From TFA:
> An Army police vehicle led the caravan from Tularosa, passing the Tularosa Basin
> Downwinders protesting the alleged fallout from the atomic test.
What's 'alleged' about the fallout? Did I miss something?
[... Snorts Repeatedly... ]
That is the funniest gdamn post I've read in quite a while. Maybe you have to be Canadian for it to be funny.
Even worse, maybe you have to a Canadian in Ontario (which I am).
But that was damn funny. Thanks for the Laugh of the Day.
The only client side tool I've encountered is at http://filippo.io/Heartbleed/
Can't speak to the implementation or even if it actually checks. But it purports to check in real time and if you trust it you can check sites prior to changing passwords.
Oh gawd... I had no idea what the flap was all about. That is fscking brutal.
[... ]
I had to go back and take another look - like slowing down to see a fatal accident. It's still brutal.
Going to the mobile site redirects to http://classic.slashdot.org/ on my phone and a desktop browser. I can't see them pushing the beta view on mobile users, but stranger things have happened.
Now they have to wait until the moon is in the Eighth House of Aquarius again to attempt the resurrection
No, No, No - the moon that will be in the *seventh* house. And of course Jupiter will need to be aligned w/ Mars. Next thing you know, goddamned *peace* will rule the planets, and (if you can believe this) *love* will steer the fscking stars.
Google's core business is intelligence. Facebooks core business is stupidity.
.
That's a god-damned beaut, brother. I actually spewed some yogurt into my nose, I started laughing so hard in mid-swallow.
If I had my way around here - which of course I don't - you'd get some bonus/recognition cool award thing. Not mod points, but like an instant order of magnitude reduction in your/. UID.
Not that you really need it, now that I've looked at your UID, but hey, it's the thought that counts, right?
Replying to my own post is in horrific bad taste, so I expect to get the bejesus mod'd out of me, but...
I don't know how the dollars add up, and it also smacks of conspiracy theorism, but advocating automation in health care as a cost saving measure, with a side benefit of data-ming the hell out of electronic medical record systems looks like enlightened self-interest for health insurers
And when the Dartmouth College Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice (author of one of TFA's cited sources) looks to be financed by health care suppliers (J and J), and really large health insurers (Wellpoint, United Health) through their charitable foundations, my spidey sense really starts tingling.
None of which means that there isn't any merit in the article. Maybe I'm just being too cynical at 4:00 a.m.
Dartmouth College Institute for Health Policy ...
on
IT and Health Care
·
· Score: 1
From TFA:
The amount of unnecessary spending is huge. In a project that analyzed 4,000 hospitals, the Dartmouth College Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice estimated that eliminating 30 percent of Medicare spending would not change either access to health care or the quality of the care itself.
The first thing I did was go looking for who funds the Dartmouth College Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice. Following the second search result was just too damn funny - excellence.php needs a bit of work, I guess.
Steven E. Koonin, the under secretary for science at the Energy Department, said the earthquake issue was new to him, but added, "We're committed to doing things in a factual and rigorous way, and if there is a problem, we will attend to it."
I have zero understanding of the technology being used here, nor of what might constitute rigorous risk identification, monitoring and response. The article doesn't help much in that it appears to focuses on the polar - people who assert little or manageable risk(s) and on the other end those who think just about anything (bad) could happen.
At the risk of trivializing something complex that I know jack shit about, I'll note I can't tell whether Mr. Koonin's comment is indicative of solid forethought and comprehensive contingency planning or a talking point meant to reassure listeners with no actual content behind it. An informative article might have detailed some of the problems that have been considered and the monitor/identify/respond/mitigate work that should now stand behind those scenarios.
Seems to me that the people who insure these sorts of projects are likely thinking about this sort of shit a lot. Sure enough, using a tool available even to journalists , it turns out that "As no standards have been established for this kind of insurance yet, the co-operation between project developer and insurer is of major importance. The clear definition of scenarios, best- and worst-cases, measures and procedures is crucial in order to produce a reliable and transparent policy. Both the stimulation concept and the layout of the test program for the certification of results should be specified in advance and form part of the insurance policy" [link left as an exercise for the interested reader].
How about some follow-up by The Gray Lady on what this actually means?
I'll admit being long-winded here, but I honestly have no intent to troll. That this article is accepted for print at a international newspaper of record is just beyond me. Where the hell is the science? Where is the investigative reporting?
And would it kill them to put in a WYSIWYG toolbar (tinyMCE, fckeditor, etc.)?
I don't know about Taco, but it might kill me. If we can't get away from JS editor toolbars on/., then they truly have taken over the world, I suppose.
I think a little manual markup is good for the soul, myself. Strictly IMHO.
How do you know our civilization's ability to produce personal computers isn't going to vanish. At least a book is good for three centuries on proper paper, is our ability to produce hard drives so robust?
I'll echo this sentiment w/ a reference to A Canticle for Leibowitz, by Walter Miller Jr., as well as noting that although I have documents stored on 720k, three and a half inch floppies within arm's reach, I've got no similarly handy way way to retrieve those docs.
Obviously the fact that they're orphaned on a media for which I have no required hardware is my own fault, but it does serve as an example to illustrate the temporal nature of contemporary storage. I have a hardcover book from the 1920's in great shape, very readable and physically robust; yet even a printout of my fourth year honours thesis (one of the docs stored on the aforementioned disks) would be in rough shape by now had I printed it using the 9-pin dot matrix printer I had 20 years ago.
I can guarantee that there will be *no* post-apocalyptic need for anything I cranked out in 1989. But I take Miller's central question to heart - how to preserve man's scientific knowledge so that we're not doomed to rediscover electricity (or whatever) again and again? Forever is a long, long time.
Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
That's the damn funniest.sig I've read in quite a while. Kinda like asking Henry Spencer if he knows anything about Usenet, or regular expressions.
Anyway, as another poster noted, the $12 million is for planning only. And it is up from $8 million in the original budget. I'm pretty impressed - how does the *planning* budget run over by 50%? And w/ a big 'n' to boot - it's not like it bloated from 1k to 1.5k.
We did not understand the global bio-sphere to begin with so we are in the Global-Environment change state. Now we propose attacking the symptoms without a full understanding of the dynamics.
Thank you. Very succinctly and clearly stated.
I've never understood what appears to me to be an urge to rush headlong into 'fixing' one problem that came about through poor understanding into another initiative or second phase that is also poorly understood.
Of course, you never know what you don't know, so there is a danger of paralysis resulting from fear (and even FUD) of the unknown.
The James Bay Project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bay_Project is an example of a tremendously complex initiative w/ an obvious goal and an amazing number of social, environmental and resource impacts (ranging from the obvious and straightforward to the unanticipated and complex). Many impacts were known and/or anticipated, but many weren't.
At the time, what I gleaned out of the controversy surrounding the proposed final phase on the project (often referred to as the James Bay Project 2) was that by the time man becomes aware of effects, through monitoring/observation/testing, etc. they are often a *done* deal. Monitoring, adjusting and reacting quickly enough in such circumstance is very difficult.
So what? Well, often the idea that we can fix specific elements in such complex systems is hubris and sheer folly. However, the fear-of-the-unknown objection can be the pendulum swinging to the other extreme to stop any activity. This planet is out in the middle of nowhere, and is all we have in terms of resources. There's no going down to the Milky Way corner store to pick up replacements for things we seriously fuck up.
This is serious shit. I'm glad to see serious study is occurring at the Carnegie Institution. The idea of countering warming with geoengineering on a piecemeal basis scares the crap out of me.
Slashdot Mirror
faceyelp - that's funny shit:
Todd Smith: "Great if you need help moving a couch. Don't bring up Star Trek."
Wow. I won't even attempt to match this, because gstoddart fscking nailed it.
From TFA:
> An Army police vehicle led the caravan from Tularosa, passing the Tularosa Basin
> Downwinders protesting the alleged fallout from the atomic test.
What's 'alleged' about the fallout? Did I miss something?
> literally, every American man, woman, and child would've been killed trying to invade
> Japan
I think you might want to look up 'literally'.
That was the funniest damn comment I have read on /. in I don't know how long.
I'm waiting for Whoosh Guy to deliver the metadata-matters diatribe and close the show.
Gmail Paper gets my vote.
One click, and the next thing I knew the door bell was ringing and a print out was delivered to my door. How handy is that???
Too bad the service only lasted for one day in April.
...of Vast Air Passengers? You mean Americans?
Well played sir!
In the UK that equates to a 12 year old.
The minimum age for a Facebook account is 13. It's right there, in their terms and conditions.
Parental fail.
Maybe the *kid* was failing. He could be 15 if he's been held back enough.
Mod Parent +1. Required Snark, thanks. Wish I had mod points.
I just wonder how this plays out with a screen failure and no transparent windshield?
...
An unusual set of circumstances but airplane accidents almost always are
[ ... Snorts Repeatedly ... ]
That is the funniest gdamn post I've read in quite a while. Maybe you have to be Canadian for it to be funny.
Even worse, maybe you have to a Canadian in Ontario (which I am).
But that was damn funny. Thanks for the Laugh of the Day.
The only client side tool I've encountered is at http://filippo.io/Heartbleed/ Can't speak to the implementation or even if it actually checks. But it purports to check in real time and if you trust it you can check sites prior to changing passwords.
Oh gawd ... I had no idea what the flap was all about. That is fscking brutal.
[ ... ]
I had to go back and take another look - like slowing down to see a fatal accident. It's still brutal.
Going to the mobile site redirects to http://classic.slashdot.org/ on my phone and a desktop browser. I can't see them pushing the beta view on mobile users, but stranger things have happened.
How many jets failed before the US military perfected the jet engine?
Okay, I'll bite - can you expand on this? A citation?
The moral of this story is - friends on Facebook shouldn't be professional relationships. That's what LinkedIn is for, if you must.
Oblig Ref. Warning Flash Ahead!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymMBEwtRZOg
Now they have to wait until the moon is in the Eighth House of Aquarius again to attempt the resurrection
No, No, No - the moon that will be in the *seventh* house. And of course Jupiter will need to be aligned w/ Mars. Next thing you know, goddamned *peace* will rule the planets, and (if you can believe this) *love* will steer the fscking stars.
Google's core business is intelligence. Facebooks core business is stupidity.
.
That's a god-damned beaut, brother. I actually spewed some yogurt into my nose, I started laughing so hard in mid-swallow.
If I had my way around here - which of course I don't - you'd get some bonus/recognition cool award thing. Not mod points, but like an instant order of magnitude reduction in your /. UID.
Not that you really need it, now that I've looked at your UID, but hey, it's the thought that counts, right?
Replying to my own post is in horrific bad taste, so I expect to get the bejesus mod'd out of me, but ...
I don't know how the dollars add up, and it also smacks of conspiracy theorism, but advocating automation in health care as a cost saving measure, with a side benefit of data-ming the hell out of electronic medical record systems looks like enlightened self-interest for health insurers
And when the Dartmouth College Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice (author of one of TFA's cited sources) looks to be financed by health care suppliers (J and J), and really large health insurers (Wellpoint, United Health) through their charitable foundations, my spidey sense really starts tingling.
None of which means that there isn't any merit in the article. Maybe I'm just being too cynical at 4:00 a.m.
The amount of unnecessary spending is huge. In a project that analyzed 4,000 hospitals, the Dartmouth College Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice estimated that eliminating 30 percent of Medicare spending would not change either access to health care or the quality of the care itself.
The first thing I did was go looking for who funds the Dartmouth College Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice. Following the second search result was just too damn funny - excellence.php needs a bit of work, I guess.
Steven E. Koonin, the under secretary for science at the Energy Department, said the earthquake issue was new to him, but added, "We're committed to doing things in a factual and rigorous way, and if there is a problem, we will attend to it."
I have zero understanding of the technology being used here, nor of what might constitute rigorous risk identification, monitoring and response. The article doesn't help much in that it appears to focuses on the polar - people who assert little or manageable risk(s) and on the other end those who think just about anything (bad) could happen.
At the risk of trivializing something complex that I know jack shit about, I'll note I can't tell whether Mr. Koonin's comment is indicative of solid forethought and comprehensive contingency planning or a talking point meant to reassure listeners with no actual content behind it. An informative article might have detailed some of the problems that have been considered and the monitor/identify/respond/mitigate work that should now stand behind those scenarios.
I despise this sort of sensational drivel that whips people up while giving them near zero content to build some understanding on which to stand. It leaves you wondering whether you should a) have faith that people putting millions of dollars into a complex project using a less than mature technology do indeed have a clue and are professionals who do their homework (c.f. this example that was supposed to create a black hole and suck the Earth into it but didn't (yet anyway) ) or b) be convinced that greedy money-grubbing fsckheads with no ethics and bereft of a single ounce of humanity are at it again.
Seems to me that the people who insure these sorts of projects are likely thinking about this sort of shit a lot. Sure enough, using a tool available even to journalists , it turns out that "As no standards have been established for this kind of insurance yet, the co-operation between project developer and insurer is of major importance. The clear definition of scenarios, best- and worst-cases, measures and procedures is crucial in order to produce a reliable and transparent policy. Both the stimulation concept and the layout of the test program for the certification of results should be specified in advance and form part of the insurance policy" [link left as an exercise for the interested reader].
How about some follow-up by The Gray Lady on what this actually means?
I'll admit being long-winded here, but I honestly have no intent to troll. That this article is accepted for print at a international newspaper of record is just beyond me. Where the hell is the science? Where is the investigative reporting?
And would it kill them to put in a WYSIWYG toolbar (tinyMCE, fckeditor, etc.)?
I don't know about Taco, but it might kill me. If we can't get away from JS editor toolbars on /., then they truly have taken over the world, I suppose.
I think a little manual markup is good for the soul, myself. Strictly IMHO.
How do you know our civilization's ability to produce personal computers isn't going to vanish. At least a book is good for three centuries on proper paper, is our ability to produce hard drives so robust?
I'll echo this sentiment w/ a reference to A Canticle for Leibowitz, by Walter Miller Jr., as well as noting that although I have documents stored on 720k, three and a half inch floppies within arm's reach, I've got no similarly handy way way to retrieve those docs.
Obviously the fact that they're orphaned on a media for which I have no required hardware is my own fault, but it does serve as an example to illustrate the temporal nature of contemporary storage. I have a hardcover book from the 1920's in great shape, very readable and physically robust; yet even a printout of my fourth year honours thesis (one of the docs stored on the aforementioned disks) would be in rough shape by now had I printed it using the 9-pin dot matrix printer I had 20 years ago.
I can guarantee that there will be *no* post-apocalyptic need for anything I cranked out in 1989. But I take Miller's central question to heart - how to preserve man's scientific knowledge so that we're not doomed to rediscover electricity (or whatever) again and again? Forever is a long, long time.
Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
That's the damn funniest .sig I've read in quite a while. Kinda like asking Henry Spencer if he knows anything about Usenet, or regular expressions.
Anyway, as another poster noted, the $12 million is for planning only. And it is up from $8 million in the original budget. I'm pretty impressed - how does the *planning* budget run over by 50%? And w/ a big 'n' to boot - it's not like it bloated from 1k to 1.5k.
We did not understand the global bio-sphere to begin with so we are in the Global-Environment change state. Now we propose attacking the symptoms without a full understanding of the dynamics.
Thank you. Very succinctly and clearly stated.
I've never understood what appears to me to be an urge to rush headlong into 'fixing' one problem that came about through poor understanding into another initiative or second phase that is also poorly understood.
Of course, you never know what you don't know, so there is a danger of paralysis resulting from fear (and even FUD) of the unknown.
The James Bay Project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bay_Project is an example of a tremendously complex initiative w/ an obvious goal and an amazing number of social, environmental and resource impacts (ranging from the obvious and straightforward to the unanticipated and complex). Many impacts were known and/or anticipated, but many weren't.
At the time, what I gleaned out of the controversy surrounding the proposed final phase on the project (often referred to as the James Bay Project 2) was that by the time man becomes aware of effects, through monitoring/observation/testing, etc. they are often a *done* deal. Monitoring, adjusting and reacting quickly enough in such circumstance is very difficult.
So what? Well, often the idea that we can fix specific elements in such complex systems is hubris and sheer folly. However, the fear-of-the-unknown objection can be the pendulum swinging to the other extreme to stop any activity. This planet is out in the middle of nowhere, and is all we have in terms of resources. There's no going down to the Milky Way corner store to pick up replacements for things we seriously fuck up.
This is serious shit. I'm glad to see serious study is occurring at the Carnegie Institution. The idea of countering warming with geoengineering on a piecemeal basis scares the crap out of me.