Your first example is not non-deterministic, it's probabilistic. Drawing a sample from a truly random distribution doesn't make the program non-deterministic.
Non-determinism comes from transitions which have no known distribution and might cause your program to take alternate execution paths without any predefined rule. That's clearly not true in your example.
I think you're splitting hairs here. Not sure what definition or context of determinism you are using, but in most scientific fields not only is probability the de-facto example of non-determinism, but in fact the words are often used interchangeably.
By definition, if your outcome is a random draw from a probability distribution (known or unknown), you cannot guarantee the outcome in a deterministic manner; you can only guarantee that in the limit, a large number of random draws will follow that distribution (known or unknown). But that's not what one would typically call determinism.
I don't think that link contracts anything. It just says that probability is a subset of ND but not vice versa. Which is true. But this is not the same as saying probability is not ND. Maybe I'm missing something...
Nice. I like the idea of splitting trust so that the clients IP + browsing data are not linked unless the two servers collude. This feels very similar in spirit to VPN cascading though?
- the Affordable Care Act subsidizes American health insurance with tax payer funds by covering much of the cost of insurance
- Health insurance companies are required by law to spend 85% of that revenue on healthcare
- Health insurance companies, logically, acquire providers. Thus, the 85% of their spending on healthcare is just funneled into the other companies that they own
The system is currently the worst of both worlds. We have tax payer funds going straight to for-profit entities which have become vertically integrated throughout every aspect of the American healthcare system.
Within the context of the current system it’s still better than being denied insurance due to pre-existing conditions.
What the author ignores re: the shooting is that United Healthcare is particularly bad compared to other insurance companies. I’ve had multiple instances of them denying a first choice drug without explanation despite doctor’s write ups. Doctors are always on the edge and saying things like “if the insurance approves.”
What is the point of going to medical school/residency/fellowship/etc if at the end of the day the insurance is making medical decisions?
From the blog:
> If insurers were so good at extracting money from the system, why are they so unprofitable?
Maybe their unprofitability is driving them to find new ways to extract money?
For healthcare I don’t understand the need for profit except for the researchers and companies who directly had a role in discovering and manufacturing the product (and funding trials).
Why do we even need insurance companies if we actually trusted doctors to make the right decisions?
I am all for eliminating mortgage interest rate deductions. It primarily benefits upper-middle class homeowners. They borrow money from a bank and somehow get a tax break for it? Yet, even a wealthy person that pays cash for their home doesn't enjoy that benefit?
I think the idea is to encourage people to invest in non-liquid assets, in order for them to save rather than to spend. Also if you own a house it makes you a shareholder in the town, which means what's good for the town is also good for you. This makes people of the town work together towards a common goal which is presumably a good thing.
Non-determinism comes from transitions which have no known distribution and might cause your program to take alternate execution paths without any predefined rule. That's clearly not true in your example.