81–90 of 170 posts
People often wonder what the point of tenure is. Well this is it. Those authors need to not back down, and call attention to this. If they're tenured researchers or professors, they should be able to make publications like this without fear or retaliation from the school or industry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Agree. Related thought: the influence of lawyers in tech firms - witness the draconian EULAs users are 'forced' to accept with a false binary choice of accept or not The comedy option is to print it out, cross out and initial each clause you disagree with, sign it, and mail it to them certified with a letter saying you agree under these terms please write back if they don't agree. This actually works with all contr…
Sounds like my kind of comedy jam! I also like the idea of the 'Nightmare Letters' such as this one for GDPR: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/nightmare-letter-subject-acce... Would be of interest to note how many users have submitted such requests/letters, since GDPR took effect in May of this year. If lawyers, and by extension, the management/C-level teams of software firms - who either direct, endorse or approve wha…
The case against regulation gets a lot stronger if it reliably spawns an army of trolls out for blood.
People often wonder what the point of tenure is. Well this is it. Those authors need to not back down, and call attention to this. If they're tenured researchers or professors, they should be able to make publications like this without fear or retaliation from the school or industry.
Very few physicians are tenured professors today. Many stay at the associate or assistant level.
What is the value that private equity and/or VC are adding to dermatology? I guess what I'm asking is, why would the physicians be interested in sharing some portion of their income with these non-physicians? Medicine, like other guild professions like law, dentistry, and accounting, is an enterprise which seems to naturally fit the partnership model instead.
The value add is an enthusiastic pursuit of profit. Ownership by a collection of doctors drives lower margins/profits than ownership by a private equity firm. Economies of scale can also help, but that’s not the driving reason behind PE acquisitions. There’s a degree of good faith/naïveté when medical providers and pharmacies bill insurance providers. PE firms can leverage this expectation and push for increased cost…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Rest... That woman burned the skin off her genatalia when McDonald's served a far too hot coffee. After they refused to pay a small amount to cure her injuries (remember, no socialized health care in USA), she sued. She offered to settle, again for a small amount to cover expenses, and McDonald's refused again McDonald's launched a massive PR campaign to mock he…
Nobody like to remember that folks went there because the coffee was extra hot. She didn't get burned because McD's served hot coffee - she'd been drinking that for years? She got burned because just as she took the top off to put in sugar, her grandson gunned the motor and spilled it. So who's 'fault' is all this? In law you can sue for money from anybody even remotely connected with an injury. So she chose McD's in…
Uh, it was McDonald's fault, as proven by the several legal battles this woman won. This continuous questioning of settled arguments is absurd. They served the woman boiling hot coffee - it's simply not drinkable or safe to handle at that temperature (and shouldn't even have been brewed over 180...)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In many other countries you can not fire someone by default (it's illegal) so calling it a powerful tool sounds wrong.
In what country can you not fire your own employees?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In many other countries you can not fire someone by default (it's illegal) so calling it a powerful tool sounds wrong.
In what country can you not fire your own employees?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not a deflector shield, but "Protects you from getting fired" is, itself, a powerful tool. Especially at public universities with potentially hostile legislatures/boards of regents.
In many other countries you can not fire someone by default (it's illegal) so calling it a powerful tool sounds wrong.
It's still a powerful tool in any country regardless if it's the default or not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody like to remember that folks went there because the coffee was extra hot. She didn't get burned because McD's served hot coffee - she'd been drinking that for years? She got burned because just as she took the top off to put in sugar, her grandson gunned the motor and spilled it. So who's 'fault' is all this? In law you can sue for money from anybody even remotely connected with an injury. So she chose McD's in…
> So who's 'fault' is all this? Uh, it was McDonald's fault, as proven by the several legal battles this woman won. This continuous questioning of settled arguments is absurd. They served the woman boiling hot coffee - it's simply not drinkable or safe to handle at that temperature (and shouldn't even have been brewed over 180...)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this legal arms race is a consequence of America's overly-litigious and profitable legal system. These EULAs are the equivalent of warning labels on soda bottles that loosely read "Warning: Contents under pressure, don't point at your eyes"... who is that written for? We laugh and call it unnecessary, but that warning exists because there is precedent that must now be defended against. When those ludicrous ca…
Do they actually write that on carbonated drinks in USA? That's brilliant.