It shows the U.S. spending 2.4x that of Europe on pharma expenditure as a % of GDP, and 3.2x that of Europe on government R&D health budgets as a % of GDP.
60 Billion a year (if I've read you charts correctly) is a drop in the bucket of US annual medical spending (4 Trillion/year.)
You could pick the next most expensive country's plan, triple US R&D expenditures, and still spend way less. The GP's point about it not being outsized is correct.
You're attempting to introduce a tangential point to cloud the issue, a typical Red Herring fallacy. Bowyakka was 100% incorrect. It is indisputable that U.S. medical R&D spending makes European spending appear insignificant.
Is it not a bit of a paradox that said embedded platforms matter enormously right up to, but not including the point of having toolchains ported to them and maintained? And yes while gcc can be built to produce binaries for an alpha it's not producing any bugs right?
The interests of people writing new language toolchains sadly does not seem to extend to supporting older platforms. This doesn't mean that they are not important, it just means that that they are not important to the people writing the new language toolchains.
I will often watch movies with them one, it might be that I grew up with them as my father is deaf; but I find they give me more information than speech alone.
Me too, captions and subtitles allow me to watch videos while listening to music, or watch videos in public settings where I either didn't bring headphones or don't want to wear headphones, and allow me to watch 2 videos at the same time in which both of them are filled with 80% fluff and 20% content, as they usually are.
I've been in hospital recently after suffering a large oil burn to my left arm, and part of my chest. As most of us probably know, wards get very noisy. I only ever used my cochlear implant processor when I'd see the team of doctors first thing in the morning, otherwise I'd just chill and watch my laptop with captions on.
Absolutely shocked me every time I'd turn my processor on and the world would roar into my ears. "How the fuck is anyone sleeping" I'd ask myself.
I would love it if Sweden was right and tackled this in a way that does look like a seasonal flu, but I think the science is still out on that. It does seem the science points mildly towards it being quite as deadly as initially thought, but I would not the Swedish death rate a total win.
<snark>
Forget all that Sweden is the best approach, we should copy it in America especially the very solid social health care system :)
</snark>
* It was solved at a greater expense of human life, its easy to say "those people would have died" but that is harder to prove ethically. Could the excess deaths have lived on _longer than a flu season_?
* Is there a good argument that it is in fact over in Sweden?
* Are there other variables that might have made Covid-19 not so bad in Sweden?
If I was to take more direct counters to the article:
> I am willing to bet that the countries that have shut down completely will see rates spike when they open up. If that is the case, then there won’t have been any point in shutting down in the first place, because all those countries are going to end up with the same number of dead at the end of the day anyway.
Maybe, but that could also be a case of thinking that the death rate is a fairly simple linear model, which would fly in the face of the various epidemiological models that we use (not just for covid but since the 1920s)
> No, because influenza has been around for centuries while covid is completely new. In an average influenza year most people already have some level of immunity because they’ve been infected with a similar strain previously, or because they’re vaccinated.
Is Covid-19 completely new? By this reasoning it would as stated be more infectious due to a lack of known immunity. With this line of reasoning why wouldn't a _different_ cornovirus also give a more uniform immunity? Why would a novel Cornovirus strain have a greater impact over a novel Influenza strain?
I could go one but I feel like I am sniping.
Personally I dont think the world wide response has been great, I do think we have overreacted but I also would argue that its not just another influenza and should be ignored as such.
Plus, just because some policy works for some country (for some specific time period) it doesn't mean it will work for another. There are way too many differences in factors that affect virus propagation for the same policy to be effective in most other places, healthcare being, like you mentioned, just one of them.
> Is your reasonably small bank known for its reliability and fault tolerance? The main reason banks don't go offline is because the core critical infrastructure is running on 50 year old mainframes that no one is allowed to touch because all of the greybeards with actual talent who made them are pushing up daisies.
> Nowhere did I say you should be on one incredibly large server, nor that you should have a single point of failure. That wouldn't be simple, either, because it would fail to support the prime directive, or would require a great deal of gymnastics to. It's about balance. You don't need thousands of servers to make a reliable system.
Heh those things go offline every night for 2 hour maintenance.
Also fun when those nice single points of failure crash (they do)
Source: work at a shop trying to _get out of_ greybeard mainframe to get more reliablity
Most banks have a window of a couple of hours per night where access to the core system is restricted for settlement. It's kind of a necessity of the business model. However most banks (including every bank I've ever worked at, which is quite a few), don't shut down services during that time. ATM, credit and debit cards, everything else... All those systems run all the time. They just have an eventual consistency model. The compromise that the banks tend to make, is that certain types of fraud are more tolerated during that window, rather than sacrificing availability.
On the continum of relational algebra to logic programming catalog is somewhere in the middle.
It is better at handling recursive queries, and logical inference than SQL. On the flip side SQL can be better at more set style operations (for instance windowing functions are painful in datalog).
It is different tooling, essentially it comes down to do you want to extract answers from your data with varying relational algebra but holding the logic the same (SQL), or keeping the relational algebra the same but varying the logic (datalog).
https://data.oecd.org/rd/gross-domestic-spending-on-r-d.htm