No, I think what would happen is that they can just look at the OS, without looking at the data running in the OS. Thus, they can get a license count. But, if you won't give them one, then, you could get sued, and be forced to give one, or rather, have some third party or even the local sherriff do the count with the understanding that the HIPAA data is implicitly protected because the exposure is to officers and appointees of the court.
I don't think you understand exactly how draconian the HIPAA statute really is. A HIPAA covered entity may not disclose or allow the possibility of disclosure of protected health information to ANYBODY without the patient's consent. That includes sheriffs, court officers, and the President of the United States. It also includes other HIPAA covered entities! That's right folks, your doctor cannot tell another doctor about you, unless it fits a VERY specific set of circumstances. I've heard horror stories of nurses losing their jobs because they told other nurses vital information about a patient's care, and I'm not talking about gossip in the hallway, I'm talking about perfectly legitimate transfers of information for the patient's benefit. The statute is so broadly worded that you can be fined because you saved a patients life.
You would essentially have to get written consent from all 10,000 patients before anybody who is not themselves a HIPAA covered entity could so much as GLANCE at those machines.
Now you might say, let's just declare ourselves to be HIPAA covered entities, and promise to abide by the law. Except it doesn't work that way. A person cannot choose to become a HIPAA covered entity. You must meet a very specific set of criteria, one of which is that you conduct electronic transactions (either billing or file transmission) regarding health care information. A software auditor simply does not meet the criteria.
HIPAA is widely regarded as one of the most overreaching, destructive laws ever passed, with insane and unintended consequences. By the way, anybody is allowed to file a HIPAA complaint against any covered entity, even if they are not associated with either the patient or the health care provider. In theory, if I knew that some health care company somewhere allowed a BSA audit, I could file complaint against them myself, and OCR would be compelled to investigate it.
You really should read up on HIPAA. It's like a god damned nuclear weapon and it has the entire healthcare industry constantly quaking in their boots.
The civil justice system has NEVER been an "innocent until proven guilty" system. Unlike criminal justice, civil justice is about "preponderance of evidence." Roughly, this means that whoever's case is more impressive, wins. You don't have to prove anything, you just have to be more convincing than the other guy. And if you don't try to defend yourself? You lose by default. This isn't new. It's always been this way.
If only Google had the ability to grant access to the most extensive library of information on Earth. Some kind of powerful system where users could easily find answers, not only to the question they are asking, but the questions they haven't even thought to ask yet. If only Google had that, then they wouldn't have a problem answering their customers' questions.
Suppose I'm a healthcare company. Software auditors show up at my door, waving contracts in my face. I let them in. They insist that they must inspect ALL machines running, say, MS Office. Some of these machines contain sensitive health information for ten thousand patients. I have now committed 10,000 willful HIPAA violations, and could go to jail, in theory, for up to 10,000 years (maximum jail time for willful but non-malicious breach is 1 year per instance).
Or what about SarbOx? Any possibilities for violation there?
I think a strong case could be made that if you are a HIPAA covered entity who uses software which is subjects to such agreements, and you abide by the agreements, then you are committing a felony. Thus, using Microsoft software is a felony. QED
I didn't say I'd WIN, I said that just because I have an arbitration agreement doesn't mean I have to abide by it. It's fundamentally impossible to give up your right to sue somebody. It just makes it a hell of a lot less likely that you'll win.
You hit the key point yourself. An MRI has a huge, static magnetic field. But it also bombards the target with radio frequency radiation. Normally, the RF would simply cause the nuclei (and atoms they are a part of) to vibrate, but because of the large static field, their spin is contrained and instead the nuclei PRECESS, like a gyroscope tipped off axis will precess around the point of support without falling -- and as they do so, they give off radiation which can be detected. It is not the static magnetic field which causes problems, it's the RF scanning radiation. To put it simply, it will cause anything made of metal to heat up. That may not be a problem with your belt buckle, but for a large piece of metal which is embedded inside your body, heating is a PROBLEM.
Giving up your right to sue doesn't mean you can't sue. I've seen it done. Party A and Party B enter an arbitration agreement. Party A believes Party B has failed to fulfil some contractual obligation. Party B disagrees, finds fault with Party A, and sues Party A. In court, party A enters the original contract into evidence. Party B disputes it. A hearing is scheduled. A question of validity of the contract is raised. Party A then sues Party B for breach of contract. The whole thing is tied up in the courts for 17 months. The issue is resolved when everybody gets so fucking tired of it that they just walk away.
You say I gave up my right to sue? How are you going to prove it? I guess you'll have to... TAKE ME TO COURT.
A motion of discovery ON WHO'S BEHALF? Dude, I WISH it worked like that. I'm curious what the fuck my neighbor keeps doing in his garage at 3:00 in the morning. I'll just go down to the courthouse and get a court order to search his home, right?
Re:What about prescription lens wearers?
on
Hot Or Not — 3D TV
·
· Score: 1
The 3D glasses easily fit over my regular ones, and the picture was crystal clear. No problems noticed.
Re:My brain/eyes are incompatible with 3D TV/movie
on
Hot Or Not — 3D TV
·
· Score: 1
It took a while, but eventually I was able to relax my eyes and stop trying to change my focal length. Although it was a bit weird at first, seeing something in the background of the scene, far away, and trying to focus on it does not bring it into focus but in fact makes the whole image blurry.
I don't know if I'm better than most at consciously changing my eye's focal length, but everyone is capable of it to some extent. In fact, I deliberately practice (one eye at a time, the other eye covered) because it seems to help ease eye fatigue at work. In my experience, it's very difficult to achieve near-infinite focal length without actually having something extremely far away to refer to. Short focal length is easy.
Once you put a huge chunk of conductor, like titanium, into your body, you can never set foot anywhere near a MRI machine. That might be a bummer years down the road.
Can somebody with knowledge please explain why we need to ditch IPv4 instead of just layering on top of it? Most private networks have a tree topology, which implies a single entry/exit point for traffic bound for the rest of the Internet. There's absolutely no need for any entity to have more than a single IP. The internal hosts can be publicized via some new mapping/routing protocol which sits on top of IPv4.
In other words, push IPv4 one click down the network stack and build a larger address space on top of it. Why can't we do this?
jpeg, mp3, and h264 contain patents unrelated to DRM. DVD-CSS and AACS have both been cracked. So I fail to understand the scaremongering. I yawn at this patent.
I always have to laugh when people complain about patents on technologies they hate. Hello? They PATENTED it. That means nobody else is allowed to do it. And Microsoft of course, will fail at it themselves. Thus the effect of the patent is to PREVENT these sorts of DRM mechanisms from proliferating. Use your brains people.
I work for a company with a lot of patents. Our products are protected partially by patents and partially by trade secret information. In other words, to recreate our product you would need to license the patents AND figure out how we did the other stuff, that is NOT patented, but is secret. There's no reason you can't mix patented and trade secret technology in one solution.
Everyone likes to show off how stupid they are, I guess. You don't measure public key keyspace like that. Not all possible bit patterns are valid keys. In fact, VERY FEW bit patterns are valid keys.
If that were true, then there would be a central point that everything else was expanding away from. It would also imply an edge to the universe. The balloon analogy reduces space to two dimensions, but in reality there are three, so you need to imagine a "hyperballoon." It's still only an analogy, but it helps understand the geometry of what we think is happening.
It has to do with the expanding universe, period. Take a balloon and draw a bunch of regularly spaced dots on it with a marker. Now inflate the balloon. The dots all get farther away from each other. Moreover, there is no "center" to the expansion that lies on the surface of the balloon -- no one point can be said to be the center from which all other points move away. In this analogy, the speed of light would be the maximum speed at which the dots could move about on the surface of the balloon -- this is totally unrelated to the expansion of the balloon itself.
A PDF "form" is just a macro of content stream commands. It has nothing to do with a "Form" in the sense of a document with fields that are filled in. And if you're thinking of FDF, that's a different issue entirely. FDF represents form data which will be composed by software on top of a form -- what we're talking about here are user-filled forms, submitted from the reader. THAT functionality is almost entirely implemented in JavaScript.
PostScript has nothing to do with PDF either. The content stream format of PDF was designed to map onto PostScript, but the reverse is not true. PDF readers have no PostScript processing abilities, and Adobe actively discourages the use of PostScript-specific features of PDF (which, sadly, still exist in limited form).
It's about the Education, not the Technology. If technology furthers education, use it. If it doesn't, don't. Carry out studies to determine what is effective and what isn't. Implement what is found. Rinse, repeat. It won't ever be perfect, just keep trying to make it better. I don't care if they're using supercomputers or abacuses, are they learning how to add numbers or aren't they?
So, you think that people should not be allowed to engineer devices as they see fit? If you have the right to install whatever software you want on your device, then why does the manufacturer of that device not have the right to make that as difficult as possible for you? The answer is not legislation, the answer is to take your money elsewhere if you don't like it. Screw your fanatical ideology, I want freedom in the market.
Why do people draw this comparison? GSM is a network standard, CDMA is a modulation. The appropriate comparison would be TDMA vs CDMA, since TDMA is the modulation used by GSM. Yeah, yeah, it's marketing but it bugs me. It's like trying to compare a PC brand with a CPU brand. It's apples and oranges.
The lump sum does suck. I've been using T-Mobile for about 10 years, and haven't really had anything to complain about, but I still hate the contract. I was poking around their online phone store and saw that they are now offering financing for the newer touchscreens with NO CONTRACT, which is pretty nice. It works out to about $20 a month, and it's 0% APR. I was going to take the plunge, but then I saw that the Nexus was coming out any day now. So maybe I'll wait and see if they offer a similar financing deal for the Nexus.
Slashdot Mirror
No, I think what would happen is that they can just look at the OS, without looking at the data running in the OS. Thus, they can get a license count. But, if you won't give them one, then, you could get sued, and be forced to give one, or rather, have some third party or even the local sherriff do the count with the understanding that the HIPAA data is implicitly protected because the exposure is to officers and appointees of the court.
I don't think you understand exactly how draconian the HIPAA statute really is. A HIPAA covered entity may not disclose or allow the possibility of disclosure of protected health information to ANYBODY without the patient's consent. That includes sheriffs, court officers, and the President of the United States. It also includes other HIPAA covered entities! That's right folks, your doctor cannot tell another doctor about you, unless it fits a VERY specific set of circumstances. I've heard horror stories of nurses losing their jobs because they told other nurses vital information about a patient's care, and I'm not talking about gossip in the hallway, I'm talking about perfectly legitimate transfers of information for the patient's benefit. The statute is so broadly worded that you can be fined because you saved a patients life.
You would essentially have to get written consent from all 10,000 patients before anybody who is not themselves a HIPAA covered entity could so much as GLANCE at those machines.
Now you might say, let's just declare ourselves to be HIPAA covered entities, and promise to abide by the law. Except it doesn't work that way. A person cannot choose to become a HIPAA covered entity. You must meet a very specific set of criteria, one of which is that you conduct electronic transactions (either billing or file transmission) regarding health care information. A software auditor simply does not meet the criteria.
HIPAA is widely regarded as one of the most overreaching, destructive laws ever passed, with insane and unintended consequences. By the way, anybody is allowed to file a HIPAA complaint against any covered entity, even if they are not associated with either the patient or the health care provider. In theory, if I knew that some health care company somewhere allowed a BSA audit, I could file complaint against them myself, and OCR would be compelled to investigate it.
You really should read up on HIPAA. It's like a god damned nuclear weapon and it has the entire healthcare industry constantly quaking in their boots.
The civil justice system has NEVER been an "innocent until proven guilty" system. Unlike criminal justice, civil justice is about "preponderance of evidence." Roughly, this means that whoever's case is more impressive, wins. You don't have to prove anything, you just have to be more convincing than the other guy. And if you don't try to defend yourself? You lose by default. This isn't new. It's always been this way.
If only Google had the ability to grant access to the most extensive library of information on Earth. Some kind of powerful system where users could easily find answers, not only to the question they are asking, but the questions they haven't even thought to ask yet. If only Google had that, then they wouldn't have a problem answering their customers' questions.
Suppose I'm a healthcare company. Software auditors show up at my door, waving contracts in my face. I let them in. They insist that they must inspect ALL machines running, say, MS Office. Some of these machines contain sensitive health information for ten thousand patients. I have now committed 10,000 willful HIPAA violations, and could go to jail, in theory, for up to 10,000 years (maximum jail time for willful but non-malicious breach is 1 year per instance).
Or what about SarbOx? Any possibilities for violation there?
I think a strong case could be made that if you are a HIPAA covered entity who uses software which is subjects to such agreements, and you abide by the agreements, then you are committing a felony. Thus, using Microsoft software is a felony. QED
I didn't say I'd WIN, I said that just because I have an arbitration agreement doesn't mean I have to abide by it. It's fundamentally impossible to give up your right to sue somebody. It just makes it a hell of a lot less likely that you'll win.
You hit the key point yourself. An MRI has a huge, static magnetic field. But it also bombards the target with radio frequency radiation. Normally, the RF would simply cause the nuclei (and atoms they are a part of) to vibrate, but because of the large static field, their spin is contrained and instead the nuclei PRECESS, like a gyroscope tipped off axis will precess around the point of support without falling -- and as they do so, they give off radiation which can be detected. It is not the static magnetic field which causes problems, it's the RF scanning radiation. To put it simply, it will cause anything made of metal to heat up. That may not be a problem with your belt buckle, but for a large piece of metal which is embedded inside your body, heating is a PROBLEM.
Giving up your right to sue doesn't mean you can't sue. I've seen it done. Party A and Party B enter an arbitration agreement. Party A believes Party B has failed to fulfil some contractual obligation. Party B disagrees, finds fault with Party A, and sues Party A. In court, party A enters the original contract into evidence. Party B disputes it. A hearing is scheduled. A question of validity of the contract is raised. Party A then sues Party B for breach of contract. The whole thing is tied up in the courts for 17 months. The issue is resolved when everybody gets so fucking tired of it that they just walk away.
You say I gave up my right to sue? How are you going to prove it? I guess you'll have to... TAKE ME TO COURT.
A motion of discovery ON WHO'S BEHALF? Dude, I WISH it worked like that. I'm curious what the fuck my neighbor keeps doing in his garage at 3:00 in the morning. I'll just go down to the courthouse and get a court order to search his home, right?
The 3D glasses easily fit over my regular ones, and the picture was crystal clear. No problems noticed.
It took a while, but eventually I was able to relax my eyes and stop trying to change my focal length. Although it was a bit weird at first, seeing something in the background of the scene, far away, and trying to focus on it does not bring it into focus but in fact makes the whole image blurry.
I don't know if I'm better than most at consciously changing my eye's focal length, but everyone is capable of it to some extent. In fact, I deliberately practice (one eye at a time, the other eye covered) because it seems to help ease eye fatigue at work. In my experience, it's very difficult to achieve near-infinite focal length without actually having something extremely far away to refer to. Short focal length is easy.
Once you put a huge chunk of conductor, like titanium, into your body, you can never set foot anywhere near a MRI machine. That might be a bummer years down the road.
Can somebody with knowledge please explain why we need to ditch IPv4 instead of just layering on top of it? Most private networks have a tree topology, which implies a single entry/exit point for traffic bound for the rest of the Internet. There's absolutely no need for any entity to have more than a single IP. The internal hosts can be publicized via some new mapping/routing protocol which sits on top of IPv4. In other words, push IPv4 one click down the network stack and build a larger address space on top of it. Why can't we do this?
jpeg, mp3, and h264 contain patents unrelated to DRM. DVD-CSS and AACS have both been cracked. So I fail to understand the scaremongering. I yawn at this patent.
I always have to laugh when people complain about patents on technologies they hate. Hello? They PATENTED it. That means nobody else is allowed to do it. And Microsoft of course, will fail at it themselves. Thus the effect of the patent is to PREVENT these sorts of DRM mechanisms from proliferating. Use your brains people.
Ooooh! You're so.... SOPHISTICATED!
You are a tool. They've got you hooked on the good smack, and you can't stop watching it. But go ahead, go on hating the shit out of them anyway.
By the way, congrats on your upcoming graduation from high school. What is it, two years away or three?
I work for a company with a lot of patents. Our products are protected partially by patents and partially by trade secret information. In other words, to recreate our product you would need to license the patents AND figure out how we did the other stuff, that is NOT patented, but is secret. There's no reason you can't mix patented and trade secret technology in one solution.
Everyone likes to show off how stupid they are, I guess. You don't measure public key keyspace like that. Not all possible bit patterns are valid keys. In fact, VERY FEW bit patterns are valid keys.
So what you're saying is...
"I'm Mark Shuttleworth's drinking buddy, and Ubuntu 9.10 was my idea!"
If that were true, then there would be a central point that everything else was expanding away from. It would also imply an edge to the universe. The balloon analogy reduces space to two dimensions, but in reality there are three, so you need to imagine a "hyperballoon." It's still only an analogy, but it helps understand the geometry of what we think is happening.
It has to do with the expanding universe, period. Take a balloon and draw a bunch of regularly spaced dots on it with a marker. Now inflate the balloon. The dots all get farther away from each other. Moreover, there is no "center" to the expansion that lies on the surface of the balloon -- no one point can be said to be the center from which all other points move away. In this analogy, the speed of light would be the maximum speed at which the dots could move about on the surface of the balloon -- this is totally unrelated to the expansion of the balloon itself.
A PDF "form" is just a macro of content stream commands. It has nothing to do with a "Form" in the sense of a document with fields that are filled in. And if you're thinking of FDF, that's a different issue entirely. FDF represents form data which will be composed by software on top of a form -- what we're talking about here are user-filled forms, submitted from the reader. THAT functionality is almost entirely implemented in JavaScript.
PostScript has nothing to do with PDF either. The content stream format of PDF was designed to map onto PostScript, but the reverse is not true. PDF readers have no PostScript processing abilities, and Adobe actively discourages the use of PostScript-specific features of PDF (which, sadly, still exist in limited form).
It's about the Education, not the Technology. If technology furthers education, use it. If it doesn't, don't. Carry out studies to determine what is effective and what isn't. Implement what is found. Rinse, repeat. It won't ever be perfect, just keep trying to make it better. I don't care if they're using supercomputers or abacuses, are they learning how to add numbers or aren't they?
So, you think that people should not be allowed to engineer devices as they see fit? If you have the right to install whatever software you want on your device, then why does the manufacturer of that device not have the right to make that as difficult as possible for you? The answer is not legislation, the answer is to take your money elsewhere if you don't like it. Screw your fanatical ideology, I want freedom in the market.
Why do people draw this comparison? GSM is a network standard, CDMA is a modulation. The appropriate comparison would be TDMA vs CDMA, since TDMA is the modulation used by GSM. Yeah, yeah, it's marketing but it bugs me. It's like trying to compare a PC brand with a CPU brand. It's apples and oranges.
The lump sum does suck. I've been using T-Mobile for about 10 years, and haven't really had anything to complain about, but I still hate the contract. I was poking around their online phone store and saw that they are now offering financing for the newer touchscreens with NO CONTRACT, which is pretty nice. It works out to about $20 a month, and it's 0% APR. I was going to take the plunge, but then I saw that the Nexus was coming out any day now. So maybe I'll wait and see if they offer a similar financing deal for the Nexus.