What an ignorant post. How exactly does "laying down the taco" help Scott Hanselman and the other million of US citizens who suffer from Type 1 diabetes?
Even if it doesn't, there's a lot more profit in advertising than insulin. The economy would probably function better if diabetes patients were left untreated and die, since the cost saving estimates are quite enormous.
> today’s diabetes patients are tomorrows alzheimer patients
... possibly. Or they could be tomorrow's cancer patients, or tomorrow's stroke patients, or tomorrow's jack-knifed tractor trailer across three lanes of traffic patients. All those can happen to people without diabetes, too, though; it's part of living.
Obesity and Type 1 diabetes aren't related...I think @raganwald was thinking about Type 2. For the record, I am not obese, nor are most Type 1 diabetes.
For those with Type 2, yes, exercise and eating right largely solves that (totally different) issue.
There are multiple types of diabetes, one of them being type 1. "The exact cause of type 1 diabetes is unknown. Most likely it is an autoimmune disorder. An infection or some other trigger causes the body to mistakenly attack the cells in the pancreas that make insulin. This kind of disorder can be passed down through families." [1] So how could taco and exercise cure this type of diabetes?
That's like saying "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." even though death by speeding bullet is more prevalent where guns are legal. Guns and cameras should be used only where a credible strategical benefit exists. Right now, they're often part of a scare tactic and thus oppresses the people confronted by them. One has to ask whether their output is relevant at all before questioning the usage of said output.
So I think you are suggesting imposing a ban on cameras like here in UK bans guns. That is one approach and maybe effective however I feel that there are public good to be derived from surveillance tech, that if the govt has cameras to enable those benefits we still need to manage that and the difficulties of enforcing such a ban for civilian usesuggest to me that mitigating the
existence of cameras through open access is simplest approach
I wasn't even suggesting guns should be banned everywhere (although they should), let alone cameras. Open access doesn't mitigate the problem, it'd merely replaces one problem with another. Similarly, publicising requests for footage could be detrimental to law enforcement agencies who are trying to help protect fellow citizens.
Since crime will always exist and criminals will always one-up law enforcement, it's in our best interests to always use the least possible countermeasures. Time will tell when we've reached 1984, society seems to drift closer and closer — albeit, ever so slowly.
Postgres is developing a lot quicker then Firebird. Also, management and replication solutions for Postgres are far more advanced. But what matters most (for me) is documentation. I can find everything I need to know right here:
Actually it was Red Alert 1 with altered graphics and just a single new feature: technology overview screens. The graphics for the G.I.'s were exactly the same as in RA1.
