Techdirt: China's Cheap Blu-Ray and HD-DVD Alternative You'll Never See: "High-def capable players at prices as low as $87 sure sounds tasty, but adoption elsewhere is unlikely, given the collective muscle of the companies backing the primary two next-gen DVD formats. Instead, you can look forward to paying Sony $1,000 for their latest DRM-soaked Blu-Ray player, and watching industry heavyweights and their respective fanboys pummel each other senseless."
Thursday, December 07, 2006
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Do They Get Their Money Back?
Recently, like a week ago, I heard on the radio that the FDA is going to lift their near 20 year ban on silicone-gel breast implants. Seems that in all that time nobody was ever really able to prove conclusively that anyone's getting sick was directly attributable to the prosthesis, and I assume not in a "shadow of doubt" way that you would have to prove it in court. It would seem likely that at this point even if there really was strong, but not conclusive evidence they would have left the ban in place.
I mean, you've already put them out of the boob business, so why take chances.
Interestingly, when many of these cases did go to court, both as individual and as class action suits it was in civil court. So there wasn't a "shadow of doubt" rule in place there either, but rather a preponderance of the evidence. I guess not so surprisingly many, many people managed to convince a jury that various illnesses were in fact directly attributable to the prosthesis.
So, my question is: now that the federal government is on record as saying that we must have been over-excited or something, can Dow have their money back?
Really, it seems that in a lot of cases where science is being weighed by a jury that we have made a tremendous mistake structurally. Having a panel of disinterested lay-people judge competing arguments about esoteric science is just stupid. First off, one would assume that in almost all cases there is a predisposition for the jury to give the suffering person the money regardless of the evidence. Second, there just isn't time to bring people without the specialized knowledge up to speed on some niche specialty. Something that probably requires post-graduate work to master, and in many cases I would wager something more than average high school competency to comprehend.
More than that though is that in the end it likely isn't about the science at all. It is a sales job. Whichever attorney or expert sells their theory better wins. There isn't a whole lot of room for "truth" between the competitive sales pitches. Don't even get me started about a case in which the truth is someplace in between the complainant and the respondent.
On top of the sales angle is the profit motive. The complaining attorneys need not care that they are right, they just really have to want to win. Experts need not actually have proof of what they are trying to sell, they just need a good pitch, and it is in their financial best interest to be effective, as an effective expert can expect future gigs. Nobody wants to hire someone who is right, but can't win.
Is it possible there should be a pretrial process for scientific issues which are going to be open to interpretation? Something the attorneys and judge participate in that includes recognized experts in the field and peer review. No experts hired by either side, but people there to speak for the truth, on the government dime, who are all irrefutable experts in the eyes of their peers. The scientific arguments would be made in this pretrial environment and then the judge would prepare an unbiased finding of fact which either side could decide to present to the jury or not. This way, there can still be litigation if the sides disagree, especially in the case where the actual scientific finding is murky. But at least we wouldn't be depending on the jury to arbitrate a scientific finding.
Something such as the jury's findings that silicone breast implants make people sick. Someone with a specialty would have to prove it, and I don't mean in a courtroom, I mean in a lab or a clinic.
I guess even the panel of experts could be wrong. Science sometimes blind alleys over what seems to be a good idea at the time. But at least in that case we would be able to have some confidence that they were supposed to be right in the first place. Looking back, I don't think anyone could make an argument that the jurors in the Dow cases carried any expectation with them that they would make the correct scientific conclusion. That we repeatedly put people in this position and repeatedly rely on these decisions to determine the fate of an individual or a company is embarrassing.
Though I don't think anyone that got the money at the time is embarrassed. The story I heard on the radio didn't include any interviews with complainants, attorneys, or experts from the winning side of the cases. Next slow news day someone at Frontline ought to look up those people and have them account for themselves. They all made quite a bit of money suing these people and asserting that their product was the cause of many terrible things. In the view that there really is no credible evidence, at the very least they ought to be made to account for themselves.
I know what they would say though: "nobody proved the implants didn't make the people sick."
But that's not really how our system is supposed to work is it?
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Nav System
I've been thinking about getting a Navigation System for my truck. Maybe I won't...
Techdirt: Turn On GPS, Turn Off Brain: "One of the common reasons given for people to exclude technology from education is a fear that people will come to rely on it too much, and either be lost when it fails, or unable to recognize when it's giving bad results."
Poor Prop Joe
Have you been watching The Wire? Last night you certainly couldn't say nothing happened. Poor Prop Joe, after doing the best police work of the season Omar didn't just take the package, he took the shipment. Singlehandedly (alright, he had a few helpers) he's done what the cops have been unable to do for three seasons - he's effectively ended heroine dealing in Baltimore. Its a novel approach you must admit. Don't bother with arresting the dealers, just steal all of their stock.
Except for Omar everything be on a steep down hill for everyone. Prop Joe gets ripped, Marlow gonna get popped, all four of the kids are essentially on the street, Kima is turning out to be lazy, Herc is going to get fired if not charged, everyone is about to get a truckload of names in red, and Bubbles - Bubbles killed his only friend while trying to poison the guy that's been stealing from him. And on top of that, the gym owner got shot and the school is making the hoppers study for the state test in their special class.
No, you certainly couldn't say that nothing happened this week.
There's only the one week left though. It looks like they're going to bust Malow's soldiers. I wonder if they will get Marlow. He's supposedly been the target all season, and they've never actually managed to arrest the target. Seems more likely Omar will deal with him. Maybe Carcetti should look at Omar for Chief of Police. He's been looking for a minority, local candidate. Omar certainly fits the bill.
Somehow I don't think so.
Anyway, if this all sounds like Charlie Brown adults to you then you ought to be watching The Wire instead of reading this. Amongst very elite company it is one of the best shows on television, hands down.
Monday, December 04, 2006
Spooky
This is a new kind of peeping...
Kismet Chat
Sort of like being the William Baldwin character in Sliver.
Sunday, December 03, 2006
Oh, Really?
Think Progress: "I think there is no alternative but to rank him as the worst president in U.S. history.” "
Saturday, December 02, 2006
Go See Happy Feet
It seemed like the population of Pittsburgh thought the heavens were going to dump snow on us last night. Naturally that meant we went out, to the Waterfront, on a Friday night. Some people have a bottomless capacity for aggravation.
As it turned out, the place was deserted.
We went to see Happy Feet, the penguin movie. You should stop whatever you are doing and go to see it right now.
This is just a really well done movie. I had just heard a review on NPR, and everything he says is true. At one point he talks about how the music in this film works just the way that the music in Moulin Rouge! didn't. It's an odd quote, but he's right. Both films integrated pop music into their stories. The previous film did it well, this one does it better. There's also this nice Drum & Bugle Corp or "step" dimension to the whole thing. They could really sell the soundtrack CD in the lobby. We stopped at Best Buy on the way home, only to discover they were sold out.
If you've seen March of the Penguins you'll probably like this even more so. The first half hour looks like it was cribbed from the documentary scene by scene. All that was missing mas Morgan Freeman. I wonder if they thought of that?
My only complaint about the film is that I wanted to hear more of each of the numbers. In what was already a long movie, I really did want more.
Good story, good music, good animation, good acting (maybe a little too much Mork)... Good stuff. Go see it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
