66 karma · joined February 24, 2014
Norway has a rigorous involuntary admittance into mental asylums; US has at most strictest, 3-day VOLUNTARY admittance.
It is arguable that US mental asylums were dismantled by US Mental Health Systems Act of 1980.
In 1980 to 1993, Feds have shriveled up the states’ funds earmarked for fixed mental facilities and dedicated psychiatric hospitals of which took decades to recover in some form of private-funded psychiatry hospitals but still in no way covering all the US needs required for such care due to its “voluntary”-only approach and perhaps the lack of personal funding needed for its own mental health.
So, could that be the small price that US citizens pay for allowing freedom for some “insane” of their citizens just to roam ... freely and with unchecked access to firearms?
== Reference: ==
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_Health_Systems_Act_of_1...
- https://ijmhs.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13033-018-...
- https://www.reddit.com/r/Norway/comments/17tq0i/how_are_the_...
- https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210121/Researcher-explor...
Nothing to do with density, although there are numerous county and local laws on density zoning (which is not Prop 13)
Of course, it has been 1973 when this happened and I think only twice has the state government tried to changed it by “stealthily titled” proposition and failed.
So glad that solar manufacturing has stopped, at least in California; but the environmental damage has probably been done across the country.
I’d like to think that antibody test would be the one to use as it can determine whether or not a person has ever contracted COVID. Plus antibody has lower false positive and lower false negative than PCR.
Just a bit unclear as to why one would make a statistical case using short-ranged (short-insight) PCR that could have missed the ones who have already had been infected but recovered and then go on to get reinfected (whitepaper’s missed data points).
Oh wait, a case of FREE (short-insight) PCR tests provided by Dutch government. Never mind.
Furthermore, the process ID is not yet identified at early inbound stage of EBPD. We would be talking about being past the pre-inbound stage, post-table-lookup stage, and specifically just during the input-to-user land stage.
Hence, OpenRC enters the picture instead just to ensure that network port is not being used.
Also, premise of the DEFAULT-DENY firewall modeling is to pinhole open the port(s) on a per-process (or per-parent-process group) basis.
— The said feature is critical to proper DEFAULT-DENY firewall configuration/modeling.
It was a lone tree on a hillside for miles around.
Those nuts too are still being harvest for biogenetic rework.