>60 or 70% of Americans polled*

I certainly don't want it and nobody I know that actually understands the real cost does either. Every single nation that provides socialized healthcare is hopelessly strained by its cost, and the service has suffered as a result. The system relies on eithe dramatic reductions in the cost of healthcare or a positive birthrate to sustain it.

Nobody I know in socialized healthcare systems has good things to say about it when they actually need it.

The US has the most expensive healthcare costs per capita in the OECD, and the poorest health outcomes on average.

You might think that this is merely because so many people in the US are not covered at all. But even when you account for people who are covered, the results are mixed at best. With the US performing slightly better in some areas, but much worse across the board.

I also know a few people who have moved back from the US, even though they had health insurance, just to receive better socialised medical care in their own countries. I also know of a who went to the US to get cancer treatment. None of that means anything really. The number of people you know and their uninformed attitudes are statistically insignificant.

I'd recommend you listen to the consumer's of those systems, instead of American pundits talking about them.

Our system in Australia is absolutely fantastic, and far cheaper in taxes than you'd think.

Could say the same thing about interstate highways or the military though

Having experienced both, and needed both, I certainly have more positive things to say on the socialized version than the privatized version. Does the US system not hopelessly strain people by its cost? Does the US system not require positive rate of insurance payers to sustain it?

I was like you. Then I was left with a surprise $32,000 medical bill that I feel pushed me past my limit. I still haven't recovered my life. My divorce. Missing so much with my kids.

https://www.ilr.cornell.edu/scheinman-institute/blog/john-au...

You are OK with peoples lives (500,000 a year) being destroyed in order to 'keep the service good'. And you are OK with the price of good service being over 50% of American bankruptcies being due to medical dept. But who cares if peoples lives are ruined, you have a shorter wait.

When did this country become a country of sociopaths? This isn't working.

This is even less than statistically insignificant.

Every single person that doesn't return their cart does so out of laziness. Besides just being an asshole, the cart will take a potential parking spot that someone else later needs to move to free up, and worst of all the wind could blow the cart into someone elses car.

Nobody is gonna kidnap her kids as she walks the cart back in less than a minute. It is simply her being a lazy asshole.

> Every single person that doesn't return their cart does so out of laziness. > It is simply her being a lazy asshole.

I can see that this is a very personal issue for you, so I'll just say this: People are complicated, and I would encourage you to have more grace for them. If it bothers you that much to see a cart left by a mom struggling with kids, you might consider offering to return it on her behalf.

The addition of flouride to tap water supply likely affects brain development. Let's not go adding lithium too.

These things are simple enough to advise the populace to use on their own. The government should never play nanny, ever.

Is advising people to wear sunscreen and not speed also nannying? If the government ultimately bears the costs of poor health of citizens, why shouldnt they embark on public health interventions to lower those costs.

The government should not be bearing that cost. It is idiotic to ever put the state in charge of people's health.

Clearly, the best system is the one where you spend the most to get less /s

Author seems confused. 2FA isn't about securing your account, it's about harvesting your phone number.

I’d say it’s the opposite. The dumbest don’t have the faculties to appreciate technology. It’s treated as inevitable and immediately becomes another modern fixture we take for granted in our life like a baby using an ipad.

That sounds like a perspective from deep in the trenches. A software system has SO many parts, spanning your code, other people’s code, open source software, hardware appliances, SaaS tools, office software, email servers, and also humans reachable via social engineering. If someone makes a project manager click a link leading to a fake Jira login, and the attacker uses the credentials to issue a Jira access token, and uses that to impersonate the manager to create an innocuous ticket, and a low-tier developer introduces a subtle change in functionality that opens up a hole… then you have an insecure system.

This story spans a lot of different concerns, only few of which are related to coding skills. Building secure software means defending in breadth, always, not fucking up once, against an armada of bots and creative hackers that only need to get lucky once.

Take a broader view of what "building secure systems" means. It's not just about the code being written by ICs but about the business incentives, tech choices of leadership, the individual ways execs are rewarded, legacy realities, interactions with other companies, and a million other things. Our institutions are a complex result of all of these forces. Taken as a whole, and looking at the empirical evidence of companies and agencies frequently leaking data, the conclusion "we cannot build secure systems" is well founded.

This is accurate. Especially in shops that implement firm shipping dates for Product Increments. You have X weeks to build Y features consisting of Z tickets. At the end of those X weeks you better have all your tickets done. So more often than not, the tickets are done and the features are implemented. Shops like this build incredible ticket closing machines. They are implemented to pass user acceptance testing not to hold back hackers or bad actors. When leadership incentivizes delivering features and a developers job or raise depends on delivering those features, you get what you incentivize.

> Building secure systems is trivial

I'd suggest you try and build a secure system for > 150k employees before you make sweeping statements like that.

Sometimes it is the management that doesn't understand anything. In their perspective, security doesn't improve the bottom line.

I worked for an SME that dealt with some sensitive customer data. I mentioned to the CEO that we should invest some time in improving our security. I got back that "what's the big deal, if anyone wants to look they can just look..."

Looking at the number of already discovered vulnerabilities in popular applications, I would say it's actually impossible to build secure systems right now. Even companies that are trying are failing. IMO it's still way too easy to introduce a vulnerability and then miss it in both review and pentests. We need big changes in all parts of the software buliding and maintaining process. Probably no one will like that, because we are still in "move fast and break things" software development age.

This is true, but what's even more interesting is all the things that had to fail long before you had a shop full of monkeys.

i used to agree with you but i feel its naive. incompetence is always guaranteed

You're saying that creating secure systems is easy.

I'm not sure which is worse:

1) Creating secure systems is hard, and we often fail at it.

2) Creating secure systems is easy, and we often fail at it.

I don't know which is worse, but I know for sure we often fail at it.

There are far more than 500 people working in Starbase. Most of them do not live there so it's kind of pointless to mention that.

Not when the argument is that they're building homes for residents?

If congressmen never voted on double edged swords or poison pill legislation out of principle, they'd all be labeled do-nothing grandstanders like Thomas Massie. While it may work for Massie, as his constituents are smart enough to know voting no on every bill is better than voting yes on a bad one, most congressmen would not survive that for long.

It is, solely, the fault of disinterested constituents that congress get away with passing laws for special interests and corporate lobby rather than the country at large.

It might have something to do with the systematic dismantling of our education system and associated propaganda campaigns convincing the now-uneducated masses that education is evil brainwashing, everyone except white billionaires are actual, literal monsters, voting is pointless, and there's no chance at ever changing anything for the better.

Or maybe several hundred million individual Americans are each bad, lazy people. That sounds more likely.

It is the duty of Americans to vote for good congressmen to represent the whole Republic. We need to hold them accountable. Failing to do that relinquishes our right to complain about the things they are doing.

Everything else you are saying is retarded dogma wrapped in utter brainrot.

Optical media is unmatched for archival purposes. I have photos, videos, and documents I'd be devastated to lose. I simply cannot trust magnetic or solid-state storage over the long term.

Luckily blurays are still somewhat cheap in Japan so I stock up when I visit. Stored properly they should outlive me.

If you care about your data, you need to have a regular process where you check the copies and remake them from time to time.

Hopefully some of the copies live on after your death. Optical does well, but I've seen reasonably treated cd-rs degrade, and well treated pressed cds decay. Sometimes some mistake in production takes years to become apparent, but results in a fixed lifetime below the estimates.

I have so many CDs/DVDs that cannot be read anymore that I stopped using them for backups.

Blu rays are meant to be like the old M-Discs and they should last ages. I've been burning my archives to BDXL discs for years and never had any issues reading them back.

Thanks for the suggestion, I actually might invest in a new BDXL-capable burner.

Regular optical media can suffer corrosion of the aluminium reflector layer, and breakdown of the dye. Sure, they do make archival grade discs (e.g. with a gold layer) but they're expensive.

There are drugs like metformin which appear to have a drastic affect on lifespan in patients with or without diabetes.

But yes generally, premature death seems to come from bad lifestyle choices over a lifetime, so being proactive is gonna yield the greatest return.

I take Metformin and don't have diabetes, but don't think there's much of a chance of significant benefits. Would expect diabetics etc to have noticably higher healthapans offset by the diabetes symptoms. It's been a heavily-taken drug for decades...

Metformin is a prescribed drug, so how do you obtain a prescription if you're an otherwise healthy person (i.e., someone w/o diabetes)?

Not the parent, but I take it by going to any pharmacy in Ukraine and asking for it. Prescription not required. In my case it’s part of a treatment protocol for insulin resistance but the pharmacist doesn’t ask and I don’t tell them.

When I lived in Georgia it was also that easy.

It's also not a prescribed drug everywhere. Some countries do let people make medical choices on your own without needing to have your hands held by some legal gatekeeping for even minorly risky drugs.

Know a doctor.

Isn't there some liability there?