Even though you speak as someone knowledgeable and authoritative about HIPAA, I have a hard time believing you since you apparently don't know how to spell it.
:) I still do those things, but there is always some trepidation in the back of my mind.
Understand, of course, that fearing something doesn't mean you don't do it. Alas, I'm somewhat of the opinion that irrationally fearing something almost obligates you to do it, to get over the fear.
In Baltimore, a series of loud bangs is indeed probable cause (and for good reason too), given that it has an "actual" crime problem.
Baltimore City != Baltimore County. One of the rare large cities in the US that is outside of the jurisdiction of a county. (St. Louis being the other, IIRC.)
Honestly, I'm not complaining about what the Baltimore County cop did. It's reasonable to investigate. And as long as everyone has a round of laughter at the end and the officer goes away wishing everyone a good day, it's cool.
But, sadly, that isn't the case for a lot of law enforcement these days. (Hence the/. story.)
Plenty have been accosted or detained for doing nothing more than taking pictures of trains from passenger platforms and similar places
I feel your pain... I'm an aviation geek, and I'm waiting for the day I get shot for standing on the top floor of the BWI parking garage with my scanner listening to ATC while watching departures from RWY 15-R.
This lets me tell one of my favorite stories (which probably isn't all that funny.)
I have a friend who is a physicist. He was hanging around with his brother, who worked at a bookstore. They were doing essentially the same thing, but with liquid nitrogen, behind the store. After one particularly loud bottle explosion, they went back into the store, only to hear a loud pounding on the door shortly thereafter.
Opening the door, they were faced with a Baltimore County police officer, who demanded an explanation. My friend started to explain: "Oh, it's OK Officer, I'm a physicist..." As if that explained everything. Which, to be honest, probably does.
I make that joke more often than you could imagine at the physicists at work.
But in all seriousness, this continues what I've been calling the "war on curiosity". Recently, I accidentally picked a flight that had a stopover (that's what I get for clicking through the website too fast.) So while I was bored and waiting on the plane, I wandered up next to the front row of seats and peered into the cockpit. I was there for a minute or so, until the flight attendant came up in a fairly huffy attitude, and told me that I couldn't congregate in the front of the plane. Which was on the ground. With the engine shut off. With the wheels chocked. And the pilot sitting in his seat.
I'm afraid anymore to walk to the end of the platform and look down the subway tunnels. I'm afraid to take pictures of bridges. I'm afraid to be just plain curious, because it's apparently abnormal and suspicous. It's getting ridiculous. And it's going to come back and bite us in the butt.
No, it is the experience of someone who learned long, long ago not to talk all tough unless you're able and willing to back it up. Because eventually someone will call you on it.
And to not count on your big friends, because they will not always be there to protect you.
Lessons learned in high school are quite often apropos to real life, and quite often scale up to the nation state level.
Are you capable of defending yourself, or are you simply hiding behind the protection of your government? Are you always certain it will be able to protect you? Will you never leave its influence? Are you foolish enough to believe that once you leave its borders, it will go to the ends of the earth to protect you? Hint: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37907132/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/
Age discrimination kicks in (legally) at 40 years old.
Yeah, ain't that great?
Oh, oh, I like this one too: You can't engage in housing discrimination, unless, of course, you're requiring that people be at least 55, then discrimination is OK.
So I wanted to wait a couple of days and let this thread die off before asking this.
What exactly makes you so hostile here? I actually appreciated that you pointed out where my logic was flawed, but I don't get why it had to be so standoffish.
mandate that office hours be flexible and staggered.
You do realize that in many large cities, this already happens? There are areas around where I live that begin to jam up at around 5:30-6, until 10-10:30, if you're lucky the lunch rush is not quite so bad, then around 2:30-3:00 the traffic jams back up again until 8:00 or later at night.
Section 1. After a Bill has become Law, if one-half of the State legislatures declare the Law to be "unconstitutional" it shall be null and void. It shall be as if the Law never existed.
What would be REALLY cool would be if the state legislatures had a vote in one of the houses of the Congress. We could call it the "Senate", and it would protect the state's rights.
Nah, wouldn't work, some schmuck would come by and pass the 17th amendment.
(BTW, since I've never replied to you, I've often wanted to ask you why you don't use the quote tag, opting for '>>>' instead?)
Sure, except that's not always how it plays out. Dirty cops win quite often.
And even if you're found not guilty, it doesn't matter, the mere fact that you were charged with a crime in some people's minds is enough to convict you. Try getting a job requiring a background check and see how that works out for you.
You fail to understand that BP has been doing major spin control since day one.
And that has what to do with this thread? The original poster complained about BP not focusing on fixing the well, I said they certainly could be focusing on fixing it while also doing marketing work to repair their image. I made no judgment as to the ethics of the marketing effort.
moron.
Yeah, I think I'm done with this thread. You'd think after 12 years or so of/., I'd be used to people floating ad hominem attacks for no reason, but I always forget and end up trying to have a grown-up discussion. I'm sure I'll make that mistake yet again at some point, but I've definitely learned my lesson (again) today.
rarely does the throwing of real resources at a problem "well make it worse".
Forgive me, but that is kind of a naïve position to take. We're talking about marketing people, here. They are otherwise useless.;)
But seriously, you want BP to send marketing people down to the Gulf to help shut off an oil well? Or even to help clean up the spill? (which is likely more resource and equipment constrained, than people constrained) When it comes to certain tasks, you CAN'T just throw unequipped, inexperienced/untrained resources at it. I admit to not knowing for certain that this is the case here.
Perhaps you are from the BP PR department feeling a bit defensive
Look, BP deserves to be crucified for this. More than they will be, and we all know that. But that doesn't mean I'm going to shut off my capability to use logic and reason.
I would bet a lot of money that you can't do concurrency very well, as you don't seem to understand it!
As a matter of fact, I absolutely loathe concurrent programming. But I'm not stupid, I do certainly understand parallelism.
My response was to the OP who was complaining about "focusing their efforts a mile down", which clearly is a criticism about killing the well, not mitigating the environmental damage.
Regardless, even THERE I'm not convinced that just throwing people onto beaches and saying "OK, start cleaning up!" is necessarily helpful. I don't think you've ever experienced having a hoarde of people show up to "help" do something that they don't know how to do. Try working a rock concert load-in some time and see what happens when lots of inexperienced people show up to "help". It can (and does) take more time than just the experienced people doing it, and can result in damage to equipment and facilities.
If loads of untrained people are in fact somehow useful, then that's a great application for our military (what's left of it, anyway), where there is an existing command structure, support structure, equipment, etc. and thus probably the best place to start.
Please kindly restrict your responses to discussions of the issues, and not ad hominem attacks about my programming abilities.
It's gonna be a real bummer for him when he gets stopped for speeding, he acts "suspicious", they search his car, and then they just happen to "find" some cocaine in the trunk.
And how, pray tell, would he do that constitutionally? And what exactly would he do to kill the well that BP isn't already doing?
I'm personally convinced that if I walked up to the BP CEO this very second and said, "I can shut off the oil spill right now if you write me a check for $2 Billion", I wouldn't even have finished the sentence before the check would be written. It is absolutely, positively in BP's best interests to have this well shut down immediately using any means possible, and I for one am convinced that they are working toward that end. Having the President unconstitutionally nationalizing their company would change what? Perhaps the environmental mitigations, yes. But the President already has access to the entire Navy and Coast Guard, and working to contain the oil spill is certainly within their capability. Leave BP alone and let the engineers do their work, shutting down the well in the safest way plausible. You can crucify them for their atrocious risk management later.
I'm open to being convinced that BP isn't doing everything in its power to shut down this well, and that the U.S. government can somehow make that better. Convince me, I'm willing to listen.
Slashdot Mirror
Even though you speak as someone knowledgeable and authoritative about HIPAA, I have a hard time believing you since you apparently don't know how to spell it.
I have been to quite a few shuttle launches. (Benefits of working for NASA)
I have been to a couple of drag races with top fuel dragsters. (Benefits of having redneck friends)
There is no comparison. Granted, at equal distances the shuttle will be far, far louder.
:) I still do those things, but there is always some trepidation in the back of my mind.
Understand, of course, that fearing something doesn't mean you don't do it. Alas, I'm somewhat of the opinion that irrationally fearing something almost obligates you to do it, to get over the fear.
In Baltimore, a series of loud bangs is indeed probable cause (and for good reason too), given that it has an "actual" crime problem.
Baltimore City != Baltimore County. One of the rare large cities in the US that is outside of the jurisdiction of a county. (St. Louis being the other, IIRC.)
Honestly, I'm not complaining about what the Baltimore County cop did. It's reasonable to investigate. And as long as everyone has a round of laughter at the end and the officer goes away wishing everyone a good day, it's cool.
But, sadly, that isn't the case for a lot of law enforcement these days. (Hence the /. story.)
Plenty have been accosted or detained for doing nothing more than taking pictures of trains from passenger platforms and similar places
I feel your pain... I'm an aviation geek, and I'm waiting for the day I get shot for standing on the top floor of the BWI parking garage with my scanner listening to ATC while watching departures from RWY 15-R.
This lets me tell one of my favorite stories (which probably isn't all that funny.)
I have a friend who is a physicist. He was hanging around with his brother, who worked at a bookstore. They were doing essentially the same thing, but with liquid nitrogen, behind the store. After one particularly loud bottle explosion, they went back into the store, only to hear a loud pounding on the door shortly thereafter.
Opening the door, they were faced with a Baltimore County police officer, who demanded an explanation. My friend started to explain: "Oh, it's OK Officer, I'm a physicist..." As if that explained everything. Which, to be honest, probably does.
I make that joke more often than you could imagine at the physicists at work.
But in all seriousness, this continues what I've been calling the "war on curiosity". Recently, I accidentally picked a flight that had a stopover (that's what I get for clicking through the website too fast.) So while I was bored and waiting on the plane, I wandered up next to the front row of seats and peered into the cockpit. I was there for a minute or so, until the flight attendant came up in a fairly huffy attitude, and told me that I couldn't congregate in the front of the plane. Which was on the ground. With the engine shut off. With the wheels chocked. And the pilot sitting in his seat.
I'm afraid anymore to walk to the end of the platform and look down the subway tunnels. I'm afraid to take pictures of bridges. I'm afraid to be just plain curious, because it's apparently abnormal and suspicous. It's getting ridiculous. And it's going to come back and bite us in the butt.
Plus hundreds of artists trying to get known.
Yes, unlike Helen Austin, Poko Lambro, Lizzie Hibbert and Kina Grannis who are already household names. ;)
No, it is the experience of someone who learned long, long ago not to talk all tough unless you're able and willing to back it up. Because eventually someone will call you on it.
And to not count on your big friends, because they will not always be there to protect you.
Lessons learned in high school are quite often apropos to real life, and quite often scale up to the nation state level.
Are you capable of defending yourself, or are you simply hiding behind the protection of your government? Are you always certain it will be able to protect you? Will you never leave its influence? Are you foolish enough to believe that once you leave its borders, it will go to the ends of the earth to protect you? Hint: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37907132/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/
Age discrimination kicks in (legally) at 40 years old.
Yeah, ain't that great?
Oh, oh, I like this one too: You can't engage in housing discrimination, unless, of course, you're requiring that people be at least 55, then discrimination is OK.
*sigh*
Your argument could be used to argue against e-mail, telephones, telegraphs...
Perhaps it is reasonable to simply accept that different people communicate differently?
Also, no pay raise for any politician unless approved by 75% of the voting populace.
You seriously think any politician is in office for the paycheck?
First Sale Doctrine, and most recently NEBG v Weinstein.
Further, I don't recall entering into any licensing agreement last time I bought a DVD. (Though in fairness, it's been a very long time.)
Where a discussion of a portable laser being used as a weapon can devolve into a grammar and logical fallacy flamewar in 4 posts or less.
Four posts or fewer, you nincompoop! :)
So I wanted to wait a couple of days and let this thread die off before asking this.
What exactly makes you so hostile here? I actually appreciated that you pointed out where my logic was flawed, but I don't get why it had to be so standoffish.
I'm asking this as a genuine question.
mandate that office hours be flexible and staggered.
You do realize that in many large cities, this already happens? There are areas around where I live that begin to jam up at around 5:30-6, until 10-10:30, if you're lucky the lunch rush is not quite so bad, then around 2:30-3:00 the traffic jams back up again until 8:00 or later at night.
Section 1. After a Bill has become Law, if one-half of the State legislatures declare the Law to be "unconstitutional" it shall be null and void. It shall be as if the Law never existed.
What would be REALLY cool would be if the state legislatures had a vote in one of the houses of the Congress. We could call it the "Senate", and it would protect the state's rights.
Nah, wouldn't work, some schmuck would come by and pass the 17th amendment.
(BTW, since I've never replied to you, I've often wanted to ask you why you don't use the quote tag, opting for '>>>' instead?)
Sure, except that's not always how it plays out. Dirty cops win quite often.
And even if you're found not guilty, it doesn't matter, the mere fact that you were charged with a crime in some people's minds is enough to convict you. Try getting a job requiring a background check and see how that works out for you.
Trust me, I know from personal experience.
You just described Washington, DC. ;)
You fail to understand that BP has been doing major spin control since day one.
And that has what to do with this thread? The original poster complained about BP not focusing on fixing the well, I said they certainly could be focusing on fixing it while also doing marketing work to repair their image. I made no judgment as to the ethics of the marketing effort.
moron.
Yeah, I think I'm done with this thread. You'd think after 12 years or so of /., I'd be used to people floating ad hominem attacks for no reason, but I always forget and end up trying to have a grown-up discussion. I'm sure I'll make that mistake yet again at some point, but I've definitely learned my lesson (again) today.
rarely does the throwing of real resources at a problem "well make it worse".
Forgive me, but that is kind of a naïve position to take. We're talking about marketing people, here. They are otherwise useless. ;)
But seriously, you want BP to send marketing people down to the Gulf to help shut off an oil well? Or even to help clean up the spill? (which is likely more resource and equipment constrained, than people constrained) When it comes to certain tasks, you CAN'T just throw unequipped, inexperienced/untrained resources at it. I admit to not knowing for certain that this is the case here.
Perhaps you are from the BP PR department feeling a bit defensive
Look, BP deserves to be crucified for this. More than they will be, and we all know that. But that doesn't mean I'm going to shut off my capability to use logic and reason.
I would bet a lot of money that you can't do concurrency very well, as you don't seem to understand it!
As a matter of fact, I absolutely loathe concurrent programming. But I'm not stupid, I do certainly understand parallelism.
My response was to the OP who was complaining about "focusing their efforts a mile down", which clearly is a criticism about killing the well, not mitigating the environmental damage.
Regardless, even THERE I'm not convinced that just throwing people onto beaches and saying "OK, start cleaning up!" is necessarily helpful. I don't think you've ever experienced having a hoarde of people show up to "help" do something that they don't know how to do. Try working a rock concert load-in some time and see what happens when lots of inexperienced people show up to "help". It can (and does) take more time than just the experienced people doing it, and can result in damage to equipment and facilities.
If loads of untrained people are in fact somehow useful, then that's a great application for our military (what's left of it, anyway), where there is an existing command structure, support structure, equipment, etc. and thus probably the best place to start.
Please kindly restrict your responses to discussions of the issues, and not ad hominem attacks about my programming abilities.
That's not what I was replying to. The OP was criticizing their allocation of resources. Your criticism has merit, I agree.
It's gonna be a real bummer for him when he gets stopped for speeding, he acts "suspicious", they search his car, and then they just happen to "find" some cocaine in the trunk.
And how, pray tell, would he do that constitutionally? And what exactly would he do to kill the well that BP isn't already doing?
I'm personally convinced that if I walked up to the BP CEO this very second and said, "I can shut off the oil spill right now if you write me a check for $2 Billion", I wouldn't even have finished the sentence before the check would be written. It is absolutely, positively in BP's best interests to have this well shut down immediately using any means possible, and I for one am convinced that they are working toward that end. Having the President unconstitutionally nationalizing their company would change what? Perhaps the environmental mitigations, yes. But the President already has access to the entire Navy and Coast Guard, and working to contain the oil spill is certainly within their capability. Leave BP alone and let the engineers do their work, shutting down the well in the safest way plausible. You can crucify them for their atrocious risk management later.
I'm open to being convinced that BP isn't doing everything in its power to shut down this well, and that the U.S. government can somehow make that better. Convince me, I'm willing to listen.