They are sold, in bulk, and if not properly disposed-of (most won't be), that mercury gets into the soil around landfills, possibly into the water supply, where it joins all those pharmaceuticals (and god knows what else) that were irresponsibly dumped down the drain/toilet.
You would have gotten your point across easier had you merely said "the film industry was ruined when they invented 'talkies'! Get the hell off my lawn!"
That almost sounds like you are anthropomorphizing the entirety of the universe across the entire span of time (if such a thing exists)... It is also spatially egotistical (can't think of a better phrase).
Just because you can't see something happening to that bucket-worth of pond scum a billion light-years away doesn't mean it isn't being affected by time there as we are here. So going and changing something far away would change the time line there, and would be exactly the same as changing the time line here. The fact that your time traveling self isn't able to see the results has no bearing on the situation. What if instant transportation became a realized technology? Then you would be able to witness the results of your time traveling, and suddenly you can't do it any more, just because of the invention of an unrelated technology. I don't buy it.
So i just got to know WTH else is out there that actually needs Win9x support?
We have HVAC monitoring software that will not run on anything newer that W98. It was running on an old laptop in a dirty elevator machinery room, and unsuprisingly it finally died (last year). The oldest machine we had available was a Dell Optiplex 270 (made in about 2005), which was lucky, because that was probably one of the last devices w98 could possibly be installed on. After we got that in service we had to figure out what to do if that one fails (being a Dell it will, soon).
So we now are the proud owners of a Windows 98 VMWare virtual machine. Just because management didn't want to upgrade our HVAC monitoring software (which, admittedly, is extortionately expensive).
Surely the solution to this is just to remove any mod points if a post is edited?
That would remove down-mods too. Having time limits on moderation means GNAA (and other) trolls are guaranteed to be at score:1 for that time limit. It increases the incentive for trolls to fristpost.
Besides "SQL injection, phishing, malicious attachments, social engineering", what other types of realistic attacks are there?
When an army of machete-wielding pirates with stacks of floppies and USB drives break down the doors to your server room, you will know... yes... you will know!
That's a bit of a fallacy... Of course life exists here: if it didn't, we wouldn't be here to observe it. So the 1-out-of-1 so far doesn't say much about the probability of life existing elsewhere, unless we find some place very similar to Earth. Also, "fairly large number of parameters" isn't quite accurate since, on a galactic scale, any place on/in the Earth is within a relatively small set of parameters. From our perspective it's a lot, because it's all we've been able to experience so far, with the exception of somewhat limited information gathered from telescopes, etc.
Some PACS client software can burn a study to a CD, which is the way we deal with sending images to doctors offices (I work IT in a hospital). These CDs will have self-contained viewing software on them to see the images, and sometimes you can include reports with them. But that's only with the right PACS software... Trying to cut and paste DICOM images into Word sounds like a terrible idea -- not to mention tedious.
However, I know how stubborn doctors can be, and radiologists are often the worst of them... To pin down a proper solution, I'd probably need to know a lot more, mostly where the doctors are who are getting these reports. If they are employed by a hospital, that hospital probably has a PACS to which the images could be transferred. Of course, if they are in private practice that's pretty much out the window. A properly-configured PACS (that supports such access at all) would allow you to give those doctors remote access to it to only see their patients, but the Rads probably wouldn't go for it, as it may require more work on a regular basis, on top of setting up new users, etc.
I also want to reinforce what another poster said, which is to be VERY careful with HIPAA rules. If you have some kind of business agreement in providing IT services to medical staff, you may be accepting personal responsibility for privacy breaches that result from your work.
Our successful evolution contradicts "failure in evolution". In fact, given that evolution is a process and not steps toward a goal, "failure in evolution" is inherently nonsensical. It doesn't fail, it just happens.
I'd have to disagree, or at least disagree with the suggestion that it's any worse than any other industry. I actually work in a hospital's IT department (not bio-med). And a small hospital at that, with a relatively limited budget. We offer free wireless, but it doesn't touch our clinical network, even at the edge (separate Internet connections). It's unfair to single out health care IT as lacking, when it is lacking everywhere else too.
One big difference here is that medical records are a private, touchy issue. But that's only because people want them to be private, not because there is an actual need (under normal circumstances). In reality, very few people give a crap that you came to the ER to get some stitches. Do you think anyone cares what meds you are on? For most of us, no one does. Notable exceptions would be for public figures, of course. That doesn't mean I'm handing out passwords, or that I don't care about security -- I do care, and I take all reasonable steps I know of (and am allowed to do) to keep the data secure.
On a side note, thank you for spelling HIPAA properly: it's incredibly irritating to see people -- even those working in health care -- write "HIPPA".
The next time you read something incredibly implausible, might I suggest you consider whether or not the statement may have been made in jest or sarcastically.
Those people are a subsection of "anonymous", and do not represent the whole. Most in anonymous are not taking part in the DDoSes, and many disagree with the attacks. So to say anonymous have "common, predictable goals and means", and that there is no infighting is simply incorrect.
By *definition* democracy is rule by the biggest mob.
That's an oversimplification that steps way past the line of reason and into complete BS. "Mob rule" would be true if every member of that "mob" had the exact same viewpoints on every topic. But since people have differing opinions, that "mob" changes drastically based on the decision to be made. Therefore, it's not the biggest group that rules, but that for each decision being made, the side that has the most support wins.
Re:The most successful trolls
on
Angles On Anonymous
·
· Score: 4, Informative
There is no infighting for one thing, and those who participate have common, predictable goals and means.
You really don't understand Anonymous at all if you think that.
Slashdot Mirror
I bet a lot of companies will just pack-up shop and move over there. To avoid the hassle.
Umm... companies are moving there now without that hassle. I don't think employee transportation costs are the major driving factor behind that.
They are sold, in bulk, and if not properly disposed-of (most won't be), that mercury gets into the soil around landfills, possibly into the water supply, where it joins all those pharmaceuticals (and god knows what else) that were irresponsibly dumped down the drain/toilet.
You would have gotten your point across easier had you merely said "the film industry was ruined when they invented 'talkies'! Get the hell off my lawn!"
That almost sounds like you are anthropomorphizing the entirety of the universe across the entire span of time (if such a thing exists)... It is also spatially egotistical (can't think of a better phrase).
Just because you can't see something happening to that bucket-worth of pond scum a billion light-years away doesn't mean it isn't being affected by time there as we are here. So going and changing something far away would change the time line there, and would be exactly the same as changing the time line here. The fact that your time traveling self isn't able to see the results has no bearing on the situation. What if instant transportation became a realized technology? Then you would be able to witness the results of your time traveling, and suddenly you can't do it any more, just because of the invention of an unrelated technology. I don't buy it.
standards can be different. Take a look at html5
HTML5 isn't standardized yet, is it? Or did I fall asleep?
So i just got to know WTH else is out there that actually needs Win9x support?
We have HVAC monitoring software that will not run on anything newer that W98. It was running on an old laptop in a dirty elevator machinery room, and unsuprisingly it finally died (last year). The oldest machine we had available was a Dell Optiplex 270 (made in about 2005), which was lucky, because that was probably one of the last devices w98 could possibly be installed on. After we got that in service we had to figure out what to do if that one fails (being a Dell it will, soon).
So we now are the proud owners of a Windows 98 VMWare virtual machine. Just because management didn't want to upgrade our HVAC monitoring software (which, admittedly, is extortionately expensive).
Surely the solution to this is just to remove any mod points if a post is edited?
That would remove down-mods too. Having time limits on moderation means GNAA (and other) trolls are guaranteed to be at score:1 for that time limit. It increases the incentive for trolls to fristpost.
Besides "SQL injection, phishing, malicious attachments, social engineering", what other types of realistic attacks are there?
When an army of machete-wielding pirates with stacks of floppies and USB drives break down the doors to your server room, you will know... yes... you will know!
That's a bit of a fallacy... Of course life exists here: if it didn't, we wouldn't be here to observe it. So the 1-out-of-1 so far doesn't say much about the probability of life existing elsewhere, unless we find some place very similar to Earth. Also, "fairly large number of parameters" isn't quite accurate since, on a galactic scale, any place on/in the Earth is within a relatively small set of parameters. From our perspective it's a lot, because it's all we've been able to experience so far, with the exception of somewhat limited information gathered from telescopes, etc.
and Stallman had come over
I'm sorry. At least that wasn't enough to deter them!
Yes, they can. They can be a part of Anonymous legitimately.
Some PACS client software can burn a study to a CD, which is the way we deal with sending images to doctors offices (I work IT in a hospital). These CDs will have self-contained viewing software on them to see the images, and sometimes you can include reports with them. But that's only with the right PACS software... Trying to cut and paste DICOM images into Word sounds like a terrible idea -- not to mention tedious.
However, I know how stubborn doctors can be, and radiologists are often the worst of them... To pin down a proper solution, I'd probably need to know a lot more, mostly where the doctors are who are getting these reports. If they are employed by a hospital, that hospital probably has a PACS to which the images could be transferred. Of course, if they are in private practice that's pretty much out the window. A properly-configured PACS (that supports such access at all) would allow you to give those doctors remote access to it to only see their patients, but the Rads probably wouldn't go for it, as it may require more work on a regular basis, on top of setting up new users, etc.
I also want to reinforce what another poster said, which is to be VERY careful with HIPAA rules. If you have some kind of business agreement in providing IT services to medical staff, you may be accepting personal responsibility for privacy breaches that result from your work.
That's correct. What comes before a fall is "Oh $#!&, I'm about to fall."
Twitter makes a profit? That's insane and quite unbelievable.
I know it's not always a realistic option because of politics or policy, but if your switches can't do SSH, I suggest you change brands.
Our successful evolution contradicts "failure in evolution". In fact, given that evolution is a process and not steps toward a goal, "failure in evolution" is inherently nonsensical. It doesn't fail, it just happens.
No, "hold on" suggests he was going to do it right then: imminent.
We're a failure in evolution. A product of our own success.
Self-contradict much?
Yes, Russo-Soviet Subscription.
I'd have to disagree, or at least disagree with the suggestion that it's any worse than any other industry. I actually work in a hospital's IT department (not bio-med). And a small hospital at that, with a relatively limited budget. We offer free wireless, but it doesn't touch our clinical network, even at the edge (separate Internet connections). It's unfair to single out health care IT as lacking, when it is lacking everywhere else too.
One big difference here is that medical records are a private, touchy issue. But that's only because people want them to be private, not because there is an actual need (under normal circumstances). In reality, very few people give a crap that you came to the ER to get some stitches. Do you think anyone cares what meds you are on? For most of us, no one does. Notable exceptions would be for public figures, of course. That doesn't mean I'm handing out passwords, or that I don't care about security -- I do care, and I take all reasonable steps I know of (and am allowed to do) to keep the data secure.
On a side note, thank you for spelling HIPAA properly: it's incredibly irritating to see people -- even those working in health care -- write "HIPPA".
The next time you read something incredibly implausible, might I suggest you consider whether or not the statement may have been made in jest or sarcastically.
pined down Cyber Turrurist Julian Assange
Did they whack him with a spruce tree or something?
What am I missing?
Those people are a subsection of "anonymous", and do not represent the whole. Most in anonymous are not taking part in the DDoSes, and many disagree with the attacks. So to say anonymous have "common, predictable goals and means", and that there is no infighting is simply incorrect.
By *definition* democracy is rule by the biggest mob.
That's an oversimplification that steps way past the line of reason and into complete BS. "Mob rule" would be true if every member of that "mob" had the exact same viewpoints on every topic. But since people have differing opinions, that "mob" changes drastically based on the decision to be made. Therefore, it's not the biggest group that rules, but that for each decision being made, the side that has the most support wins.
There is no infighting for one thing, and those who participate have common, predictable goals and means.
You really don't understand Anonymous at all if you think that.