Scott Ableman/Flickr Creative Commons

A doctor administers a shot to a young girl.

With Thursday’s news about which insurance plans will be available to individuals through Covered California, state residents are getting a clearer picture of the health plans and prices offered under the new health care rules in President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare.

The state’s largest health insurers — including Anthem Blue Cross, Blue Shield and Kaiser Permanente — will be among 13 plans competing to sell policies to millions of Californians who are expected to purchase coverage through the state’s new health exchange, officials announced Thursday.  

Covered California, the state agency running the health insurance marketplace, announced the plans and prices that will be offered by private insurers when the exchange begins enrolling customers in October. Coverage begins Jan. 1, the same time virtually everyone in the country will be required to have health insurance or pay a penalty.

So what does this mean for you? We’ve assembled the answers to common questions. Let us know in the comments below if you have other questions, and we’ll try to find the answers.  

Q:  Does this affect me?

A:  Yes, if you are one of the estimated 5 million Californians who lacks insurance coverage through your employer, or who earns too much to qualify for Medi-Cal. If so, you are required to purchase insurance by January 1, 2014, or face a fine.    

Q: How much does it cost?

A: That depends on where you live and how old you are.   

You can plug in your age and income into Covered California’s online calculator to get an estimate of what you’d pay for a mid-range (silver) plan. But you won’t know the true cost range until October 1st, when the exchange’s enrollment system is complete.

Q:  What if I can’t afford it?

A:  Depending on your income, you may qualify for help:

• An upfront federal tax credit to help reduce your premium is available to single people who earn less than $44,680 a year, up to $92,200 for a family of four.
• A cost-sharing subsidy for out-of-pocket costs, like co-pays. 

This help is only available to people who purchase  a plan through the Covered California exchange.   

You may also qualify for free care through Medi-Cal if state lawmakers expand the program.

Q:  How do I know if my doctor is in the provider network?

A:  Covered California will provide a network directory on its website later this year. Your doctor would have to be in the network of one of the providers in your area.

Q:  Which plans will be available where I live?

A:  Not all of the plans will be available in your area. But there will be two to six insurance plan available, depending on your Zip Code. For a full list by Zip Code go to the booklet link here or consult the booklet embedded below.

Los Angeles and San Diego will offer six carriers. Almost all counties will have at least two health plans to choose from.

Q: Can I be rejected for a pre-existing condition or my state of health?

A: No. All insurers in California must provide coverage to anyone who applies.

Q: I’m a smoker. I heard under the Affordable Care Act I may have to pay more than non-smokers? Is that true?

A: No, California opted out of that provision of the Act in favor of making insurance affordable for more people. Other states may opt to charge smokers more.

Q: When can I enroll in one of the health exchange’s plans?

A:  Open enrollment is from Oct. 1, 2013, to March 31, 2014.

Q: I own a small business. When will the Exchange announce which plans will be available for me?

A: Check back in June.

Q: Where can I get more information?

A: Covered California’s website page on individual health plans.

The Associated Press contributed to this report

CC Health Plans Booklet

Two-factor authentication, or 2FA as it’s commonly abbreviated, adds an extra step to your basic login procedure. Without 2FA, you enter in your username and password, and then you’re done. The password is your single factor of authentication. The second factor makes your account more secure, in theory.

“Twitter made the decision to use SMS [to deliver its second factor] because it makes sense from their position,” said Jon Oberheide, a two-factor authentication expert and co-founder and Chief Technology Officer of Duo Security, which uses apps to prove identity. “[SMS is] universal in some respects, all you need is a mobile phone.”

But Twitter has faced some backlash, he said, because many of the highest-profile Twitter hacks have been against corporate Twitter accounts.

“Two-factor authentication does help, but Twitter is a high-value target and it needs to be protected like one,” said Jim Fenton, Chief Security Officer at OneID, an enterprise password replacement system.

Here’s a rundown of what two-factor authentication is, how it can work for you, and what its limitations are.

What is two-factor authentication?
Two-factor authentication adds a second level of authentication to an account login. When you have to enter only your username and one password, that’s considered a single-factor authentication. 2FA requires the user to have two out of three types of credentials before being able to access an account. The three types are:

Something you know, such as a Personal Identification Number (PIN), password, or a pattern

Something you have, such as an ATM card, phone, or fob

Something you are, such as a biometric like a fingerprint or voice print

How old is two-factor authentication?
Older than life itself.

Okay, not really. But 2FA is nothing new. When you use your credit card and you must enter in your zip code to confirm a charge, that’s an example of 2FA in action. You must provide a physical factor, the card, and a knowledge factor, the zip code.

But just because it’s been around for a long time doesn’t mean that it’s easy to set up or easy to use.

Wait, it’s hard to use?
It definitely adds an extra step to your login process, and depending on how the account vendor, such as Twitter, has implemented it, it can be a minor inconvenience or a major pain. Much also depends on your patience and your willingness to spend the extra time to ensure a higher level of security.

Fenton said that while two-factor authentication makes it harder to log in, it’s not “hugely” so.

“An attacker might be able to collect a cookie or an OAuth token from a Web site and essentially take over their session,” he said. “So, 2FA is a good thing, but it does make the user experience more complicated… It’s done when you’re logging into an account on your device for the first time, for example.”

Will two-factor authentication protect me?
Well, that’s a loaded question when it comes to security.

It’s true that two-factor authentication is not impervious to hackers. One of the most high-profile cases of a compromised two-factor system occurred in 2011, when security company RSA revealed that its SecurID authentication tokens had been hacked.

Fenton explained both sides of the effectiveness problem. “The thing that concerns me as a security guy is that people don’t look at what the cause of the threats might be. 2FA mitigates the problems, but there are a lot of awful attacks can run on 2FA.”

At the same time, he said, two-factor offered more protection than logging in without it. “When you make an attack harder, you’re disabling a certain subset of the hacker community,” he said.

How is 2FA vulnerable to hackers?
To hack two-factor authentication, the bad guys must acquire either the physical component of the login, or must gain access to the cookies or tokens placed on the device by the authentication mechanism. This can happen in several ways, including phishing attack, malware, or credit card-reader skimming. There is a another way, however: account recovery.

An RSA SecurID key fob.

(Credit:
Via Wikimedia Commons)

If you remember what happened to journalist Mat Honan, his accounts were compromised by leveraging the “account recovery” feature. Account recovery resets your current password and e-mails you a temporary one so that you can log in again.

“One of the biggest problems that’s not adequately solved is recovery,” said Oberheide.

Account recovery works as a tool for breaking two-factor authentication because it “bypasses” 2FA entirely, Fenton explained. “Just after [the Honan story was published], I created a Google account, created 2FA on it, then pretended to lose my data.”

Fenton continued: “Account recovery took some extra time, but three days later I got an email helpfully explaining that 2FA had been disabled on my account.” After that, he was able to log back in to the account without 2FA.

Account recovery is not a problem without a solution, though. Or at least, solutions are being worked on.

“I see biometrics as an interesting way to solve the recovery problem,” said Oberheide. “If I lost my phone, it would take forever to go through each account and recover them. If there’s a very strong biometric recovery method, a passcode of my choosing and a voice challenge or something like that, it becomes a very reasonable and usable recovery mechanism.”

(Credit:
CNET)

Basically, he’s suggesting using one form of two-factor for logging in, and a second, different two-factor combo for recovery.

What’s next for 2FA?
As two-factor authentication becomes more commonplace, it’s more likely that attacks will be more successful against it. That’s the nature of computer security. But by virtue of being more commonplace, it will become easier to use, too.

Oberheide said that many of his customers start off think that implementing 2FA will be expensive or hard to use, but often find that their experience with it is the opposite.

“I think that will come faster in the consumer space because they’re not dealing with all this cruft from the legacy of 2FA from the 80s,” he said. But, he noted, that older systems can have a hard time getting 2FA going. “A few months ago we published the bypass of Google’s two-factor scheme,” he explained. “It’s not a ding against two-factor in general, but against Google’s complicated legacy system.”

Fenton noted that increased adoption could create opportunities to refine the technology. “Should we be planning now on designing something that can scale to large numbers of sites? It seems that 2FA is really exploding right now,” he said.

Despite its problems, Oberheide sounded an optimistic tone for two-factor authentication. “If we can increase the security and usability of 2FA at the same time, that’s a Holy Grail that’s often difficult to achieve,” he said.

As a small business owner, you may be asking “starting in 2014, do I have to provide health insurance to employees?” No business has to offer health insurance. However, the Affordable Care Act includes a mandate for certain large employers (with over 50 full time equivalent employees) to either offer qualified and affordable health benefits, or pay a tax penalty. This is commonly referred to as the employer mandate, “play or pay” requirement, or employer shared responsibility.

It is important for your business to understand whether you are defined as an applicable large employer by the IRS, as the mandate and employer tax penalties only apply to your business if you are an applicable large employer. 

Less Than 50 Employees? No Mandate or Penalties

If your business has less than 50 employees, the mandate and tax penalty does not apply to you. 

What is an Applicable Large Employer?

For the majority of businesses this is a simple calculation. However, for businesses on the border with many part-time or seasonal employees, the calculation will be more in-depth.In general, if your business employed an average of 50 or more full-time equivalent (FTE) employees during the previous calendar year, you are considered an applicable large employer for the current year. 

First, a business is defined as an applicable large employer on a calendar-year basis. For example, you could be an applicable large employer in 2015, but not in 2014. Did your business employ 50 or more full-time employees on average during the preceding calendar year? If yes, then you are an applicable large employer for the current calendar year. 

Second, your business is NOT an applicable large employer if:

• You employed less than 50 full-time employees on average during the previous calendar year, or

• You employed more than 50 full-time employees no more than 120 days during the previous calendar year due to a seasonal workforce.

Calculating Full-Time and Part-Time FTEs

For the purposes of determining whether your business is an applicable large employer, your business must include all full-time employees plus the full-time equivalent of your part-time employees.

A full-time employee is defined as working on average at least 30 hours of service per week in a given month. How many full-time employees do you have?

Next, factor in part-time employees. To calculate the full-time equivalent of part-time employees, add the number of hours worked by part-time employees in a given month and divide the total by 120. How many full-time equivalent part-time employees do you have?

Finally, the sum of the full-time employees and the full-time equivalent of the part-time employees is the number used to determine whether your business is an applicable large employer. If the sum is 50 or over, you are an applicable large employer.

Worksheet: How to Calculate FTEs

Here is a worksheet outlining the above FTE calculations.

Now that you’ve determined if you’re an applicable large employer, and you know if you “have” to offer health insurance… what’s next? Here are additional health care reform articles to help your business decide your health care reform strategy:

• Quick Guide to Calculating the Business Health Insurance Tax Penalty

• The ObamaCare Solution – A Business Expense Account for Healthcare

• Affordable Care Act: Play or Pay?

Note: This should not be taken as legal or tax advice.

Maximum spoilers ahead…

How does the movie start?

Well, with Kirk and Bones fucking with a planet of primitive aliens. They steal some kind of holy scroll, and then get chased through a red jungle.

Seems like kind of a dick move.

Well, it’s not very clear, but ostensibly they’ve stolen the scroll to get chased, in order to draw the aliens away from a volcano that’s about to explode.

Okay, that seems reasonable.

Except that 1) when the volcano erupts, it’s going to kill everybody on the planet, so it hardly matters where they are, and 2) Spock is getting dropped down into the volcano to set off a cold fusion bomb.

Wait, what?

Yeah, he sets off the cold fusion bomb and all the lava freezes.

You know cold fusion isn’t actually cold, right? It’s only “cold” in the sense that opposed to regular fusion it’s not a bazillion degrees hot.

Huh.

And did you say Spock was in the volcano? Why the hell didn’t they just beam the bomb in there?

Um, something about the planet’s magnetic field. Although they do beam Spock out of the volcano just a few minutes later, so…

And why did Spock have to go with the bomb to set it off? Are you telling me in the 23^rd century that people don’t have a way to detonate bombs remotely? That’s stupid.

Well —

And why the fuck is the Enterprise just carrying around a cold fusion suitcase bomb anyways?

Look, you’re getting very upset, and this is just the first scene of the movie.

Okay, fine. What happens next?

Well, Spock’s zipline breaks, so he’s stuck in the volcano, The Enterprise is underwater, so Kirk can’t ascend without the aliens seeing it, thus breaking the Prime Directiv —

WHAT.

The Enterprise is parked in the ocean.

That’s ridiculous. Even the ship designed to function in the vacuum of space could handle the pressures underwater — which I’m 99% sure it can’t — even if the thrusters could function underwater, which makes no sense — and even if the ship could survive flying out of the water without the insanely large surface area of the front part snapping off like a twig — why the fucking fuck did they park it underwater instead of just hanging out in space like they were supposed to?!

Because J.J. Abrams saw the Helicarrier scene from Avengers and got jealous, I guess.

Look, I know Star Trek is science fiction, but hasn’t Trek always at least nominally tried to get science right? Shouldn’t a Star Trek movie give the tiniest shit about such things?

One might presume.

UGH.

Let’s just move on. So Kirk rescues Spock, breaks the Prime Directive by showing themselves to the aliens, the aliens start worshipping the Enterprise, Spock sends a report to Starfleet on what happened, Kirk gets busted, Kirk is removed as Captain of the Enterprise.

What?

Yeah. You know how the first movie was all about Kirk’s journey from a rebellious kid to a more mature leader of men?

Yeah?

Well, we’re doing that again!

I repeat, UGH.

Meanwhile, Rose’s boyfriend Mickey from Doctor Who puts a ring in a glass and blows up the Starfleet library in London.

Why does he do that?

In exchange for Benedict Cumberbatch saving his sick kid. This forces all the Starfleet bigwigs — including Pike, who’s reinstated as the captain of the Enterprise — and Kirk, who becomes Pike’s first officer — to meet at very specific room with large windows at Starfleet HQ to discuss the situation.

That sounds like a bad idea.

As it turns out, it is. Cumberbatch bombed the library just to get all the heads of Starfleet in this room, so he can use a small gunship and shoot the hell out of everyone in it. Pike dies before Kirk manages to destroy the ship with a fire hose, and Cumberbatch beams away.

Pike dies? He doesn’t get in his little wheelchair box?

Alas, no. Because everything is about Kirk, Kirk uses the opportunity to ask Starfleet Admiral Peter Weller for permission to take the Enterprise and go kill the shit out of Benedict Cumberbatch. Weller accepts. After Scotty somehow figures out that Cumberbatch has gone to the Klingon homeworld, Weller gives the Enterprise 72 experimental new photon torpedoes and says when they locate Harrison, they need to just bomb him from orbit.

Eesh. So that “kill the shit out of Benedict Cumberbatch” thing was literal, huh?

Very much so.

That… that doesn’t seem very Starfleet-y to me.

Well, it doesn’t seem very Starfleet-y to Spock, either, who points out to Kirk that it’s both legally and morally wrong to kill even a known terrorist without a trial. But Kirk really, really want to get revenge for Pike, even to the point of firing Scotty when Scotty refuses to allow the mysterious photon torpedoes on board unless he can see what’s in them (something to do with them maybe fucking up the warp engine).

Kirk fires Scotty? What kind of a Star Trek film is this?

Well, he accepts Scotty’s resignation, but I think your question stands. Anyways, Carol Marcus — who is Admiral Peter Weller’s daughter, although we’re not supposed to know this, and who also has an English accent for some reason — sneaks on board, because she’s a weapons specialist and interested in the torpedoes.

Wasn’t Carol Marcus a molecular biologist in the original Trek universe?

Yeah, I assume the career switch is Eric Bana’s fault.

So then what?

Then Kirk finally decides that murdering a man in cold blood possibly isn’t the right thing to do, and announces they are going to try to catch Benedict Cumberbatch alive. They head to Kronos and are pretty much immediately caught by Klingons, but are saved by Benedict Cumberbatch.

Huh? Why does he save them?

I think mostly to show what a supreme badass he is, since he takes them all out simultaneously, including a few ships, thanks to a very big gun. And then he surrenders.

Huh? What? Why?

Well, he finds out about the weird torpedoes — specifically, the number of them, which is 72 — and then surrenders. There’s actually a reason.

Which is?

Well, as Kirk finds out when he interrogates Benedict Cumberbatch, Cumberbatch made the torpedoes for Peter Weller, and inside each torpedo is one of his cryogenically frozen people, because as it turns out that Cumberbatch is actually —

S

Khan.

…

…

Aren’t you shocked? Aren’t you surprised at this incredible reveal?

No, I’m just angry. When the movie was announced, Abrams and whoever clearly stated that Cumberbatch would be playing a canon Trek character, and everybody guessed it was Khan. Then they promised he wasn’t playing Khan. And then they said Cumberbatch’s character’s name was John Harrison, even though there’s no previous Trek character named John Harrison, and again we knew it was Khan. And they tried to make it this whole big mystery as if we were all morons who had some how forgotten a classic Trek character named John Harrison, like they were actually going to pull one over on us when we were telling them over an over again that we knew it was Khan and the only thing they were accomplishing by denying it was 1) being assholes and 2) insulting our intelligence.

Well —

And furthermore, using Khan just proves that nu-Trek is going to be nothing more than the greatest hits version of Star Trek, and not even the original hits — some new band covering the old hits. It means that Abrams doesn’t have any original ideas for Star Trek, and is content to rehash the shit people enjoyed the first time. Of all the classic Trek characters to bring back, of all the classic stories they could have brought to mass audiences for the first time, or even bad stories that they could have improved, they go with the one character everybody already fucking knows because they think all we want to see is the same old shit.

You seem to have strong feelings about this.

I do. Also, did you say Khan put his frozen people in torpedoes?

Yes.

He’s a brilliant strategist and that’s the best plan he could come up with? To hide the people he so desperately wanted to save in explosives? What the fuck was he going to do if Kirk hadn’t conveniently had all those torpedoes on him? And why did Peter Weller give Kirk all 72 torpedoes to kill a single dude in the first place?

…um… Eric Bana?

Fuck you.

Don’t shoot the Frequently Asked Question Answerer, please. Anyways, Kirk verifies the frozen torpedo people with thanks from Carol Markus and Bones, gets some coordinates from Khan, and calls Scotty, the person he’d so recently let go and asks him to check it out. As it turns out, Peter Weller is building a giant combat starship out there because he wants to militarize Starfleet because he’s certain we’re going to meet more races like the Klingons and also because he’s a dick. Weller is also the one who found Khan floating in space, woke him up, and forced him to use his intellect and powers to make badass weapons for him.

Why was Khan floating in space?

Actually, this Khan has the same origin as the original Khan; he’s a genetically engineered warrior, created for the Eugenics Wars of the 1990s. He ruled part of Asia befor —

Wait, what? The Eugenics Wars of the 1990s?

Yes.

We didn’t have any Eugenics Wars in the 1990s, unless you count Dawson’s Creek.

Yeah, but Gene Roddenberry didn’t know that when he created Khan in 1967.

But we do, because it’s 2013.

But it’s canon! Don’t you like canon?

I like it when it doesn’t get stupid. And why the hell would Abrams and crew stick to Khan’s origin timeline, even though it makes zero sense, but also suddenly change him to a white dude? That’s cherry-picking the stupidest parts of canon and non-canon!

I don’t know. I think it’s nice that in this day and age, a white male can still be cast as an Indian played by a Mexican. White men really have come a long way!

I’m going to punch you in your throat.

Anyways, that’s Khan’s deal. Weller flies the Killerprise to meet Kirk and steal his prisoner, so he 1) doesn’t get caught being an evil dick and 2) can continue being an evil dick and militarize Starfleet. He beams his daughter onto his ship, and then starts firing. The Enterprise takes more direct hits than it does in the entirety of the original TV series.

Huh.

But before Weller fires the final shot, Scotty, who has snuck upon the Killerprise and apparently been waiting for this exact moment, resets the Killerprise’s power, forcing it to boot back up like Mac (and almost as long). Since the Enterprise has no weapons or shields, Kirk takes the opportunity to team up with Khan and they fly over to the Killerprise; Scotty lets them in.

What?

Yeah, Kirk teams up with Khan! Isn’t that cool? The two enemies, forced to work together to take out a greater enemy?

No, because Khan’s an asshole. Kirk’s being a moron.

In Kirk’s defense, it only takes him 5-10 minutes to realize he’s made a horrible mistake. This mistake is confirmed when they reach the bridge and Khan beats the shit out of Kirk and Scotty, breaks Carol’s leg, and crushes Peter Weller’s head in his hands.

Yeah, that’s pretty much what I figured.

Meanwhile, Spock calls old Spock to ask him what the deal with this Khan guy is.

I thought Old Spock has agreed never to tell New Spock anything so he could live his own life and all that jazz.

Yes. And we know this because Spock says “I had vowed never to tell you anything of your future because I want to live your own life and blah blah blah” just before adding “but Khan is an asshole and here’s exactly how we defeated him.”

Sigh.

Khan offers to trade Kirk and the others for his people and their torpedo beds, which acting captain Spock agrees to. Of course, Spock arms all the torpedoes right before Khan beams them over, so the Killerprise explodes (although not before shooting the Enterprise several million more times).

Brilliant strategist, eh?

He was a little excited. Also, he still had Peter Weller’s skull juice all over his hands; that would distract anybody.

So we’re done?

By no means. The Enterprise is pretty much dead and has entered Earth’s orbit, meaning it’s falling really, really fast. The problem is that the warp drive is misaligned, so —

Wait a minute. I know what’s happening here.

— so the ship can’t stop falling, but the warp drive room is full of radiation and —

Goddammit. GODDAMMIT

— so Kirk runs into the Warp Drive room and kicks it back into place —

OH GOD IT’S KIRK THIS TIME THAT’S EVEN WORSE

— and then Spock realizes what’s happened and he runs down to the room where he sees Kirk dying behind the locked glass door and —

AAAAAUUUUUUUGGGGHHHHH

— and Kirk puts his hand on the glass and Spock puts his hand on the glass and he makes the Vulcan salute and Kirk dies and —

NO DON’T YOU SAY IT

— Spock —

NO GODDAMMIT DON’T YOU SAY IT

— Spock yells —

AAAAUUUUUUUUURRRRRRGRGGGGGGHHHHH

“Khhaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnnnn!”

Fuck.

Why don’t you like it?

I liked it just fine, the first time I saw it in Wrath of Khan. Of course, the reason I like it is is because Kirk and Spock’s friendship has been part of pop culture for 15 years, so Spock’s death and Kirk’s anguish was given some actual agency, instead of now, when Kirk and Spock have known each other for four hours of screentime, two of which they didn’t like each other. I also liked it the first time because it was new and not a crass, creatively bankrupt attempt to manipulate the audience’s emotions, not through sadness because there’s clearly no way Kirk is actually going to stay dead, but because the scene is nothing more “HERE IS SOMETHING YOU HAVE SEEN BEFORE WITH A SLIGHT DIFFERENCE SO YOU WILL LIKE IT” as opposed to even trying to give us something, anything, genuinely new.

Oh.

So next movie is “The Search for Kirk,” I suppose?

Nah. See, Bones drew some of Khan’s blood to figure out why he was so strong and resilient, and he injected it into a dead Tribble because… because I suppose Bones’ hobby is inject dead things with various people’s blood? It’s a little weird.

/sound of facepalm

As it happens, as soon as Bones’ hears Kirk has died, the dead Tribble comes back to life, thanks to Khan’s blood!

/sound of gun being loaded

The Killerprise has crash-landed on San Francisco, and Khan is of course fine despite the destruction of many, many high-rise buildings and thousands upon thousands of people. Spock chases Khan down, they have a fist fight on top of some moving flying cars, and with help from Uhura they get their man. And they bring Kirk back to life!

Uh-huh. So they’ve just eliminated death forever.

Beg pardon?

Kirk was dead for many, many minutes of radiation poisoning, right? He gets injected with Khan’s blood —

A synthesized version of it.

— even better. So what wouldn’t Khan’s blood fix? Decapitation, but most other mortal wounds? Poisons? Phaser blasts, I bet. Certainly most other illnesses and cancers and such. And probably aging, at leats to an extent. So basically Bones has discovered the secret to eternal life, and not only will no one on the Enterprise ever need to die again unless their body is somehow destroyed, but all of the civilization — heck, probably galactic civilization – will be irrevocably changed because of this amazing discovery.

Uh, I don’t think so. I think they just save Kirk and then forget about it.

Of course they do. And I suppose the Tribble that Bones brought back to life multiplies like Tribbles do and causes its own horrible situation?

No, it’s just not mentioned again. Maybe Bones kills it with his bare hands to keep it from spawning. Or maybe he injects it with Mountain Dew or something, since that’s how he rolls.

/sound of gun being cocked

And then Kirk gives a speech at Starfleet a year later, because everything is all about him, and then they start on their five-year mission! Which will almost certainly involve Space Whales, since that’s the next biggest thing people remember about Star Trek. The end!

When it comes to the
Xbox One, we had just as many questions as any of our readers.
Fortunately, we’ve also got answers.

Below is Wired.co.uk’s guide to the facts, peppered with answers
to questions we’ve been asked by readers — and each other.

What is the release date for the Xbox
One?
Officially, “later this year”. We expect November for the UK.

What are the specifications of the Xbox
One?
It has an eight-core AMD CPU, and Microsoft has claimed the
console delivers eight times the graphics performance of the Xbox
360. The system also has 8GB of RAM (same as the PlayStation 4) and
a 500GB hard drive. It uses Blu-ray discs for games instead of
DVDs.

Is the 500GB hard drive user-replaceable?
No, although the USB 3.0 sockets do support external storage. In
essence, it’s the same setup as the Xbox 360.

Does the Xbox One require an always-on internet
connection?
No. Offline play is possible. However, this is something games
developers can override if they want to. The hardware, however,
doesn’t fundamentally require persistent connectivity to the
internet.

Is the Xbox One backwards compatible with Xbox 360
games?
No.

Can I use Xbox 360 controllers with the Xbox
One?
No.

Can I use my existing gamertag with the Xbox
One?
Yes, this will carry over. Achievements and Gamerscore will also
carry over.

Is my Xbox Live Gold subscription still going to be
valid?
Yes. In fact one Gold account can be used for multiple Xbox
profiles, meaning only one paid-for subscription will be needed for
a family.

Are trade-ins and pre-owned games
supported?
Officially yes, although there are likely to be caveats currently
not disclosed. “Yes, we will support games that are traded or
resold…we will not block that from happening,” a spokesperson
told Wired.co.uk.

Do I have to install games to the console’s hard
drive?
Yes. All games must be installed to the hard drive, but play can
begin while the install is in progress. You will not have to wait
for the install to complete before playing.

Does the Xbox One support HDMI pass-through for TV
set-top boxes?
Yes, it has one HDMI input and one HDMI output. This is one of a
number of ways Microsoft wants to enable the Xbox One to be a
television device.

Can I use the Xbox One with my Virgin Media or Sky
box?
Eventually, although it’s unlikely the UK will benefit from the
Xbox One’s TV functionality at launch. To begin with we expect this
to be US-only.

Will Xbox One use dedicated servers for multiplayer
games?
Yes. Microsoft has 300,000 servers in place for the Xbox One’s
launch and games are no longer hosted on a player’s own Xbox
console. If you’ve ever felt the frustration of a multiplayer match
ending because the host switched their console off, prepare to be
thankful it’ll not happen anymore.

Does the use of dedicated multiplayer servers increase
the number of players that can play online together?
Yes. Although precise limits aren’t known, the Xbox One should be
able to handle 64-128 players. Battlefield fans will be
pleased.

Does the Xbox One output higher than 1080p, such as 4K
“Ultra HD”?
It hasn’t been confirmed, but the graphical power is certainly
high enough to deliver this.

Will the new Kinect system be supported on Windows
PCs?
Yes, although further details haven’t been released on this
yet.

Edited by Olivia Solon

Many of the rights and liberties Americans cherish—such as speech, religion, and the right to fair trial—were not enumerated in the original Constitution drafted in Philadelphia Convention in 1787, but were included in the first 10 amendments, known as the Bill of Rights. How much do you know about this founding document? Check out these handy FAQs to learn all about it.

What is the Bill of Rights?

The Bill of Rights is the first 10 amendments to the United States Constitution. These amendments guarantee essential rights and civil liberties, such as the right to free speech and the right to a fair trial, as well as reserving rights to the people and the states.

As a distinct historical document, drafted separately from the seven articles that form the body of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights has its own fascinating story. But ever since the first 10 amendments were ratified in 1791, the Bill of Rights has also been an integral part of the Constitution.

How many original copies of the Bill of Rights exist? Where are they?

Congress commissioned 14 official copies of the Bill of Rights—one for the federal government and one for each of the original 13 states, which President George Washington dispatched to the states to consider for ratification.

Today, most of these original copies reside at the archives of their respective states. The federal government’s copy is on display at the National Archives and Records Administration in Washington, D.C.—alongside the original, handwritten copies of the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

Four states are missing their copies—Georgia, Maryland, New York, and Pennsylvania. Two unidentified copies are known to have survived; one is in the Library of Congress, and the other is in the collection of The New York Public Library, which is the copy that will be displayed at the National Constitution Center.

North Carolina’s copy of the Bill of Rights was missing for nearly 140 years after being stolen by a Union soldier during the Civil War. The National Constitution Center played a key role in the recovery of the document in 2003, including assisting in an FBI sting operation.

Why wasn’t the Bill of Rights included in the original Constitution?

Toward the end of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, George Mason, a delegate from Virginia, proposed adding a bill of rights, which would, he argued, give great quiet to the people” and “might be prepared in a few hours.”

Though it might be surprising today, the state delegations unanimously rejected Mason’s proposal. Some delegates reasoned that a federal bill of rights was unnecessary because most state constitutions already included some form of guaranteed rights; others said that outlining certain rights would imply that those were the only rights reserved to the people. However, historian Richard Beeman, a Trustee of the National Constitution Center, has pointed out a much more prosaic reason the delegates were so skeptical: They had spent four arduous months of contentious debate in a hot, stuffy room, and were anxious to avoid anything that would prolong the convention. They wanted to go home, so they took a pass. A bill of rights was overruled.

The Constitution was signed by 39 delegates on September 17, 1787, at the Pennsylvania State House, now known as Independence Hall, in Philadelphia. Three delegates were present but refused to sign, in part because of the absence of a bill of rights: George Mason, Edmund Randolph, and Elbridge Gerry.

After the convention, the absence of a bill of rights emerged as a central part of the ratification debates. Anti-Federalists, who opposed ratification, viewed its absence as a fatal flaw. Several states ratified the Constitution on the condition that a bill of rights would be promptly added, and many even offered suggestions for what to include.

Pauline Maier, author of Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787–1788, noted of these proponents of a bill of rights:

“Without their determined opposition, the first ten amendments would not have become a part of the Constitution for later generations to transform into a powerful instrument for the defense of American freedom. … Their example might well be their greatest gift to posterity.”

Who wrote the Bill of Rights?

After the Constitution was ratified in 1788, James Madison, who had already helped draft much of the original Constitution, took up the task of drafting a bill of rights. Madison largely drew from the Virginia Declaration of Rights, which was primarily written by George Mason in 1776 two months before the Declaration of Independence; he also drew from amendments suggested by state ratifying conventions.

Madison drafted 19 amendments, which he proposed to Congress on June 8, 1789. The House of Representatives narrowed those down to 17; then the Senate, with the approval of the House, narrowed them down to 12. These 12 were approved on September 25, 1789 and sent to the states for ratification.

When was the Bill of Rights ratified?

The 10 amendments that are now known as the Bill of Rights were ratified on December 15, 1791, thus becoming a part of the Constitution.

The first two amendments in the 12 that Congress proposed to the states were rejected: The first dealt with apportioning representation in the House of Representatives; the second prevented members of Congress from voting to change their pay until the next session of Congress. This original “Second Amendment” was finally added to the Constitution as the 27th Amendment, more than 200 years later.

Bill of Rights Day is observed on December 15 each year, as called for by a joint resolution of Congress approved by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1941.

Where was the Bill of Rights written?

The Bill of Rights was drafted in New York City, where the federal government was operating out of Federal Hall in 1789. (The Declaration of Independence and the original, unamended Constitution were written and signed in Philadelphia.)

Why is the Bill of Rights so important?

The Bill of Rights represents the first step that “We the People” took in amending the Constitution “in Order to form a more perfect Union.” The original, unamended Constitution was a remarkable achievement, establishing a revolutionary structure of government that put power in the hands of the people. The Bill of Rights built on that foundation, protecting our most cherished American freedoms, including freedom of speech, religion, assembly, and due process of law. For more than two centuries—as we have exercised, restricted, expanded, tested, and debated those freedoms—the Bill of Rights has shaped and been shaped by what it means to be American.

Editor’s Note: The National Constitution Center announced today that starting in 2014, it will display an American treasure: one of the 12 surviving copies of the Bill of Rights. Learn more here.

More about the Bill of Rights

National Constitution Center to display original copy of the Bill of Rights

Can you pass a Bill of Rights quiz?

Also Read

Health workers at University of California medical centers began a two-day strike on Tuesday with a walkout at 4 a.m. that potentially affects thousands of employees and led to the postponement and rescheduling of some patient surgeries and appointments.

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) union is battling management over staffing and pension issues at facilities in San Diego, Orange, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, San Francisco and Sacramento.

RELATED: Health workers begin strike against University of California medical centers

The union represents nearly 13,000 hospital pharmacists, nursing assistants, operating room scrubs and other patient care workers. Members of the University Professional and Technical Employees (UPTE) union, representing more than 3,300 health care workers, were expected to hold “sympathy strikes,” according to UCLA.

WHAT PATIENTS NEED TO KNOW

• What happened to the scheduled appointments and surgeries? 

Dale Tate, executive director at UCLA Health Sciences Media Relations, told KPCC that anyone who had clinical appointments or surgeries affected by the strike were contacted days ago to reschedule.

• What if I have a medical emergency in the next two days?

Emergency rooms will remain open at UCLA Medical Center in Santa Monica and at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center in Westwood. It’s a Level I Trauma Center, Tate explains. ”They are open. They have to stay open.” 

• Will I be able to make a future appointment during the strike?

Yes, according to Tate. Medical staff are answering phones at all locations and taking appointments for future dates.

• How can the facilities function with employees on strike?

Tom Rosenthal, chief medical officer for UCLA hospitals, told KPCC that to ensure patient safety, they’ve brought in 400 temp workers to fill in at three local campuses. They’ve also filed a court injunction to ensure certain staffers stay on the job.

 ”Pharmacists, for example. You can’t run a hospital safely without pharmacy, we give millions of doses of drugs — it’s the mainstay of treatment for a lot of the patients so there’s nobody else who can do that work other than pharmacists. So they were enjoined by name and they are in the hospital.”

• How many patients are currently in the hospitals?

Rosenthal said UCLA has about 700 patients in three hospitals — Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, UCLA Medical Center Santa Monica and the Resnick Neuropsychiatric Hospital. UCLA also runs Mattel Children’s Hospital, but it is not separately licensed and sits within the Ronald Reagan campus.

“We’re caring for patients exactly as usual, but it’s not a usual day,” he said. “We’ve had to do a whole ton of things to be sure we can, in fact, run safely. That’s cost a lot of money, but that’s not the most important issue. We’re working hard to make sure it is safe and business as usual.”

• What’s the latest word from UCLA?

On May 21 at 8:40 a.m. the UCLA Health System issued the following statement:

“Despite a strike by two unions, both the Westwood and Santa Monica campuses of the UCLA Health System are open and providing the safest and highest quality care to our patients. With careful planning and the professionalism and dedication of many union employees who put patients first and came to work today, the UCLA Health System is taking care of the health care needs of our community.”

• What’s the latest word from AFSCME?

On May 21, a story published to the AFSCME blog reads:

“Thousands of University of California patient care workers went on strike today in five locations throughout the state. … ‘This strike is about standing up for students, patients and taxpayers the UC Medical System was intended to serve,’ said Local 3299 Pres. Kathryn Lybarger, also an AFSCME International vice president. ‘UC’s increasingly unsafe staffing practices and growing culture of executive entitlement are undermining patient care quality and unnecessarily putting lives at risk.’”

Do you have a question we haven’t answered? Let us know in the comments. Also, if the strike is affecting your healthcare, please let us know in the comments, share it on our Facebook page or tweet it and mention @KPCC and we’ll share it with our audience.

Always online connection?

Nope. Apparently, you will need to be able to hook your console up to the net, but it won’t have to be always online. A Microsoft spokesperson to Polygon: “It does not have to be always connected [...] We are also designing it so you can play games and watch Blu-ray movies and live TV if you lose your connection.”

Backwards compatibility?

No again. Xbox Live Vice President Marc Whitten: “The system is based on a different core architecture, so back-compat doesn’t really work from that perspective.” However, music and video content downloaded via Xbox Live will be compatible with the new machine. Microsoft has not yet mentioned whether it will make Xbox 360 titles available via a streaming service a la PlayStation 4.

Second-hand sales of games blocked?

A third no – but with a caveat. From Develop:

“On the new Xbox, all game discs are installed to the HDD to play,” said a spokesperson.

Microsoft then confirmed that users of a pre-owned game will have to pay a fee to gain access to the title if it had already been installed on another console so they could use it on their own account.

UPDATE: It appears that this has now been discredited. Other sources suggest that things will work like this: when you buy a game disc, the game has to be installed on to the hard drive. But then if you sell the game and the new owner tries to install the game on their machine, the version on your console is rendered void. In short, one disc = one owner.

So it’s going to work like EA’s Online Pass, which might not be universally popular?

Will Gamerscores carry over from Xbox 360?

Yes! You won’t have to start from scratch on your new machine. I’m just looking into whether your gamer reputation also transfers over or if you get the chance to wipe the slate clean.

More details later…