High resolution imaging is important not hi res viewers.
You’re probably right in like 99.999999999999999999999999999999999% of cases, but I’d want to ensure we could save that extra 0.000000000000000000000000000000001%. I’d sacrifice anything and everything for just one more day with my loved ones. So, its probably overkill, but I’d rather screen resolution not being the thing that costs me time with those I care about.
Because medicine is a field that seems to most benefit from high technology and, when a loved one of mine is treated by a doctor, I’d rather use a cannon to swat a mosquito.
Why would the medical field need 8k screens?
I’d rather the doctor performing life-saving surgery not have screen resolution being an inhibition. I’d rather they have the best tools and resources available.
What’s stopping me from just suing them for breach of contract rather than going through their appeals process if they illegally deny my claim?
Medicaid is a government provision that has no contract that underpins it. With something like United Healthcare, there is a bargained for exchange of mutual consideration (you give $ and UHC provides insurance subject to all the terms and conditions in the contract).
That is not something in Medicaid because Medicaid isn’t getting anything in exchange for its health coverage. The government can put whatever restrictions on it that it wants. The benefit comes from the government having one more contribution to the ecconomic system. However, that is too attenuated of a benefit to say that there was a bargained-for exchange.
jd vance is next in line and hes also a fascist.
Guillotines spring eternal?
BlueSky