty, no expectation for it to actually do anything, etc. You may as well sue someone after walking into their house uninvited, listening to them whistle while they're sitting on the toilet, and hearing a missed note.

They law may not work as logically as you assume.

In the U.S. a person can enter a homeowner's yard uninvited and without the homeowner's knowledge, slip and fall, injure themselves, and successfully sue the homeowner.

about two weeks ago
top

Heartbleed Coder: Bug In OpenSSL Was an Honest Mistake

drnb Re:He's sorry now ... (445 comments)

Lawyers love EULA's and licenses. The OpenSSL license disclaims all liability

* THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE OpenSSL PROJECT ``AS IS'' AND ANY * EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE * IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR * PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE OpenSSL PROJECT OR * ITS CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, * SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT * NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; * LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) * HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, * STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) * ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED * OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

https://www.openssl.org/source...

If you never agreed to that license, you're violating their copyright.

OK, switching from humor to serious. The above can be challenged in court. And being correct/innocent does not necessarily determine the outcome of a case. As a hostile lawyer once explained: the facts of the matter are irrelevant, my client can afford to go to court, you can not. See "pyrrhic victory".

about two weeks ago
top

Heartbleed Coder: Bug In OpenSSL Was an Honest Mistake

drnb Sue FSF, relicense all GNU software ... (445 comments)

And even if these companies could legally sue (jurisdictions notwithstanding), what would the point be?

Take ownership and control of the project.

Hmmm ... Find a way to sue the FSF, get ownership/control, relicense all GNU software.

about two weeks ago
top

Heartbleed Coder: Bug In OpenSSL Was an Honest Mistake

drnb He's sorry now ... (445 comments)

He's sorry now, wait until some lawyer shows up on his doorstep with a bill.

about two weeks ago
top

Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

drnb Back end of HealthCare.gov may not be working (722 comments)

The great thing about this debate, is that at some point we will get a definitive answer. Probably not from the administration, they claim they don't keep track of those metrics. But we'll find out some how.

Remember the back half of the HealthCare.gov website that hadn't been started when the whole thing was supposed to be done, that's the part that keeps track of people's enrollments, movement from one plan to another, pays the government's part of their premium, etc. That is where the real numbers will come from.

The administration's "we don't keep track of those metrics" line may be code for "the backend of HealthCare.gov is working yet".

about two weeks ago
top

Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

drnb Re:Terrible article (722 comments)

The "It doesn't count until they've paid a premium" talking point is pure desperation. They've already bet the farm on Obamacare being a huge flaming wreck, and now they're grasping at straws because it looks like it's more or less following the administration's expectations.

The liberal New York Times is against the ACA and grasping at straws? They list insurance company after insurance company that states huge percentages are failing to pay and finalize their enrollment. One insurance company rep believes it is just people shopping around, perhaps some folks are being double counted and the non-payments represent these double signups.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02...

about two weeks ago
top

Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

drnb Some people are shopping not really enrolling ... (722 comments)

Actual summary of article: "It seems really unlikely the enrollment numbers got met because that would have meant a lot of last minute sign-ups *shrugs*"

"Oh and by the way even if the enrollment numbers got met, it probably doesn't count because if you haven't paid your first month's premium you don't count as an enrollment number for some reason because we said so"

Payment is the final step in the enrollment process. No payment, no enrollment. Its pretty simple, if you haven't paid you haven't bought anything.

"Matthew N. Wiggin, a spokesman for Aetna, said that about 70 percent of people who signed up for its health plans paid their premiums ... "I think people are enrolling in multiple places,” he said in a conference call. “They are shopping. And what happens is that they never really get back on HealthCare.gov to disenroll from plans they prior enrolled in"
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02...

about two weeks ago
top

Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

drnb Re:Plan not grandfathered and minimum standard. (722 comments)

FWIW ... Non ACA compliant health plans are not necessarily deficient plans as the administration would like us to believe.

I did a side-by-side comparison of my legacy Kaiser plan (California, circa 2007) and the new ACA compliant Kaiser plans. The medical coverage was pretty much the same, the differences were really in deductibles and copays. My personal coverage would go from about $400 to $500 a month with greater out of pocket expenses for me for the closest match. Fortunately this legacy Kaiser plan has not been canceled. I realize its doomed, like all non-ACA compliant plans since it can't accept new members (i.e. the young and healthy).

about two weeks ago
top

Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

drnb Blue Cross 80%, Aetna 70%, WellPoint 76% paid (722 comments)

Plus a huge number of enrollees have not actually made an insurance premium payment so they are not really signed up and insured. What was the percentage being reported, something like 15% to 20%?

Straight out of the GOP talking points. Read the LA Times, they have article explaining it for the mentally challenged.

Are you sure that you are not the one with the political blinders on?

Clue: Politicians don't have to lie when the facts coincidentally happen to be on their side. A talking point is not inherently erroneous.

That said I am not a reader of the GOP talking points, I recalled the stats from traditional media. From the liberal New York Times:
"WASHINGTON — One in five people who signed up for health insurance under the new health care law failed to pay their premiums on time and therefore did not receive coverage in January, insurance companies and industry experts say. Paying the first month’s premium is the final step in completing an enrollment. Under federal rules, people must pay the initial premium to have coverage take effect ...

Lindy Wagner, a spokeswoman for Blue Shield of California, said that 80 percent of those who signed up for its plans had paid by the due date ...

Matthew N. Wiggin, a spokesman for Aetna, said that about 70 percent of people who signed up for its health plans paid their premiums ... "I think people are enrolling in multiple places,” he said in a conference call. “They are shopping. And what happens is that they never really get back on HealthCare.gov to disenroll from plans they prior enrolled in" ...

Kristin E. Binns, a vice president of WellPoint, said that 76 percent of people selecting its health plans on an exchange had paid their share of the first month’s premium ...

One big company, Humana, said it had received 200,000 applications for insurance through the exchanges. “About 75 percent of the people paid, and 25 percent did not pay,” ...

Greg Thompson, a spokesman for the Health Care Service Corporation, which offers Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans in Illinois, Texas and three other states, said that “around 80 percent” of people choosing those plans had paid their first month’s premium ..."
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02...

about two weeks ago
top

Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

drnb 15-20% of enrollees have not paid, not insured? (722 comments)

Plus a huge number of enrollees have not actually made an insurance premium payment so they are not really signed up and insured. What was the percentage being reported, something like 15% to 20%?

about two weeks ago
top

Brendan Eich Steps Down As Mozilla CEO

drnb Mozilla believes in doublespeak ... (1746 comments)

Mozilla believes in freedom of speech? That is pure doublespeak. Being forced from your job for a politically incorrect or ill-advised or counter productive political opinion is not supportive of free speech, is not supportive of tolerance.

As long as he treats his employees equally, and a marriage certificate is not necessary to do so with respect to health care and other benefits, and treats his customers equally there should be no issue with his role as CEO.

about two weeks ago
top

China Cracks Down On Bitcoin, Cuts Off Exchanges' Bank Access

drnb Totally working == 30% discount for goods/services (100 comments)

Sure. When people are spending all their money building fake malls and fake cities, that's "totally working".

"Totally working" is undervaluing their currency so that all goods and services that they offer to the US have an inherent built-in 30% discount.

Its not really the low wages that make manufacturing so attractive in China, its this 30% discount on *everything* compared to domestic US manufacture.

about two weeks ago
top

Bitcoin Exchange CEO Charlie Shrem Arrested On Money Laundering Charge

drnb Re:Consumers pay the fees one way or the other (330 comments)

In the U.S. consumers don't pay the transaction fees on credit and debit cards, and in many states merchants are prohibited from adding a surcharge to cover this fee or offering a discount for a cash transaction.

Ohh I assure you that the consumers pay the fees even if they aren't aware of it. The merchants aren't going to eat a 2-4% fee. That gets passed on through an increase in the price of the product which is shared by everyone even if they don't use a credit card.

That was the point that I was trying to make, I phrased the first sentence poorly. I only meant to say that all the fees are paid by the merchant, unlike some atm transactions where the customer is charged. And that after trying credit card surcharges and cash discounts merchants just embedded to fees into the standard price.

about 3 months ago
top

Bitcoin Exchange CEO Charlie Shrem Arrested On Money Laundering Charge

drnb Re:Bitcoin savings go to merchant not consumer (330 comments)

If it cost a car dealer $1,000 more to sell a car, the price of cars would go up about $1,000 immediately. The money comes from the consumer. The consumer ultimately pays all the costs associated with making and selling the product.

If a car dealer can suddenly save $1,000 when selling a car due to a 3rd party he is not going to reduce the price of the car $1,000 immediately. We do not have similarity between cost increases and cost savings with respect to what the customer sees.

Also, a car analogy does not fit here. There is a difference between things that have a posted price (ex gasoline) and things that have a negotiated price (ex car) in the U.S. The courts have been through this before. Back in the day as people switched from cash to credit cards the gas stations, which operate on a very low margin, tried to pass on the swipe fee to consumers. The courts said no. The gas stations then tried to offer a cash discount. The courts said no, it was a credit card surcharge by a different method.

Therefore in the U.S. prices will reflect credit card swipe fees and any saving from a Bitcoin based transaction will go into the merchant's pocket, just like when we pay cash.

about 3 months ago
top

Bitcoin Exchange CEO Charlie Shrem Arrested On Money Laundering Charge

drnb Bitcoin savings go to merchant not consumer (330 comments)

Cheaper because you don't have to pay money transfer fees.

In the U.S. consumers don't pay the transaction fees on credit and debit cards, and in many states merchants are prohibited from adding a surcharge to cover this fee or offering a discount for a cash transaction.

Bitcoins only allow merchants to avoid the credit/debit transaction fee and receive a greater profit margin. Note merchants tend to convert bitcoins to USD immediately upon receipt, the fee for this conversion is usually far far lower than the credit/debit card fee. Sometimes even a flat fee for the month.

about 3 months ago
top

Bitcoin Exchange CEO Charlie Shrem Arrested On Money Laundering Charge

drnb In NJ its all about who you know ... (330 comments)

In NJ its all about who you know. For example, John Corzine, a close political ally of President Obama. "Former New Jersey governor and U.S. Sen. Jon Corzine, whom President Obama once hailed as an “honorable man” and one of his “best partners” in the White House, has been subpoenaed to testify before Congress about his role in the collapse of the investment firm MF Global." http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/po... [go.com]

about 3 months ago

Submissions

top

California Bill 2013 AB 174 Would Confiscate Legally Registered Firearms

drnb drnb writes  |  about a year ago

drnb (2434720) writes "California’s Assault Weapons ban of 1989 allowed those who owned covered firearms the opportunity to register those firearms and keep them. It now seems that some in the California legislature wish to revoke this registration and render these firearms illegal. The recently introduced AB 174 would force current owners to render their formerly legal and registered firearms inoperable, surrender them or remove them from California.

The California Legislative Councel's Digest says:
AB 174, as introduced, Bonta. Weapons: grandfather clauses.
Existing law prohibits the possession of various weapons. Under existing law, certain of these bans exempted from their scope weapons that were possessed prior to the ban, if prescribed conditions met, are authorized.
This bill would declare the intent of the Legislature to subsequently amend this bill to include provisions that would end all of those exemptions."

Link to Original Source

Journals

drnb has no journal entries.

Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...