What Are You Doing Right Now? (976 Viewers)

[Dostoevsky]

Time to go out for a cup of :coffee: and do nothing but chill.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Ocelot]

So what you say is that he Republicans are like the AFD right?

Oh yeah, forgot about them

True, AFD fits probably best. Though it's still somewhat imperfect.

- - - Updated - - -

http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolution-2.html

Part of me believes that there are natural boundaries and limitations that we have not foreseen yet. The way that people in the 1890s were panicking about what cities were going to do with all the exponentially growing mounds of horse poop with the explosion of horse ownership in the city streets. But you never can tell.

Amazing article.

And agree with your last part, it's always extremely uncertain to make any predictions about the future seeing as there are most probably a huge number of events, trends, natural laws or limits, etc, etc. that we just cannot know about. If you go back in history, the vast majority even of great thinkers were simply wrong with their predictions due to future developments they just couldn't have foreseen. Malthus or Marx are probably the most well-known examples, but by far not the only ones.

On the other hand of course, saying that for this reason every prediction about the future is wrong would be just as fatal, and even due to the same logical fallacy of thinking that to predict the future an intricate look at the past is enough.

 

[swag]

That's a false analogy, Greg. The latter was not changed by a boundary, but in fact by the complete opposite.

It's not the best analogy (it's what I had at hand), but it still applies: people projecting exponential growth from what knowledge they have in the present, unaware that future circumstances will disrupt that exponential growth curve.

But my analogy involves poop, so that in turn makes it the best evah.

Amazing article.

And agree with your last part, it's always extremely uncertain to make any predictions about the future seeing as there are most probably a huge number of events, trends, natural laws or limits, etc, etc. that we just cannot know about. If you go back in history, the vast majority even of great thinkers were simply wrong with their predictions due to future developments they just couldn't have foreseen. Malthus or Marx are probably the most well-known examples, but by far not the only ones.

On the other hand of course, saying that for this reason every prediction about the future is wrong would be just as fatal, and even due to the same logical fallacy of thinking that to predict the future an intricate look at the past is enough.

I love that guy (Tim Urban). He understands science at a deep level, but has a great way of communicating it to the general public that is also pretty funny. For example, here's a great take of his on teenagers which is pretty damn funny:

http://waitbutwhy.com/2014/12/the-teen-years-9-cringe-inducing-realizations.html

 

[ALC]

It's definitely white and gold, the top part of the dress makes it impossible for me to see it any other way. The only time I can see it as black and blue is if I only look at the bottom half of the dress.

Now that I saw the black and blue, I can't believe how wrong and convinced I was about it being white and gold

 

[Ocelot]

It's not the best analogy (it's what I had at hand), but it still applies: people projecting exponential growth from what knowledge they have in the present, unaware that future circumstances will disrupt that exponential growth curve.

Exactly my point.

 

[Enron]

Time to go out for a cup of :coffee: and do nothing but chill.

I'm jealous. Stuck in the office downloading socioeconomic statistics and their metadata. Then I have public meeting tonight.

 

[Seven]

It's not the best analogy (it's what I had at hand), but it still applies: people projecting exponential growth from what knowledge they have in the present, unaware that future circumstances will disrupt that exponential growth curve.

That is very true.

 

[swag]

True. But it changes what poverty means. Also, the number of people who can't eat has been drastically reduced. And if the price of healthcare becomes practically nothing, it will be universal sooner rather than later.

With healthcare you raise an interesting point. We all know that universal healthcare is not possible with the technology we have now (In a sense we need to effectively cure aging to be able to make healthcare affordable). And even if it was, we wouldn't invest it in the poor. The only way we will ever be able to afford universal healthcare is to make it dirt cheap.

And if there's one fatal flaw in the American healthcare system, it's that there is no incentive for "cheap". Every medical institution has incentive to boast the latest MRI technology -- of which only a handful have yet been newly produced at a ridiculous production and design expense, which gets passed on to patients. Nobody is incentivized to make the cheap-and-reliable MRI that every major medical center might have that has 90% of what you need for a tenth of the cost of the cutting edge.

Part of that has to do with how these medical institutions are paid. Health insurance decides what to pay them as a third party, so there isn't a direct incentive for medical institutions to offer the best care at a most reasonable -- and competitive -- price.

My wife, who has worked in health care for 20 years, has put it this way: the problem with health care in America is that we have too much of it.

 

[Seven]

And if there's one fatal flaw in the American healthcare system, it's that there is no incentive for "cheap". Every medical institution has incentive to boast the latest MRI technology -- of which only a handful have yet been newly produced at a ridiculous production and design expense, which gets passed on to patients. Nobody is incentivized to make the cheap-and-reliable MRI that every major medical center might have that has 90% of what you need for a tenth of the cost of the cutting edge.

My wife, who has worked in health care for 20 years, has put it this way: the problem with health care in America is that we have too much of it.

Not just America. The same happens in Belgium too. Part of the reason why are also the doctors. If you get paid for putting a patient under a scanner, why not put a 90 year old who is certain of dying within days under the scanner to get an extra paycheck?

 

[swag]

Ironically, I think things like medical tourism to Cuba will actually help the system. Suddenly instead of third party payers deciding expenses, you will have direct competition between healthcare providers in places like Florida and Cuba. And if the American care-per-unit-cost starts hitting the pocketbooks of patients and health system administrators, suddenly you'll have something that more closely resembles the more capitalistic forces that rule most every other aspect of the national economy.

 

[DAiDEViL]

Take a look over to Germany if you wanna
know how a proper Healthcare system works.

EVERYONE has to have an insurance,
EVERYONE pays for it.
= its getting cheaper.

Obama couldn't have installed a system like
that, cause sadly in the USA the People
Seem to not understand that.

They dont want to "pay for someone else"
They say and dont get it that it would help everyone,
The same goes for Taxes.

 

[TrezJuve]

I wouldn't say ours is perfect, but socialized health care is the way to go (combined with a private system).

 

[GordoDeCentral]

I would disagree. Look a Brazil and Mexico for example. The middle classes are gaining "more wealth" and the rich are definitely benefiting from the economic booms, but the poor are largely staying that way. There's really little to no upward movement in the developing world.

even if we are to assume what you say is true, you are ignoring class mobility. Theres no way you can find data that supports what you present especially for the countries you picked.

 

[swag]

Take a look over to Germany if you wanna
know how a proper Healthcare system works.

EVERYONE has to have an insurance,
EVERYONE pays for it.
= its getting cheaper.

Obama couldn't have installed a system like
that, cause sadly in the USA the People
Seem to not understand that.

Yes. The only real cost controls that exist in the U.S. health care system is individual bankruptcy.

I wish I were kidding.

People here are like EPL fans when it comes to their healthcare: their heads are so up their asses in thinking they have the best system in the world, they are blind to how f'ed up it is. And for all the cries of "socialism", the U.S. health care system is the most anti-capitalist system in the nation.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

Yes. The only real cost controls that exist in the U.S. health care system is individual bankruptcy.

I wish I were kidding.

we can always deregulate the market completely, why does a person need a govt cert to tell me what meds to take? my mom does a lot of that and she aint no doctor

 

[AFL_ITALIA]

Leonard Nimoy died.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/27/a...nimoy-spock-of-star-trek-dies-at-83.html?_r=0

 

[DAiDEViL]

The U.S. health care system is the most anti-capitalist system in the nation.

 

[TrezJuve]

People here are like EPL fans when it comes to their healthcare: their heads are so up their asses in thinking they have the best system in the world, they are blind to how f'ed up it is. And for all the cries of "socialism", the U.S. health care system is the most anti-capitalist system in the nation.

It's more about whose sucks less. And your health care system is fucked.

 

[DAiDEViL]

It's more about whose sucks less. And your health care system is fucked.

Well said

 

[Martin]

we can always deregulate the market completely, why does a person need a govt cert to tell me what meds to take? my mom does a lot of that and she aint no doctor

you sure have a lot of anecdotes, don't you