Slashdot Mirror

I found something VERY interesting. It looks like UHG's Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer came out in support of Obama for President. Now by UHG's own ethics and integrity rules he had to make the disclaimer that his views were his and not of the company (which he did not do) - unless the company had requested and approved it. So if UHG requested and approved of his endorsement, that must mean UHG endorses Obama. Now UHG is a FOR profit health care company and Obama is for semi-Universal Health Care. So why would a for profit company "endorse" a political candidate that is pro semi-universal health care? More than likely they are not endorsing him - unless they plan on Obama driving business towards them. So then this must mean that Strickland -didn't- have the approval of the company - which means he violated the company's ethics and integrity rules. He may also be violating the company's policy on "Former government employees". (See my references below)

Endorsement:
http://www.denverpost.com/politics/ci_8003428

http://www.politicswest.com/17596/strickland_amon_3_endorse_obama

Bill Richardson's Colorado supporters are moving in different directions, as former Senate candidate and U.S. Attorney Tom Strickland announced his support for Barack Obama's presidential bid this afternoon. Here are the details:
"I am very excited to be supporting Senator Barack Obama for President," said Strickland in a release. "Barack Obama's record of change is something that Americans can believe in."

UHG References:
Tom Strickland is an Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer of UnitedHealth Group

http://www.unitedhealthgroup.com/about/exe.htm#strickland
http://unitedhealthgroup.mondosearch.com/cgi-bin/MsmGo.exe?grab_id=0&EXTRA_ARG=SUBMIT%3DSearch&CFGNAME=MssFind.cfg&host_id=42&page_id=557&query=strickland&hiword=strickland%20
http://unitedhealthgroup.mondosearch.com/cgi-bin/MsmGo.exe?grab_id=0&EXTRA_ARG=SUBMIT%3DSearch&CFGNAME=MssFind.cfg&host_id=42&page_id=165&query=strickland&hiword=strickland%20

Ethics and Integity Brochure:
https://kbpweb2.mercerhrs.com/kblink/UHG/ER/Principles_Ethics_Integrity_brochure.pdf

Page 24
POLITICAL ACTIVITIES
If you take part in political activities or committees, you must make it clear that your views and actions are your own and not those of the company, unless the company has requested and approved your participation.

Page 21
FORMER GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
Former U.S. government employees generally are not allowed to represent the company in matters where the government has substantial interest and where the employee had prior
responsibility.

Requirement to Report:
https://kbp4web2.mercerhrs.com/profile_uhg/cgi-bin/athcgi.exe
As a UnitedHealth Group employee, you are required to comply with all laws, contractual obligations and company policies, including the Principles of Ethics and Integrity. Employees are also required to report any suspected misconduct by another employee or one of the company's contractors to their manager, someone else in management or by contacting the Ethics & Compliance HelpCenter. Ethics & Compliance H

I found something VERY interesting. It looks like UHG's Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer came out in support of Obama for President. Now by UHG's own ethics and integrity rules he had to make the disclaimer that his views were his and not of the company (which he did not do) - unless the company had requested and approved it. So if UHG requested and approved of his endorsement, that must mean UHG endorses Obama. Now UHG is a FOR profit health care company and Obama is for semi-Universal Health Care. So why would a for profit company "endorse" a political candidate that is pro semi-universal health care? More than likely they are not endorsing him - unless they plan on Obama driving business towards them. So then this must mean that Strickland -didn't- have the approval of the company - which means he violated the company's ethics and integrity rules. He may also be violating the company's policy on "Former government employees". (See my references below)

Endorsement:
http://www.denverpost.com/politics/ci_8003428

http://www.politicswest.com/17596/strickland_amon_3_endorse_obama

Bill Richardson's Colorado supporters are moving in different directions, as former Senate candidate and U.S. Attorney Tom Strickland announced his support for Barack Obama's presidential bid this afternoon. Here are the details:
"I am very excited to be supporting Senator Barack Obama for President," said Strickland in a release. "Barack Obama's record of change is something that Americans can believe in."

UHG References:
Tom Strickland is an Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer of UnitedHealth Group

http://www.unitedhealthgroup.com/about/exe.htm#strickland
http://unitedhealthgroup.mondosearch.com/cgi-bin/MsmGo.exe?grab_id=0&EXTRA_ARG=SUBMIT%3DSearch&CFGNAME=MssFind.cfg&host_id=42&page_id=557&query=strickland&hiword=strickland%20
http://unitedhealthgroup.mondosearch.com/cgi-bin/MsmGo.exe?grab_id=0&EXTRA_ARG=SUBMIT%3DSearch&CFGNAME=MssFind.cfg&host_id=42&page_id=165&query=strickland&hiword=strickland%20

Ethics and Integity Brochure:
https://kbpweb2.mercerhrs.com/kblink/UHG/ER/Principles_Ethics_Integrity_brochure.pdf

Page 24
POLITICAL ACTIVITIES
If you take part in political activities or committees, you must make it clear that your views and actions are your own and not those of the company, unless the company has requested and approved your participation.

Page 21
FORMER GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
Former U.S. government employees generally are not allowed to represent the company in matters where the government has substantial interest and where the employee had prior
responsibility.

Requirement to Report:
https://kbp4web2.mercerhrs.com/profile_uhg/cgi-bin/athcgi.exe
As a UnitedHealth Group employee, you are required to comply with all laws, contractual obligations and company policies, including the Principles of Ethics and Integrity. Employees are also required to report any suspected misconduct by another employee or one of the company's contractors to their manager, someone else in management or by contacting the Ethics & Compliance HelpCenter. Ethics & Compliance H

1: Usability is a feature, and features can be usability.

If I'm blind then the previewing of sounds when I more the cursor over them is 100% usability.

If I can't be bothered to click on the files to play them then previewing of sounds is 100% usability.

If I've been out of the piss all night and can't manage to work XMMS then previewing sounds is 100% usability.

Anyhow, lets look at his 'perfect' web site......

I thought I'd take a better look at the "the king of usability"

Lets do a little search on his web site. (very important).

Search: things I should do
Categories: 7 categories
Found: 475 pages
Count: 126 pages contain all 4 search words

Cool 7 categories, can you tell me what they are so I don't have to scroll all the way through the page... cheers....

(they could be put in the empty space to the right)

The layout:

A list with 4 vertical headings, .
1: white space between headings and data is too large.
2: Headings are too technical for Joe user,Found and Count? what's going on there.

3: "Categories: 7 categories. " Yes, I know there categories, you don't have to tell me twice.

Categories: 7. Is better, and more grammatically correct.(not that my grammar is great, but then I'm not the king of usability).

4: Found + count, again. Just combine the two you fool.

5: why not just combine the whole lot

Label data

Searched for 'things I should do'.
475 pages were found across 7 categories.

Ok, enough of that, now look at the source.

No doc-type, well done the king.
Look at the body tag, those BGCOLOR, LINK, ALINK etc.. attributes should be in the CSS, Mr King.

Look a bit further down, FIXED WIDTH Mr King, Haven't you read bobby and 503 like any self respecting web guru.

Ok,no more, it's too fucking horrible for words.

I thought I'd take a better look at the "the king of usability"

Lets do a little search on his web site. (very important).

Search: things I should do
Categories: 7 categories
Found: 475 pages
Count: 126 pages contain all 4 search words

Cool 7 chategories, can you tell me what they are so I don't have to scrole all the way through the page... cheers....

(they could be put in the empty space to the right)

The layout:

A list with 4 vertical headings, .
1: white space between headings and data is too large.
2: Headings are too techincal for Joe user,Found and Count? what's going on there.

3: "Categories: 7 categories. " Yes, I know there categories, you don't have to tell me twice.

Categories: 7. Is better, and more gramaticly correct.(not that my gramma is greate, but then I'm not the king of usability).

4: Found + count, again. Just combine the two you fool.

5: why not just combine the whole lot

Label data

Searched for 'things I should do'.
475 pages were found accross 7 categories.

Ok, enough of that, now look at the source.

No doc-type, well done the king.
Look at the body tag, those BGCOLOR, LINK, ALINK etc.. attributes should be in the CSS, Mr King.

Look a bit further down, FIXED WIDTH Mr King, Haven't you read bobby and 503 like any self respecting web guru.

Ok,no more, it's too fucking horrible for words.

Perhaps this popular mechanics link will shed some light on this topic http://popularmechanics.mondosearch.com/cgi-bin/Ms mGo.exe?grab_id=39&EXTRA_ARG=&CFGNAME=MssFind.cfg& host_id=42&page_id=1379584&query=pilot+license&hiw ord=LICENSEE+LICENSEES+LICENSOR+license+LICENSED+L ICENSES+LICENSING+pilot+PILOTAN+PILOTED+PILOTING+P ILOTS+ Note that isn't a real P-51, it is a small scale replica T-51 Other planes that qualify: TITAN TORNADO - TIGER MOTH - SKY BOY - CHALLENGER II - RANS S-7 - MURPHY MAVERICK - MURPHY JDM-8 - PIPER J-3 CUB - KITFOX - PIETENPOL AIR CAMPER - SONEX WAIEX - P-96 GOLF 100 -

Wow! Thanks for the reply!

Moving difficult-to-produce finished goods (like complicated machinery and semiconductor products and so forth) from Earth to the building site could be done with a space elevator or with mature chemical launchers. Most of the cost of current space launches is the cost of manufacture and infrastructure for spacecraft, not the cost of fuel. Once materials and techniques advance to the point where launch craft are mature commodity items, and fuel dominates launch cost, it becomes practical to lift machinery, people, and construction craft up.

At this point, colonization of space will begin.

This is a very good point, i.e., that we will start to colonize space once the way to get into space becomes "a commodity," which it arguably is not at the moment.

Why rockets? Are space elevators the only alternative?

Good point about launchers not being to the point that fuel is the critical cost element. I would be interested in more details on the engineering and economics of space elevators, too, by the way.

It seems to me that there is not much attention being given to the idea of large, flying disk/wing aircraft that could fly up to high altitudes and then switch to rocket propulsion as a means for lifting large payloads on a reliable, safe, and regular schedule. The commercial aerospace industry is pretty close to the "fuel as the primary cost" situation which you mention.

Is this notion fundamentally flawed in some way; is there something I'm not seeing?

Popular Mechanics did a cover story about lenticular aircraft, and there are lots of other articles there, too. Apparently the Nazis did a lot of work on this, and after WWII the Air Force got all the technology and has been secretly working on it ever since. The point being that these things can be very big, and the whole fuselage is a lift-providing surface, so they could potentially carry a lot of material and still be able to stay aloft in the upper atmosphere. I wrote a little blurb about the space shuttle, winged vs. lenticular aircraft, etc., which might elicit some comment, by the way.

I assume that getting out of the atmosphere is not a problem as far as frictional heating of the outer skin of the craft goes, but getting back in would be an issue since it would be slowing down from orbital velocities to upper-atmospheric cruising speeds, so part or all of the skin of the craft would have to be covered with some kind of heat-management material (like the tiles on the space shuttle) or some kind of "active" heat evacuation system.

"In the future, it will take two hours to get anywhere on the planet -- one hour to get there, and one hour to get to the airport." -- Robert McNamarra

In this vein, can we imagine trans-atmospheric aircraft taking off from airports on Earth, flying out of the atmosphere into orbit, and then returning to Earth at another airport? Or, even better, in some cases rendez-vousing with an orbiting airport-spacestation, disembarking and picking up transit passengers, and then returning to Earth? It currently takes 18 hours just to fly from LAX to New Zealand, and many people take much longer flights -- that's plenty of time to get into orbit, dock with an orbiting spaceport/hotel, maybe sta

Wow! Thanks for the reply!

Moving difficult-to-produce finished goods (like complicated machinery and semiconductor products and so forth) from Earth to the building site could be done with a space elevator or with mature chemical launchers. Most of the cost of current space launches is the cost of manufacture and infrastructure for spacecraft, not the cost of fuel. Once materials and techniques advance to the point where launch craft are mature commodity items, and fuel dominates launch cost, it becomes practical to lift machinery, people, and construction craft up.

At this point, colonization of space will begin.

This is a very good point, i.e., that we will start to colonize space once the way to get into space becomes "a commodity," which it arguably is not at the moment.

Why rockets? Are space elevators the only alternative?

Good point about launchers not being to the point that fuel is the critical cost element. I would be interested in more details on the engineering and economics of space elevators, too, by the way.

It seems to me that there is not much attention being given to the idea of large, flying disk/wing aircraft that could fly up to high altitudes and then switch to rocket propulsion as a means for lifting large payloads on a reliable, safe, and regular schedule. The commercial aerospace industry is pretty close to the "fuel as the primary cost" situation which you mention.

Is this notion fundamentally flawed in some way; is there something I'm not seeing?

Popular Mechanics did a cover story about lenticular aircraft, and there are lots of other articles there, too. Apparently the Nazis did a lot of work on this, and after WWII the Air Force got all the technology and has been secretly working on it ever since. The point being that these things can be very big, and the whole fuselage is a lift-providing surface, so they could potentially carry a lot of material and still be able to stay aloft in the upper atmosphere. I wrote a little blurb about the space shuttle, winged vs. lenticular aircraft, etc., which might elicit some comment, by the way.

I assume that getting out of the atmosphere is not a problem as far as frictional heating of the outer skin of the craft goes, but getting back in would be an issue since it would be slowing down from orbital velocities to upper-atmospheric cruising speeds, so part or all of the skin of the craft would have to be covered with some kind of heat-management material (like the tiles on the space shuttle) or some kind of "active" heat evacuation system.

"In the future, it will take two hours to get anywhere on the planet -- one hour to get there, and one hour to get to the airport." -- Robert McNamarra

In this vein, can we imagine trans-atmospheric aircraft taking off from airports on Earth, flying out of the atmosphere into orbit, and then returning to Earth at another airport? Or, even better, in some cases rendez-vousing with an orbiting airport-spacestation, disembarking and picking up transit passengers, and then returning to Earth? It currently takes 18 hours just to fly from LAX to New Zealand, and many people take much longer flights -- that's plenty of time to get into orbit, dock with an orbiting spaceport/hotel, maybe sta

From Jakob Nielsen's Top Ten Web-Design Mistakes 2002:

3. Horizontal Scrolling

Users hate scrolling left to right. Vertical scrolling seems to be okay, maybe because it's much more common.
Web pages that require horizontal scrolling in standard-sized windows, such as 800x600 pixels, are particularly annoying. For some reason, many websites seem to be optimized for 805-pixel-wide browser windows, even though this resolution is pretty rare and the extra five pixels offer little relative to the annoyance of horizontal scrolling (and the space consumed by the horizontal scrollbar).

So now why do I want this mouse?

John.

Concrete Submarines

I'm not a big fan of Jakob Nielson. (Especially ever since I meet him at CHI2002. Perhaps snubbed would be a better term.)

Still he has contributed a great deal and has an Alert Box article mentioning some of these same usability considerations as related to security. The article dates back to November 2000. Like many other postings here, the article is mainly focused on password policy and use.

The Alert Box Article

From Jakob Neilsen's UseIt column on usability and the Internet, comes this column on Security and Human Factors. His summary:

A big lie of computer security is that security improves as password complexity increases. In reality, users simply write down difficult passwords, leaving the system vulnerable. Security is better increased by designing for how people actually behave.

there is a place for flash on the web. this has more to do with SVG being a script and the nature of the commercial market. It also has to do with Macromedia selling boxes on the shelves :)

Say you create a shmick commercial SVG site for a paying customer. Opps firstly there's no real browser support for SVG at the moment (forget the plug-in argument) and remember that it's more than likely that the bulk of users are going to stick to their old browsers - (useit.com Stuck With Old Browsers Until 2003) sans an SVG plug-in. So immediatly there's demmand for a SVG-like tool to do animation - this is where Flash fits in.

The reason why commercial op's are going to keep using flash is they want their code wrapped up in a binary format. The first time a competitor/interested party comes up to new site there is the possibility to yoink the plain text script. (havent looked at the spec since 1.0 - is there a binary format possible?)

So there's going to be plenty of room in the market for an open standards (SVG) and closed binary standards (Flash). Different formats for different uses.

Have you guys ever seen a visual design artist with 4+ years of experience using Photoshop? The maniacs NEVER use menus. They have one hand on the mouse, and the other hand on the left side of the keyboard whipping up CTRL, ALT, and SHIFT keyboard combinations. I know one guy who busted out his Windows Start button so that it wouldn't get in the way.

By contrast, I'm a pretty novice Photoshop user (I'm a developer), and in my case a mouse is definitely faster than all the inane key-combinations. By sitting and watching said graphic designer, however, I've managed to pick up some of his keyboard tips, and I have noticed an increase in productivity. I've become more focused on the task and less so on the navigation.

Photoshop key combos are a good example of what Jakob Nielsen refers to as accelerators. The mouse is the primary interaction tool, but the keyboard provides accelerators for more efficient use.

About a year ago, I read a short article in Popular Mechanics about something like this... It involves spinning ions in a lattice within a superconductor to produce a "gravity like" force, althrough it isn't actually gravity. Also, this effect is supposed to agree with relativity. A device has already been built, and the researchers are turning down inverstors so they can keep the discovery open. I found the article online.