So Net Application numbers are of IE Mind share vs. Market share. I wouldn't say the numbers are Really slanted. If you need to use IE at work, then you are using IE. So if you are making corporate web software you need to know what browsers are used at work.
A loss to developers due to legal actions could cause a chilling effect towards making iOS application. Developers have to go threw the hassle of approval to make sure their product is good. Then pay Apple 20% of their profits and not having legal protection from Apple would make developers go towards android where at least they can get their software out easier.
"Initially a client-side scripting language typically (mis)used for decorative effects"
I remember using it back in the old days for client side input validations. As in the Pre-Ajax days if you were to submit a form and then get the page back with errors over a 14.4k modem took a while. Having Javascript as the first line of defense really help speed things up.
The visual effects were used as mostly toys to show off your skills as a web developer (back in the 90's if you were a good web developer that can do all sorts of gui you could make big bucks) Most serious sites kept that type of stuff down.
How many of those companies if they were to host them locally would have lost all their data without it... Many Small companies IT policies are Server under the desk, covered with dust and dirt, and used by the person sitting at the desk as their own workstation where they browse with IE 6 on questionable sites. What Amazon did was stupid. They should have had a better backup solution. But I will keep saying what I have always said.
MAKE AND READ THE CONTRACT IF YOUR BUSINESS IMPORTANT INFORMATION GOES ON AN EXTERNAL SYSTEM!!!!
It isn't cloud computing that is the problem or it is a bad idea. It is the fact that people jump into it and don't make a formal contract to make sure they can get their data back on request or guaranteed uptime and particular punishments and compensation if they don't get it.
Cloud Computing isn't always cheaper. It is a matter of size and scale. Cloud computing is best for small - mid sized organizations. Where the cost of infrastructure and keeping a server(s) to run is more expensive then a Cloud computing company to host many Uber Servers and give you a slice to use. But these companies make money off of this... Why because the cost of selling you 10% of use on their server you pay 15% (still cheaper then getting your infrastructural and keep it running successfully) However if you are getting big and you use 100% of their server infrastructure then it is clear that you should probably setup your own data center as your size and the amount you are paying will be cheaper to host it yourself.
The problem with governments is that they are failure based. It is what you do wrong that gets you in trouble. vs. what you do right that gets you recognition. And combine it with politics means for any project it is operated in a method to prevent failure (dumping a project isn't failure it is avoiding failure) and there is opposition political forces trying to get the project to fail, meaning any idea no matter how good will be under a lot of pressure and its chance for success is quite limited.
Now a failure based organization isn't always bad. Think water treatment where there are layers of safeguards to prevent problems, and almost all sane political parties (Heck if I can get some rabid Tea Party members to agree that Government should control/regulate the City Water Supply that says something) do not want to mess with it so they will not try to cause failure.
However a lot of IT based jobs require a degree of failure and experimentation until they get it right. Thus creates a lot of problems. A major improvement if you get a work ethic all the way up the organization that states, even If I Disagree with the idea, once it is approved I will do my best to make it a success then you could actually get an effective government without being scary.
Granted I think Cruel and Unjust punishment is much better then Cruel and Unusual (Especially as the Unusual may come up with more innovative and effective ideas). But Copyright law hasn't been keeping up with the modern times. The Laws are now unfairly harsh now because it doesn't factor in how easy it is now to break the law "innocently".
Back when these laws were designed copyright infringement meant often a full attempt to break the law. You needed expensive resources to produce copies. Either a lot of Man Power or an expensive press... These large expensive operations meant that copyright infringement also came with selling the goods for a profit. So the infringer were making a lot of money breaking the law. So these high fines were just because the larger the infringement the more money they made.
However today it is too easy to break copyright. Digital Technologies are designed to make consistent high quality copies every time, without degrading quality. They are cheap and easy to use so anyone could be a violator of a large scale. The laws need to tighten to help protect the copyright holders, however the punishment for the crimes shouldn't be such that it could cause life ruin for the perpetrator. It is like giving out $50,000 speeding tickets, for people who go 10-20 mph over the limit, but are in cars designed to drive at least 20mph any US. Speed limit, and roads designed to handle safe driving at those speeds under particular conditions.
Price isn't always the key element, it is value. If you are paying the difference between $1500 vs. $2000 for a computer. The question is what makes that $2000 worth $500 more, and is it worth it, for you. Lets say the IBM PC vs. Amiga. the Amiga at the time was an awesome product compared to the IBM if it had the larger software base the IBM and PC probably wouldn't have made it.
No I would disagree. Android has a larger user base then Apple does because it is a "universal" OS for smart phones and mobile devices. Apple has a strong holding in part of the marking and stile but mostly due to the fact it has the most apps. Back in the Dos days When my family went to get their first computer they looked at Apple, Amiga, Commodore, and IBM/IBM Compatibles. They liked the Amiga, the Apple is what I used in school, the Commodore was OK too... But they went with an IBM Compatible... Not because of the hardware openness but because when you looked at the store you see 1 shelf of Apple, Amiga, and Commodore programs and 3 or 4 isles of IBM/Compatible software.
"As it is, the American "capitalist" system shows a distinct lack of competition in the medical field"
Did I miss something, I hear about a dozen adds on the radio and on TV daily (Even on NPR!!) about Doctors and Hospitals advertising their services and trying to show that they are somehow better then the others in the area.
Drug companies are fighting against each other trying to get the next big drug out before someone else. Generics trying to make the good old drug cheaper then the other generic manufacture.
EMR Companies are always at it trying to gain market share, and if they are popular one year it could change the next.
I can't think of any area that isn't in a lot of competition in the medical field.
Hey even for the large million dollar MRI systems, You got GE, Phillips and Semens, topping the list.
Insurance Companies too need to compete. Unless they are in the right state. But why has my Insurance Carriers at work change every year? Well because work is finding the cheapest Insurance with decent coverage to keep the employees healthy.
The problems is Doctors know nothing about medical billing... And from the sounds of it neither do you... In the USA Doctors are paid by service performed not as a salary from insurance company. So at the end of the day the Doctor gives their staff or billers a list of all their procedures that they did, the diagnosis they found. The Billers/Coders (these are medical coders not computer program coders) take these procedures and match them up with an appropriated CPT Code, and ICD/9 Codes for the diagnoses. Then they map which diagnosis goes with what procedure. They will put in details such as the dates of service and which provider did what. They may also put in what type of facilities used or the complexity of the procedure.
Then these go across a Fee Schedule which is a price list. Say a 10 minute office visit is $75. Getting a Skin Tag Removed is $250 etc... Now the insurance company will make a deal with the doctor and give an adjusted rate. So that $75 visit will be $60 threw your insurance, and you have a $10 copay so the doctor will be getting $5.00 less for your visit with insurance then if you didn't have any. But the doctor agrees to this because the insurance company will pay him on the average with less hassle then trying to get it directly from the individual.
Doping you insurance will only hurt yourself and the insurance company. But it will not effect the Doctor, as the next time you come for a visit he can charge as much as he wants for the service, without insurance.
Doctors tend to be ill-tempored because they have been trained to perform medicine not run a small business, but society and most doctors tend to believed it themselves that they are on a higher plane, some how that much smarter then everyone else. So when it comes to something the Doctor doesn't fully understand they often get angry because it is showing that they don't know everything.
"Why doesn't everyone flip out when things like those are added to Group 2B"
Because there is a large group of people who are afraid of science and technology. And they base their knowledge of science on what they learned in 8th grade science class. When they talk about the evils of DDT, and how we didn't know how harmful radiation was when we drop the Atomic bomb to end World War II. So they will go out and protest any technology and use any bit of evidence that it could be harmful to raise their arms us and say. You are doing it again, creating something that will kill us all!
I think aver seeing the Evil the Nazis did in WWII, and the bulk of the population did nothing because they weren't looking for problems, and ignoring ones that they do see. American generations after that decided to go over board and make sure nothing bad that happens will go unnoticed and without a fight.
Yes it was. The way the story was written it looked like it was an arcade game from 1943. That said I actually never remember that game, and I am over 20 but I never spent much time in the arcade.
"building a floating launchpad is more fun than red-tape battling the bureaucrats:-)"
1 You: Yes I would like to make a large rocket, put myself in it, with a lot of explosives near my butt, and launch myself into orbit... Can I have a permit for that?
2 Them: This department cannot approve such a thing. Try this department instead.
I wouldn't want to ride it. For some reason a plexiglass dome at the nose of the rocket give me a bad feeling... Perhaps it is because all my model rockets I build never succeeding in launching the shoot, and it landed nose first about 10 cm into the ground.
Stuff like this only matters for geeks and nerds. If there was only a site that had the slogan "News for nerds stuff that matters." That would cover things like interesting hacks and new improvements to technology, and also showing ways to reuse old technology in new ways.
The trick with the Tea Party is to listen to what they say, don't argue with them as you will not enlighten them. As any solid proof is based on conspiracy reasoning. That if your idea has facts the facts were obviously planted to as part of the liberal conspiracy. You just agree with them and then you can get by with the rest of your life.
That said there are Liberal groups who are just as bad as the Tea Party. The Tea Party has the voice right now because a Democrat is president. Don't forget the 9/11 Conspiracy theorists, and those people who hated EVERYTHING George W. Bush did. And figured there is some Conservative conspiracy which is so deep that it couldn't possibly be uncovered.
Fox news saw that news tended to lean to the left, to make money they made a station with news that leaned to the right to make money off a group of people who felt left out. Then as they realized their user base is far more right they adjusted their business model to support their viewer base.
These people are at the same percentage as before, they just switch to a different media to get their news, and many of them feel they can yell louder.
"Speaking one's opinion" is valuable. Partisan is speaking the collective agreement of a large group, not your own. A non-partisan political party is impossible. As a political party is a set of agreed views, a political party could be a moderate group where extreme parties can find a middle ground, but the party isn't non-partisan it is just moderate. Being moderate doesn't mean it is wishy washy and will not stand up to ideals, it just mean its sets of ideals can cross two seeming opposing viewpoints.
Groups like this are saying My Rights of Free Speech are more important then yours. I disagree with what you say, so I will attack you and discredit you to make you stop. Vs. The more Nobel "I disagree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your rights to say it".
I personally disagree with Wikilinks I think it is a bad site and at best borderline criminal. However if you support Wikilinks and think it is a force for good. I am going to disagree with you but will not try to stop you from saying this, as your opinion is just as important as mine.
These "Political" Hackings are just idiotic. They will not change anything (with perhaps PBS getting more network security and starting a fund drive a month earlier) And what it does is makes your view look bad.
Weather is complex. Global Warming may have a large or small effect on these tornadoes. The Global Warming debate is more about politics then science. Back in the 70's and 80's they were complaining about smog (as it was a major political issue, it can be seen, smelt and noticed) Rules and regulation made automobiles and factories to greatly reduce smog in cities. However during that fight they were the anti-car group of political active environmentalist, who really has been trying to get rid of cars. As cars stop producing mass amount of the really nasty stuff and mainly CO2 the global warming CO2 connection got their attention and allowed them to continue the fight (as any activists groups biggest fear is winning, because then they loose a voice and loose funding and will need to get a different job). These most vocal people on both sides have little or nothing to do with science, they will scrape for reports that support their idea and put a marketing push to get their ideas out. We need alternate energy. Because we need to keep our options open, Nuclear, Solar, Hydroelectric, other methods are important, we need to keep our sources diverse
Slashdot Mirror
Like in a hybrid car. Or in a powered on anything car.
So Net Application numbers are of IE Mind share vs. Market share. I wouldn't say the numbers are Really slanted. If you need to use IE at work, then you are using IE. So if you are making corporate web software you need to know what browsers are used at work.
A loss to developers due to legal actions could cause a chilling effect towards making iOS application. Developers have to go threw the hassle of approval to make sure their product is good. Then pay Apple 20% of their profits and not having legal protection from Apple would make developers go towards android where at least they can get their software out easier.
"Initially a client-side scripting language typically (mis)used for decorative effects"
I remember using it back in the old days for client side input validations. As in the Pre-Ajax days if you were to submit a form and then get the page back with errors over a 14.4k modem took a while. Having Javascript as the first line of defense really help speed things up.
The visual effects were used as mostly toys to show off your skills as a web developer (back in the 90's if you were a good web developer that can do all sorts of gui you could make big bucks) Most serious sites kept that type of stuff down.
How many of those companies if they were to host them locally would have lost all their data without it... Many Small companies IT policies are Server under the desk, covered with dust and dirt, and used by the person sitting at the desk as their own workstation where they browse with IE 6 on questionable sites.
What Amazon did was stupid. They should have had a better backup solution. But I will keep saying what I have always said.
MAKE AND READ THE CONTRACT IF YOUR BUSINESS IMPORTANT INFORMATION GOES ON AN EXTERNAL SYSTEM!!!!
It isn't cloud computing that is the problem or it is a bad idea. It is the fact that people jump into it and don't make a formal contract to make sure they can get their data back on request or guaranteed uptime and particular punishments and compensation if they don't get it.
Cloud Computing isn't always cheaper. It is a matter of size and scale. Cloud computing is best for small - mid sized organizations. Where the cost of infrastructure and keeping a server(s) to run is more expensive then a Cloud computing company to host many Uber Servers and give you a slice to use. But these companies make money off of this... Why because the cost of selling you 10% of use on their server you pay 15% (still cheaper then getting your infrastructural and keep it running successfully) However if you are getting big and you use 100% of their server infrastructure then it is clear that you should probably setup your own data center as your size and the amount you are paying will be cheaper to host it yourself.
The problem with governments is that they are failure based.
It is what you do wrong that gets you in trouble. vs. what you do right that gets you recognition. And combine it with politics means for any project it is operated in a method to prevent failure (dumping a project isn't failure it is avoiding failure) and there is opposition political forces trying to get the project to fail, meaning any idea no matter how good will be under a lot of pressure and its chance for success is quite limited.
Now a failure based organization isn't always bad. Think water treatment where there are layers of safeguards to prevent problems, and almost all sane political parties (Heck if I can get some rabid Tea Party members to agree that Government should control/regulate the City Water Supply that says something) do not want to mess with it so they will not try to cause failure.
However a lot of IT based jobs require a degree of failure and experimentation until they get it right. Thus creates a lot of problems. A major improvement if you get a work ethic all the way up the organization that states, even If I Disagree with the idea, once it is approved I will do my best to make it a success then you could actually get an effective government without being scary.
Granted I think Cruel and Unjust punishment is much better then Cruel and Unusual (Especially as the Unusual may come up with more innovative and effective ideas). But Copyright law hasn't been keeping up with the modern times. The Laws are now unfairly harsh now because it doesn't factor in how easy it is now to break the law "innocently".
Back when these laws were designed copyright infringement meant often a full attempt to break the law. You needed expensive resources to produce copies. Either a lot of Man Power or an expensive press... These large expensive operations meant that copyright infringement also came with selling the goods for a profit. So the infringer were making a lot of money breaking the law. So these high fines were just because the larger the infringement the more money they made.
However today it is too easy to break copyright. Digital Technologies are designed to make consistent high quality copies every time, without degrading quality. They are cheap and easy to use so anyone could be a violator of a large scale. The laws need to tighten to help protect the copyright holders, however the punishment for the crimes shouldn't be such that it could cause life ruin for the perpetrator. It is like giving out $50,000 speeding tickets, for people who go 10-20 mph over the limit, but are in cars designed to drive at least 20mph any US. Speed limit, and roads designed to handle safe driving at those speeds under particular conditions.
Price isn't always the key element, it is value. If you are paying the difference between $1500 vs. $2000 for a computer. The question is what makes that $2000 worth $500 more, and is it worth it, for you. Lets say the IBM PC vs. Amiga. the Amiga at the time was an awesome product compared to the IBM if it had the larger software base the IBM and PC probably wouldn't have made it.
No I would disagree. Android has a larger user base then Apple does because it is a "universal" OS for smart phones and mobile devices. Apple has a strong holding in part of the marking and stile but mostly due to the fact it has the most apps. Back in the Dos days When my family went to get their first computer they looked at Apple, Amiga, Commodore, and IBM/IBM Compatibles. They liked the Amiga, the Apple is what I used in school, the Commodore was OK too... But they went with an IBM Compatible... Not because of the hardware openness but because when you looked at the store you see 1 shelf of Apple, Amiga, and Commodore programs and 3 or 4 isles of IBM/Compatible software.
"As it is, the American "capitalist" system shows a distinct lack of competition in the medical field"
Did I miss something, I hear about a dozen adds on the radio and on TV daily (Even on NPR!!) about Doctors and Hospitals advertising their services and trying to show that they are somehow better then the others in the area.
Drug companies are fighting against each other trying to get the next big drug out before someone else. Generics trying to make the good old drug cheaper then the other generic manufacture.
EMR Companies are always at it trying to gain market share, and if they are popular one year it could change the next.
I can't think of any area that isn't in a lot of competition in the medical field.
Hey even for the large million dollar MRI systems, You got GE, Phillips and Semens, topping the list.
Insurance Companies too need to compete. Unless they are in the right state. But why has my Insurance Carriers at work change every year? Well because work is finding the cheapest Insurance with decent coverage to keep the employees healthy.
The problems is Doctors know nothing about medical billing... And from the sounds of it neither do you...
In the USA
Doctors are paid by service performed not as a salary from insurance company.
So at the end of the day the Doctor gives their staff or billers a list of all their procedures that they did, the diagnosis they found.
The Billers/Coders (these are medical coders not computer program coders) take these procedures and match them up with an appropriated CPT Code, and ICD/9 Codes for the diagnoses. Then they map which diagnosis goes with what procedure. They will put in details such as the dates of service and which provider did what. They may also put in what type of facilities used or the complexity of the procedure.
Then these go across a Fee Schedule which is a price list. Say a 10 minute office visit is $75. Getting a Skin Tag Removed is $250 etc... Now the insurance company will make a deal with the doctor and give an adjusted rate. So that $75 visit will be $60 threw your insurance, and you have a $10 copay so the doctor will be getting $5.00 less for your visit with insurance then if you didn't have any. But the doctor agrees to this because the insurance company will pay him on the average with less hassle then trying to get it directly from the individual.
Doping you insurance will only hurt yourself and the insurance company. But it will not effect the Doctor, as the next time you come for a visit he can charge as much as he wants for the service, without insurance.
Doctors tend to be ill-tempored because they have been trained to perform medicine not run a small business, but society and most doctors tend to believed it themselves that they are on a higher plane, some how that much smarter then everyone else. So when it comes to something the Doctor doesn't fully understand they often get angry because it is showing that they don't know everything.
"Why doesn't everyone flip out when things like those are added to Group 2B"
Because there is a large group of people who are afraid of science and technology. And they base their knowledge of science on what they learned in 8th grade science class. When they talk about the evils of DDT, and how we didn't know how harmful radiation was when we drop the Atomic bomb to end World War II. So they will go out and protest any technology and use any bit of evidence that it could be harmful to raise their arms us and say. You are doing it again, creating something that will kill us all!
I think aver seeing the Evil the Nazis did in WWII, and the bulk of the population did nothing because they weren't looking for problems, and ignoring ones that they do see. American generations after that decided to go over board and make sure nothing bad that happens will go unnoticed and without a fight.
Yes it was. The way the story was written it looked like it was an arcade game from 1943. That said I actually never remember that game, and I am over 20 but I never spent much time in the arcade.
"building a floating launchpad is more fun than red-tape battling the bureaucrats :-)"
1 You: Yes I would like to make a large rocket, put myself in it, with a lot of explosives near my butt, and launch myself into orbit... Can I have a permit for that?
2 Them: This department cannot approve such a thing. Try this department instead.
3. goto 1
I wouldn't want to ride it.
For some reason a plexiglass dome at the nose of the rocket give me a bad feeling...
Perhaps it is because all my model rockets I build never succeeding in launching the shoot, and it landed nose first about 10 cm into the ground.
Stuff like this only matters for geeks and nerds.
If there was only a site that had the slogan "News for nerds stuff that matters." That would cover things like interesting hacks and new improvements to technology, and also showing ways to reuse old technology in new ways.
A 1943 pinball game to recored score must have been some hack. I don't think that era had electric lights in the system, or a way of keeping score.
The trick with the Tea Party is to listen to what they say, don't argue with them as you will not enlighten them. As any solid proof is based on conspiracy reasoning. That if your idea has facts the facts were obviously planted to as part of the liberal conspiracy. You just agree with them and then you can get by with the rest of your life.
That said there are Liberal groups who are just as bad as the Tea Party. The Tea Party has the voice right now because a Democrat is president. Don't forget the 9/11 Conspiracy theorists, and those people who hated EVERYTHING George W. Bush did. And figured there is some Conservative conspiracy which is so deep that it couldn't possibly be uncovered.
Fox news saw that news tended to lean to the left, to make money they made a station with news that leaned to the right to make money off a group of people who felt left out. Then as they realized their user base is far more right they adjusted their business model to support their viewer base.
These people are at the same percentage as before, they just switch to a different media to get their news, and many of them feel they can yell louder.
"Speaking one's opinion" is valuable. Partisan is speaking the collective agreement of a large group, not your own. A non-partisan political party is impossible. As a political party is a set of agreed views, a political party could be a moderate group where extreme parties can find a middle ground, but the party isn't non-partisan it is just moderate. Being moderate doesn't mean it is wishy washy and will not stand up to ideals, it just mean its sets of ideals can cross two seeming opposing viewpoints.
Fox news doesn't lie... They just don't give the inconvenient view its credit.
Groups like this are saying My Rights of Free Speech are more important then yours. I disagree with what you say, so I will attack you and discredit you to make you stop.
Vs.
The more Nobel "I disagree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your rights to say it".
I personally disagree with Wikilinks I think it is a bad site and at best borderline criminal. However if you support Wikilinks and think it is a force for good. I am going to disagree with you but will not try to stop you from saying this, as your opinion is just as important as mine.
These "Political" Hackings are just idiotic. They will not change anything (with perhaps PBS getting more network security and starting a fund drive a month earlier) And what it does is makes your view look bad.
You bet The War of 1812 was a major turning point man.
Your argument is much better then mine. Thanks
Weather is complex. Global Warming may have a large or small effect on these tornadoes. The Global Warming debate is more about politics then science. Back in the 70's and 80's they were complaining about smog (as it was a major political issue, it can be seen, smelt and noticed) Rules and regulation made automobiles and factories to greatly reduce smog in cities. However during that fight they were the anti-car group of political active environmentalist, who really has been trying to get rid of cars. As cars stop producing mass amount of the really nasty stuff and mainly CO2 the global warming CO2 connection got their attention and allowed them to continue the fight (as any activists groups biggest fear is winning, because then they loose a voice and loose funding and will need to get a different job).
These most vocal people on both sides have little or nothing to do with science, they will scrape for reports that support their idea and put a marketing push to get their ideas out.
We need alternate energy. Because we need to keep our options open, Nuclear, Solar, Hydroelectric, other methods are important, we need to keep our sources diverse