Meh - I don't bitch about the issue on my iPhone because...it's my PHONE. I don't expect it to be the end all be all of web surfing. If it doesn't load certain pages I'll live with it. The fact that my phone offers me a reasonably good browser, a rich media experience, and a few other worthwhile features makes it better than most other phones out there.
On the other hand, Apple is marketing the iPad as the best thing with which to browse the web. Well, when a web browsing tool won't allow me to view the full content on many media sites I call that a problem. One of the core (not extraneous) features of the product is severely limited. That would set me to bitching.
I think there are a number of reasons a turnstyle gate isn't the right answer. For example:
1. Turnstyle gates won't work in the event of an emergency that triggers evacuation. Imagine hundreds of people trying to flee an airport terminal. Now imagine those people trying to flee said terminal through the contraption in your link. It isn't a pretty thought. Yes, they have turnstyle-like doors in other indoor buildings, but those are always accompanied by regular doors with crash bars that can be easily opened by anyone inside the building. Sure, you could add regular doors next to the turnstyle, but as soon as you have a situaion where someone on one side of a door can hold it open for someone on the other side you've lost any sense of security.
2. An emergency isn't the only case in which such doors would be an issue. Whenever I leave a terminal it seems like at least a few hundred people are leaving it with me. I can only imagine what a hinderance a turnstyle would be to such a group - especially considering luggage, disabilities, and people trying to keep groups of children together.
At the Seattle airport (SeaTac) they have what I believe are motion sensors around terminal exits (in addition to a guard(s)). These sensors can detect when someone is entering rather than exiting the terminal exit. If they detect an entrant they set off an alarm. I know that isn't a full-proof solution, but it isn't like we are really safe at an airport anyhow.
Most commenters have only mentioned that a web diagnosis is likely to be inferior to an in-person diagnosis. I generally agree with that statement.
What I feel people are failing to catch is that a web diagnosis, conducted by a qualified individual is better than no diagnosis at all.
How many people skip or put off doctor visits because they don't have the desire or time to block 2+ hours of their day for a 5 minute visit with a doctor? How many others can't afford $150+ for a visit? Now that you're thinking about those numbers consider how many people miss out the on the potential benefits of an early diagnosis.
If this service can expand access to medical care and encourage more people to seek care when they need it I think it could have significant benefits. I think it also has the potential to limit unnecessary doctor/ER visits.
As long as the doctors stay within the bounds of what they can really do on the web I think there is upside potential in this model.
I visited more than one small business in the Seattle area where the owner has made it a point to ask me to post my thoughts/comments on Yelp. They noted that the reviews were really quite powerful at either bringing in or keeping away new customers. Does it have a large user base? Is it worth $500 million? I don't know. What I can say is that I have the impression that young local businesses put a lot of stock in Yelp's ability to impact them.
MSFT probably realizes that they are right behind fast food chains in being targeted for law suits claiming they are liable for making people fat. By making such a feature available to say, parents for example, they may make themselves less susceptible to suit.
I highly doubt MSFT is just looking to shame people.
I agree that the U.S. has its own issues when it comes to respecting the rights of its citizens. Unlike the poster to whom you are responding, I won't take a 'my country is better than yours' stance.
I do, however, take issue with the fact that you seem to think that it is acceptable for a government to restrict free speech as long as it is done via civil action and proper diplomatic channels. That, in my opinion, sets a dangerous precedent; one where expression can be restricted based largely upon its palatability to the majority of the populace.
It seems that the tyranny of the majority is the primary threat to freedom in the first world. Unfortunately, the majority in each state tend not to mind said tyranny until, in some facet of their lives, they become the minority. As such, we only criticize other countries where we would likely find ourselves with a minority status - certain of our rights in jeopardy.
Slashdot Mirror
Meh - I don't bitch about the issue on my iPhone because...it's my PHONE. I don't expect it to be the end all be all of web surfing. If it doesn't load certain pages I'll live with it. The fact that my phone offers me a reasonably good browser, a rich media experience, and a few other worthwhile features makes it better than most other phones out there.
On the other hand, Apple is marketing the iPad as the best thing with which to browse the web. Well, when a web browsing tool won't allow me to view the full content on many media sites I call that a problem. One of the core (not extraneous) features of the product is severely limited. That would set me to bitching.
Not to mention some pioneering work in technology like OLED http://www.oled-info.com/lg-buys-kodaks-oled-unit and some of the better CCD sensors on the market.
1. Turnstyle gates won't work in the event of an emergency that triggers evacuation. Imagine hundreds of people trying to flee an airport terminal. Now imagine those people trying to flee said terminal through the contraption in your link. It isn't a pretty thought. Yes, they have turnstyle-like doors in other indoor buildings, but those are always accompanied by regular doors with crash bars that can be easily opened by anyone inside the building. Sure, you could add regular doors next to the turnstyle, but as soon as you have a situaion where someone on one side of a door can hold it open for someone on the other side you've lost any sense of security.
2. An emergency isn't the only case in which such doors would be an issue. Whenever I leave a terminal it seems like at least a few hundred people are leaving it with me. I can only imagine what a hinderance a turnstyle would be to such a group - especially considering luggage, disabilities, and people trying to keep groups of children together.
At the Seattle airport (SeaTac) they have what I believe are motion sensors around terminal exits (in addition to a guard(s)). These sensors can detect when someone is entering rather than exiting the terminal exit. If they detect an entrant they set off an alarm. I know that isn't a full-proof solution, but it isn't like we are really safe at an airport anyhow.
Most commenters have only mentioned that a web diagnosis is likely to be inferior to an in-person diagnosis. I generally agree with that statement.
What I feel people are failing to catch is that a web diagnosis, conducted by a qualified individual is better than no diagnosis at all.
How many people skip or put off doctor visits because they don't have the desire or time to block 2+ hours of their day for a 5 minute visit with a doctor? How many others can't afford $150+ for a visit? Now that you're thinking about those numbers consider how many people miss out the on the potential benefits of an early diagnosis.
If this service can expand access to medical care and encourage more people to seek care when they need it I think it could have significant benefits. I think it also has the potential to limit unnecessary doctor/ER visits.
As long as the doctors stay within the bounds of what they can really do on the web I think there is upside potential in this model.
The science is being expended on trying to figure out how to affix a massive cancer warning label to the Sun.
I visited more than one small business in the Seattle area where the owner has made it a point to ask me to post my thoughts/comments on Yelp. They noted that the reviews were really quite powerful at either bringing in or keeping away new customers. Does it have a large user base? Is it worth $500 million? I don't know. What I can say is that I have the impression that young local businesses put a lot of stock in Yelp's ability to impact them.
with a Mr. Microphone? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqZQmS8KeLM
it involved using the tongue?
MSFT probably realizes that they are right behind fast food chains in being targeted for law suits claiming they are liable for making people fat. By making such a feature available to say, parents for example, they may make themselves less susceptible to suit. I highly doubt MSFT is just looking to shame people.
I agree that the U.S. has its own issues when it comes to respecting the rights of its citizens. Unlike the poster to whom you are responding, I won't take a 'my country is better than yours' stance. I do, however, take issue with the fact that you seem to think that it is acceptable for a government to restrict free speech as long as it is done via civil action and proper diplomatic channels. That, in my opinion, sets a dangerous precedent; one where expression can be restricted based largely upon its palatability to the majority of the populace. It seems that the tyranny of the majority is the primary threat to freedom in the first world. Unfortunately, the majority in each state tend not to mind said tyranny until, in some facet of their lives, they become the minority. As such, we only criticize other countries where we would likely find ourselves with a minority status - certain of our rights in jeopardy.