Again, having spent time at a school with a powerful computer security school, you should be MUCH more worried about worms such as Conficker as they can deliver a worse payload than an EMP bomb without needing to spend millions on a weapons program--AND you do NOT know when the payload hits. This past year virtually all SCADA networks (Command and control systems for US power plants) were cleaned of malware of Chinese origin. You don't need rockets or bombs to cripple U.S. infrastructure, you just need smart kids with internet access. Countries do NOT need EMP to do what you're worried about. That's why China and Russia are so heavily invested in computer science programs.
> 
> Very interesting point of view. I thought we could protect computers with firewalls, etc; but one primative small atom bomb exploded at 200 miles over the center of the country will wipe out the electronic controls and communication covering the entire country.-No. Firewalls are far from secure. Built into your ethernet card is something called a MAC address. The table that stores that unique value is updated once and once only--when the computer boots it. Getting your MAC address only requires a day of patience, a deep packet sniffer such as Wireshark to sniff your MAC address from a network packet. Spoofing a legit MAC address on a network can also be done by freely downloadable tools such as Cain and Abel or BT3, sometimes by 1 or 2 clicks. The only safe computer is one that is not connected to the internet at all, preferably with the switch firmly in the "off" position. -A bomb such as what you're talking about would require my buddies over here at Stratcom to be snoozing at the switch. We can track a hand-size object in space. Are you familiar with what happened during Russia's invasion of Georgia last year? They were knocked off the internet. Conficker presently controls a botnet of 5M computers--more computing power than any supercomputer in existence, and its being actively manipulated by absolute professionals. You could take the entire US off the internet with that--the backbones are all private and exercise varying levels of security. It'll also take ten years to get all SCADAs on the internet off the internet. And as I said before, it's much cheaper to knock out targets with software than with a bomb. You're worrying about the wrong thing at the moment.

Again, having spent time at a school with a powerful computer security school, you should be MUCH more worried about worms such as Conficker as they can deliver a worse payload than an EMP bomb without needing to spend millions on a weapons program--AND you do NOT know when the payload hits. This past year virtually all SCADA networks (Command and control systems for US power plants) were cleaned of malware of Chinese origin. You don't need rockets or bombs to cripple U.S. infrastructure, you just need smart kids with internet access. Countries do NOT need EMP to do what you're worried about. That's why China and Russia are so heavily invested in computer science programs.-Very interesting point of view. I thought we could protect computers with firewalls, etc; but one primative small atom bomb exploded at 200 miles over the center of the country will wipe out the electronic controls and communication covering the entire country.


> > AFAIK an EMP is the initial electron burst from a nuclear weapon that precedes the fireball and isn't a solitary weapon because of the amount of energy required. 
> 
> The orginal problem at, I believe, the Johnson Island test, was the effect on Hawaii elecronics. But recalculation of the original test has shown that a small relatively primative bomb detonated at 200 miles altitude carried by a relatively small missile to that altitude will electronically paralyze this country if exploded over, let's say, Kansas or Iowa. Nothing bigger is needed. And we are playing with N. Korea and Iran? Currently there is a special commission reporting to Congress. Note that I said strength with a velvet glove. I know how a democracy is properly in action.-Historically democracies have foreign policies quite a bit like tyrannies, when you compare decisions made, ourselves included. -Again, having spent time at a school with a powerful computer security school, you should be MUCH more worried about worms such as Conficker as they can deliver a worse payload than an EMP bomb without needing to spend millions on a weapons program--AND you do NOT know when the payload hits. This past year virtually all SCADA networks (Command and control systems for US power plants) were cleaned of malware of Chinese origin. You don't need rockets or bombs to cripple U.S. infrastructure, you just need smart kids with internet access. Countries do NOT need EMP to do what you're worried about. That's why China and Russia are so heavily invested in computer science programs.


> AFAIK an EMP is the initial electron burst from a nuclear weapon that precedes the fireball and isn't a solitary weapon because of the amount of energy required. -The orginal problem at, I believe, the Johnson Island test, was the effect on Hawaii elecronics. But recalculation of the original test has shown that a small relatively primative bomb detonated at 200 miles altitude carried by a relatively small missile to that altitude will electronically paralyze this country if exploded over, let's say, Kansas or Iowa. Nothing bigger is needed. And we are playing with N. Korea and Iran? Currently there is a special commission reporting to Congress. Note that I said strength with a velvet glove. I know how a democracy is properly in action.


> > Okay, I was asking because I wouldn't mind asking about our returning soldier issue. My wife has a friend that did come back from Iraq with anger-issues related to PTSD. She was however told that she wasn't a priority because she wasn't suicidal and would have to wait about 6 months before she could see a therapist. Of course, she could lie and say "I'm suicidal," but as you're aware, that becomes permanent medical history. How on earth can this be seen as serving our people properly?
> 
> It's an anecdotal story, but typical of what I have heard. The attitude of the current elites in Washington is hideous re' their attitude about the armed forces. The Clintons were almost as bad as the current group. There is safety in strength, but handled with a velvet glove. When do you think the electromagnetic pulse bomb (EMP)will be attempted on this country? What are they waiting for? Better health care? - AFAIK an EMP is the initial electron burst from a nuclear weapon that precedes the fireball and isn't a solitary weapon because of the amount of energy required. Unless that was your point. We'll probably disagree politically here as I'm of the view that a democracy necessarily fights with one hand tied behind its back. I firmly believe in no wars without direct provocation, or to aid an ally who has suffered the same. - Even besides that, if you are suggesting being bellicose with emerging nuclear states, exactly how many individual wars do you think we're capable of fighting? I'd be more concerned with Conficker and its insidious implications.


> Okay, I was asking because I wouldn't mind asking about our returning soldier issue. My wife has a friend that did come back from Iraq with anger-issues related to PTSD. She was however told that she wasn't a priority because she wasn't suicidal and would have to wait about 6 months before she could see a therapist. Of course, she could lie and say "I'm suicidal," but as you're aware, that becomes permanent medical history. How on earth can this be seen as serving our people properly? - It's an anecdotal story, but typical of what I have heard. The attitude of the current elites in Washington is hideous re' their attitude about the armed forces. The Clintons were almost as bad as the current group. There is safety in strength, but handled with a velvet glove. When do you think the electromagnetic pulse bomb (EMP)will be attempted on this country? What are they waiting for? Better health care?

Did you mean that post for me or George... you replied to my post but addressed it as George?
> 
> The post was for George. The easiest thing for me to do since George asked me to comment on US health care politics, etc. was to use your answer post to key off and expand from my perspective. The first quote I left was his sentence that you took off from. I think cross conversations are ok. I've just jumped into his discussion with dhw, and he responded. I think your view of US medicine and mine are pretty consistent.
> 
> I'd have made everything more clear if I had credited the quotes with your name - Okay, I was asking because I wouldn't mind asking about our returning soldier issue. My wife has a friend that did come back from Iraq with anger-issues related to PTSD. She was however told that she wasn't a priority because she wasn't suicidal and would have to wait about 6 months before she could see a therapist. Of course, she could lie and say "I'm suicidal," but as you're aware, that becomes permanent medical history. How on earth can this be seen as serving our people properly?

Did you mean that post for me or George... you replied to my post but addressed it as George? - The post was for George. The easiest thing for me to do since George asked me to comment on US health care politics, etc. was to use your answer post to key off and expand from my perspective. The first quote I left was his sentence that you took off from. I think cross conversations are ok. I've just jumped into his discussion with dhw, and he responded. I think your view of US medicine and mine are pretty consistent. - I'd have made everything more clear if I had credited the quotes with your name

I don't really know enough about the US health system to know whether what you say is correct. There does seem to be a lot of propaganda about. What little experience I've had of the British system has been favourable, except for inefficient individual GPs. The waiting list problem was an issue a few years ago, but now there is a rapid through-put. The current news controversy here is about nurses becoming too highly trained and losing the caring ethos. - I'm already seeing some of that. The nursing shortage is predicted to hit 1.4M nurses by 2012, meaning the bar is going to have to be lowered to fill the gap--or we're going to have to get creative with recruiting. Last year at this time my hospital posted 81 nursing positions. (We're on a hiring freeze right now.)

Any comments? - Did you mean that post for me or George... you replied to my post but addressed it as George?

The situation in the US in which millions of people who cannot afford insurance just have to hope never to fall ill seems awful. - George, you are reading political propaganda. The so-called 47 million without insurance is made up of 8-12 million illegal aliens, about 10 million between jobs, and about 10 million young folks who feel they don't need insurance but can afford it. That leaves an accepted figure of 14-16 million who should be covered by insurance, but as Matt notes below, they are covered by law. The 10 million between jobs is a gap in our nutty health insurance history. After WWII this country had a huge boom. To entice workers employers offered hedalth insurance as a benefit and the Congress allowed it as a business tax deduction. As a result much of our health insurance is from the employer, and the employee has no reason to ration his health desires; he feels he is not paying. That is why HMO's have co-pays and other methods to try and draw attention to costs. - One solution for the between-employment is to mandate portability of coverage. An other is to remove employers entirely from the mix and allow employees to have their health money as part of their salaries and as a group choose their company coveraage. This is what our federal employees do, and studies show they have better and yet cheaper coverage. By the way, our government does supply 40% of health care in this country through various coverage like medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP, a children's program. - 
 
> Having worked in a hospital for nearly 5 years I can give you a bit of perspective on the current system. Anyone who walks in must be treated--by law. There is no escaping this. - 
> Really, the only debate is on the cost of health services, which has risen much faster than inflation over the last 30 years. The no-insurance fear propagated by US media (and our president) is irrational. - I've covered this above. - 
> Many variables go into the rising health costs, first and foremost is malpractice insurance. - Another variable is the cost of medical research, and for the world we are the leaders. Further it is our pharmaceutical companies that develop most of the new drugs for the world. You fellows benefit at our cost, and our patients who can afford it pay. - Another consideration is our national psyche. This is a very capitalistic, competative society. It is impatient and demands instant gratification. We are appalled at the queues you folks tolerate. If in this country note the number of check-out counters in a large store. there is no questioning the rationing that goes on in Britain or Canada. A research paper I read indicates the French system is better, but I only know what I read as you do. If there is no important rationing in Britain then why do you have an allowed private practice? Is it only for the rich? All polls show that most people in this country are satisfied with the coverage, about 65%. - 
> But if you watch our veteran's health system--those citizens that deserve the best--they get treated like shit and a government-run system would likely end up that way here for all citizens. No sane man wants that. - I worked part-time in the VA teaching, early on in my practice. I spent two forced years in the Army Medical Corps as head of Internal Medicine in a large base hospital. I enjoyed my time and was very patient-oriented. Of the 19 two-year, fresh-from-training doctors (not regular Army), only three of us had that attitude. Private practicioners have a profit motive, and must please their patients or lose them. 8-5 hired doctors have a fixed salary and tend to be 8-5 factory workers. That is why Army medicine and VA medicine are like they are in this country. Perhaps Europeans are different. - Any comments?

I would link it to my earlier question, which I will now modify: why do some people care about their fellow creatures, even sometimes acting against self-interest, while others don't? - > again if it is not intuitive to everyone, it can't be integral to our humanity. And there are plenty of cases where even people from the same family have different moral attitudes, so it's not just a question of upbringing either. - 
Think about this. Either we are designed or we are the result of contingent chances. In either case evil appeared. On one side we can blame God, and study theodicy, looking for excuses; on the other side evolution brought the evil. So why are the newly arrived neo-atheists saying we must blame religion for most of the evil in the world, as one religion fights with another. If evil is here either way, it is due to freedom of choice, and some folks feel free and unconstrained and are evil and perform evil events. We can blame religion or evolution equally.

You don't have errant thoughts that break in and intrude when you are thinking about something else? When you sleep and you dream, you control that as well? You make some strong claims here. Lucid dreaming is of course possible, but not for most. - I admit that I do lots of weird dreaming, and I can identifiy some that come from a troubling undercurrect. My first wife died of an incurable cancer. She and I were quite young for this to happen. I decided to live my life after she was gone, actively. I did just that, remarrying. The dreams were of the first wife, still alive, but sick and I abandoned her. They lasted 4-5 years, on and off, and disappeared. Perfectly understandable, especially since my adult kids were bugging me. I did not control the dreams, but as I came to peace with MY decisions, they left. Did thoughts about my first wife pop up? Of course. I still occasionally call my wife by my first wife's name. Just my subconscious at work. - Lucid dreaming? No I can't but Richard Feynman could recognize his dreams and direct them. The fact that dreams can be controlled by some people dilutes your argument about free will. - 
> The fact that thoughts come unwilled definitely suggest that free will isn't absolute. It's an observation that's long mystified me. - My wife tells me that her brain is constantly going. She is a brilliant lady, very organized, very research oriented: She has a huge loose-leaf book on how we should improve and add to our horse pastures in our forest. I'm just the opposite. I do organize stuff in folders, but as I wrote each of my two books, the outlines for each chapter were in my head, and I had to search for the reference material in a folder when I needed to quote. I'm simply saying that each individual brain works as the individual developed it. Brains are plastic. Part of my IQ is that I was an only child with a brilliant Mother at home until age 4. My brother arrived, but he did not command her attention until I was 9, and he began to upset her. My brain wanders around as we all do, but I don't find myself in a chattering of different ideas and thoughts. I can stay very focused and concentrated, so much so, at this age (80) I can lose my reading glasses very easily. 
 
> Then take myself. When I was 16 I wanted to be a computer programmer. I thought I couldn't do the math. I tried to avoid it and now I'm where I should have been at 14 years ago... what role to you does the subconscious play, if you're so certain of free will? - Here you are talking about ego-defense mechanisms. We all have them. At age 14 lots of fears and doubts, and a frontal lobe that is not prepared for absolute decision making and security in one's decisions. I've had a background in psychology, psychiatry, etc. in my training for medicine. I read books on Transactional Analysis, an approach I favor. If you don't know this approach to therapy, Google it. We are all Parent, Adult, Child. We all play games. I've used this approach in practice, and now, everyday life. I still surprise my wife with my analysis of problem people we know. Helps me handle them better. - In summary: My brain is MY brain. I've made my conscious personality. My subconscious still harbors some ego-defense mechanisms. I know most of them. And my unconscious is not as bothersome as it was years ago. But I created it as I grew my personality. There is no outside force that makes unwanted supernatural intrusions. My reactions to people and events creates intrusions. We have free will, and we are free to change ego defense mechanisms that get in our way. I could not have counselled patients into better health if that were not so.

To me, free will would have to be *instantaneous.* We perceive it as instant, but it isn't. A delay of 1.0s for the distances the electrical pulse has to travel is akin to being able to freeze light in place. So either thought doesn't actually move at light speed, or there's processing going on that we're unaware of. These unconscious properties are obviously *part of* free will or they wouldn't be invoked in the first place. Free will requires consciousness, if part of free will is unconscious than we only have qualified free will. 
> 
> 
> I don't know how you define 'free will' at this point of our discussion. My brain is mine. My subconscious, unconscious and consciousness are all mine. There is no other power that can intrude and run my thoughts. I developed my subconscious and unconscious, no other power did. I may believe there is a universal consciousness, but I alone control all levels of my brain. 
> - Really. You control your thinking at all times? You don't have errant thoughts that break in and intrude when you are thinking about something else? When you sleep and you dream, you control that as well? You make some strong claims here. Lucid dreaming is of course possible, but not for most. - > I decide to start a car. I turn the key, put pressure on the pedal and the engine turns over. It takes a little time. I know there is a gap of 0.2-0.5 seconds when I start an activity. I don't think it is any different and I've now (Google) seen discussions that agree with me. You philosopher guys get all screwed up with too much thinking. - Heh. I like that last part. I think you're still thinking too black and white here. Yes you can do all of these things. But While you're driving, random, unwilled thoughts cross your mind. You may dismiss them, but that's not what I'm driving at. The fact that thoughts come unwilled definitely suggest that free will isn't absolute. It's an observation that's long mystified me. - Then take myself. When I was 16 I wanted to be a computer programmer. I thought I couldn't do the math. I tried to avoid it and now I'm where I should have been at 14 years ago... what role to you does the subconscious play, if you're so certain of free will?

And now you know why I favor kings over democracy--everyone in my generation and in the one just before me feels entitled to health care. They don't see it as a privelege--and it IS a privelege. Someone always pays the doctor *somehow.* In a democracy--even in ours--if the plebs want something they can vote it for themselves. 
> Every great empire falls. - You are simply describing the fall of Athens as a democracy. It took less than 100 years to deplete the treasury. We are sure on the way.