Perhaps after more studies there'll be a more compelling reason, say after results of the phase II or phase III studies, but I can still see huge arguments against based on economic reasons. It's a hell of a lot cheaper to make paps available to under served women than it is to vaccinate every woman aged 11-26 -- then every 11 year old every year...
Your numbers are off... about 70% of cancer can be traced back to HPV... generally to an exposure that occurred 10 years prior to the cancer dx -- or longer. It can also be easily IDd with paps (preferably liquid based) -- and even considering their error rate, when done annually or bi-annually, it's quite effective.
And a hell of a lot cheaper than $400 x 2 million woman/children every year a mandatory vaccination would call for.
Further, of the HPV strains which are linked to cancer (there's about a dozen or so), the two vaccines only block 2 and 3 respective.
I would hope the user would have planned ahead and picked a software suite met his needs. Particularly the need to change software suite vendors and OSs at some point in the future. I know I have.
But then again -- isn't this line of reasoning off topic? Isn't the topic the usefulness of "RENTING" office 2003? Not the inability to swap platforms? Someone asked "what if I stop renting -- will I still have access to my files?" or something to that effect. Short answer: Yes -- sort of -- with MS's free viewers.
What about my data? If I agree to a "pay as you go" software model, will you allow me to create documents, data, etc., in an open format guaranteeing me free access at anytime I decide not to continue the subscription?
You could always get MSs free word viewer... or their free PowerPoint viewer... or their free excel viewer.
Assuming it doesn't put some type of "rental flag" in the file which prevents it from working with the free viewers MS makes available.
Wtf are you talking about? LABS have people answering phones -- so do hospitals -- and they HIS' have similar regulatory requirements as LISs. And they have access to protected information (both from a privacy standpoint and a billing standpoint (read ID theft). I've consulted to a number of HXs, a few POLs, ref labs and smallish private practices which did direct billing that wanted their procedure manuals/HIPAA compliance audited.
Further, if you are in the healthcare field, you've no doubt have an interest in billing state or federal (MediCal/caid) for reimbursement. I don't think you know who created their compliance requirements, but I can assure you, it wasn't the boyscouts.
Your post talked about people answering phones
And speaking of my post, perhaps you missed where I said the following:
"Then again, if it's a small shop and you're not really dealing with protected information on the network (say, medical records for example), then you may be fairly lax as to what users can/can't do at the workstation.
*IF* however, you have federal and or state guidelines you MUST follow with regards to protecting identity and health information, then sorry pals, your workstation is locked down. Nope -- no unauthorized memory sticks. Nope, no internet access -- other than white listed work related sites. Nope, no access to install software."
You are just one of the many cranks who think they *KNOW* how to run a business and *YOUR* standards of user access are best. Bull fucking shit. Run your own business the way you want to and spend your resources in a way that you see fit. How dare bully your views on other entities.
These practices I've spoken about are sound business decisions for the single reason that it dramatically reduce the cost a company puts out in IT staff for troubleshooting/fixing busted systems. Further, it dramatically reduces their exposure to lawsuits. Nevermind meeting state/federal requirements.
Ever read CAP requirements? General Lab? I doubt it.
Such tidbits as:
Are policies and procedures in place to prevent unauthorized installation of software on any computer used by the laboratory?
Is there documentation that programs are adequately tested for proper functioning when first installed and after any modifications, and that the laboratory director or designee has approved the use of all new programs and modifications?
Is there documentation that laboratory computer procedures are reviewed at least annually by the laboratory director or designee?
Is there an adequate tracking system to identify all persons who have added or modified software?
We haven't even begun to discuss Medi-Cal compliance requirements since 05...
You want a pissing contest? I've been on the LAB side of things for over 20 years -- in IT for 16. I've written procedure manuals for numerous labs and sat on a number of HIPAA panels in `01-`03.
There is no law that says that the receptionist or phone jockeys can't install Winamp or browse MSN on their computer.
No kidding. However, there ARE laws that prevent laboratories from operating without CAP certification... And it's very hard for a lab to operate if it cant collect revenue from MediCal or some 3rd party payor because it failed a surprise inspection due to compliance weaknesses.
I'm a control freak? You are an asshat who appears to enjoy making WAGs about other people.
Re-read your own claptrap. And maybe read this thread to get some context... or at least open your eyes while you pretend to read.
I don't give a dingo's kidney if someone wants to pay their bills using company equipment. If they don't have authorization, they can't. It has nothing to do with me. I don't make policy, I just implement it. I'd really like to see that discussion between the billing manager and the GLM... "um, Carlos wants internet access to he can pay his bills".
With regards to "work related" software, where the flying fuck did you read that gem? You are the poster child for ASS-u-ming. You've no idea the federal and state regulations with regards to software, access, information/patient protection measures that are required in the healthcare industry. It's not a matter of CONTROL, it's a matter of CAP or CLIA or MediCal compliance. The biller who whats to pay his bills -- remember him? How's he going to pay after he gets his last paycheck because the lab lost it's MediCal licence for compliance violations and we can no longer collect revenue?
It's good to know that you understand the entire scope of your company's operations, and have the power to define which staff positions are entitled to which 'features.'
Way to misrepresent my post.
For what it's worth, each department has access request forms they complete for each new hire and modification requests for change of responsibilities. If their supervisor requests access outside the scope of what has been determined necessary for their work it's out of my hands and they need to justify that access to the general lab manager.
Each departments access requirements were worked out by the department managers, upper management and IT (yes, I have/had input but hardly final say). I didn't set policy -- I enforce it. That is part of my job description.
Oh, uh, and go change the frickin' toner cartridge on the LJ4 up in the second floor documentation room, dude.
You sound like a whiner to me. With your attitude, I wouldn't hire you refill paper, nevermind change toner.
At our shop, we have two physical networks. The LAB network which is locked down. Then there is the administration network. That network is used by HR, CEO, CFO, etc and we run a policy similar to what you describe.
Walk through the offices four months later, flip the keyboards, and you'll find post-it notes with the last four passwords they've used placed underneath. Typically "1, 2, , 4." Teaching doesn't work
Funny story:
During a routine maintenance job (clean workstations/mice/keyboards), one of my guys found a post-it under a plebs keyboard. It read: "Do you think I'm foolish enough to keep my password here? HAH! I use my birth date so I don't have to!"
I found the note hillarious. It was a HS kid working as a data entry drone. Now she works for me while going to college earning twice as much.
Yes. What need does a biller have for any kind of entertainment. I say ban newspapers, radios etc. too. While we're at it let's monitor toilet brakes. Oh and most employees stay back late anyway but there are a few stragglers. Let's cut their lunch hour in half and extend the working week to 12 hours 6 days a week. Ah hell lets make it 7 days a week. Worker's don't really need to have families or social lives.
Do you lack the ability to read english clearly? Where do I say that a biller has no need for entertainment? What I said was even quoted by you. Our company has NO problem with employees bringing radios or ipods or mp3 players or cds such that it doesn't interfere with productivity. Just don't hook the crap up to the workstations (actually, they cant).
But it was nice of you to put words in my mouth.
The rest of your post is more ignorant crap I'll ignore.
Have you ever considered you're simply an inconsiderate asshole with the people skills of a small mole rat?
Have you ever considered that you are simply an asshole? Who lacks the ability to read and think critically? Who spews words based on gut reactions rather than thinking things through?
What a prick. Read the post above yours in this thread. You've no idea the state/federal regulations involved in the healthcare industry.
Yes, you surely know every app they are going to need and have pre-installed it for them. And every application you haven't heard of is probably a virus.
No. Every application that I "haven't heard of" (read: hasn't been tested and signed off) will need to jump through some serious paperwork hoops -- get signed off by the medical director -- after being tested that it doesn't interfere with our LIS AND doesn't break compliance with our major payors. We go through several inspections -- and recently had a surprise inspection by Medical.
Flying colors, thank you very much.
then when the boss says "go to site XXX and tell me this..." they can't.
Because the client-services phone jockey is going to need to do this? yeah right. Internet access is limited to only those who NEED it as part of their job. Data entry, transcription, customer service, whatever does not NEED internet access to enter patient data, results or man the phones. You're a warped prick to suggest otherwise.
Yeah... now long would it take to pencil a screen full of data vs. cut/paste?
We're not just talking about teaching employees how to protect data, we're PREVENTING employees from stealing data. That job has been assigned to us by the feds via medical compliance regulations.
How about the IT guys start teaching safety instead of just bitching about how little the employees know about it.
How about ignorant ACs keeping STFU instead of bitching about stuff they know nothing about?
"anything that annoys the users in the name of security must be good."
I think it's more the case that you are focused in on the restrictions that effect you rather than getting a view of the "big picture". The trees are blocking your view of the forest.
You've obviously never worked with state/federal payors who are cracking down on fraud. Not only from the entity making the claim for service, but forcing the entity making the claim to police their own CLIENTS for fraud. There are volumes of various types of regulations and procedures that CAP/CLIA/Medi require and we are regularly inspected for compliance.
And how would their morale hold up when their employer is either shut down, fined in to oblivian or loses their ability to bill medical or some critical private insurance (essentially, you go out of business) for not providing necessary safegards for indentity/medical history? I don't think that their morale will be that high when they get their last check...
A radio is fine. A tape deck. Even a CD player. Hell... even an MP3 player is fine so long as it's not hooked up (and unable to hook up) to a workstation.
If a user screws up a machine, slap the standard install image back on and try try again.
And if the "screwed up" machine was infected with a malware which keylogged and/or sent information (such as client personal information/transaction records/ssns/ccard numbers) or perhaps medical records to some PC in Denmark BEFORE you restored from that image?
Ultimately users need to bear in mind that their PC is for working, and really should only provide for their working environment.
Agreed. What need does a biller have in hooking up their IPOD to their work PC? Why would a clientservices-phone jockey need to hook up their USB memory stick? Why would a transcriptionist need access msn/hotmail/yahoomail?
Then again, if it's a small shop and you're not really dealing with protected information on the network (say, medical records for example), then you may be fairly lax as to what users can/can't do at the workstation.
*IF* however, you have federal and or state guidelines you MUST follow with regards to protecting identity and health information, then sorry pals, your workstation is locked down. Nope -- no unauthorized memory sticks. Nope, no internet access -- other than white listed work related sites. Nope, no access to install software.
I've had users ask me for permission to install some "app" they like to use. The simple answer is "no" and I don't want to waste my breath re-hashing the same reasons. So I say "No. Check your employee handbook, page 12 for why" and walk away. I'm not going to have anyone of my guys jump through paperwork hoops to keep CAP or CLIA or MediCal happy so someone can have their computer go "ding" at a certain time using their favorite software.
and your best response is that we should keep better backups?
Re-read my post. My response is that there are already compelling reasons to have better backups -- and this is yet another reason. I don't think it's as HUGE a problem as this article suggests and I think your "stupid mod" comment is inappropriate and borders on antagonistic.
It's not a reason to use backups, it's a reason to USE A DIFFERENT OS. Pick one.
This sounds more like a programmers response than mine. Black or white. On or off. Thare ARE other options besides "A" and "B".
since otherwise the only option for disaster recovery in the absence of backups would be to wipe a machine, install XP, and then upgrade to Vista.
I just don't see this as a huge deal. It's just one more of many many countless reasons to keep backups -- and in the case of VISTA -- it sounds like keeping an HD image of the OS partition is of particular interest.
I don't think we'll find a very large corporate install base of "upgrade" versions of Vista. This will affect home users the most.
I'm more concerned with the "'per device' obsession" TFA mentions. I'm in no hurry to swap out XP/2k workstations at my shop for Vista -- and this just re-enforces that. I doubt I'm the only IT professional who feels that way.
While it's not a "million dollar" shack, it's "mansion" priced virtually anywhere else in the country. And it's a "fixer-upper".
I'm paying through the nose so that I don't spend 2+ hours a day on the road. I've got no real "mad money", but at least I spend more time with my family than most of my peers.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think ANY reasonable person is against vaccination -- just against MANDATORY vaccination.
You may want to look at this.
Perhaps after more studies there'll be a more compelling reason, say after results of the phase II or phase III studies, but I can still see huge arguments against based on economic reasons. It's a hell of a lot cheaper to make paps available to under served women than it is to vaccinate every woman aged 11-26 -- then every 11 year old every year...
Your numbers are off... about 70% of cancer can be traced back to HPV... generally to an exposure that occurred 10 years prior to the cancer dx -- or longer. It can also be easily IDd with paps (preferably liquid based) -- and even considering their error rate, when done annually or bi-annually, it's quite effective.
And a hell of a lot cheaper than $400 x 2 million woman/children every year a mandatory vaccination would call for.
Further, of the HPV strains which are linked to cancer (there's about a dozen or so), the two vaccines only block 2 and 3 respective.
I would hope the user would have planned ahead and picked a software suite met his needs. Particularly the need to change software suite vendors and OSs at some point in the future. I know I have.
But then again -- isn't this line of reasoning off topic? Isn't the topic the usefulness of "RENTING" office 2003? Not the inability to swap platforms? Someone asked "what if I stop renting -- will I still have access to my files?" or something to that effect. Short answer: Yes -- sort of -- with MS's free viewers.
Uh... if you're not running windows, I doubt you'll have need of renting office 2003, m'kay?
If you're not running windows, maybe this article is of no interest to you, m'kay?
Assuming it doesn't put some type of "rental flag" in the file which prevents it from working with the free viewers MS makes available.
Further, if you are in the healthcare field, you've no doubt have an interest in billing state or federal (MediCal/caid) for reimbursement. I don't think you know who created their compliance requirements, but I can assure you, it wasn't the boyscouts.And speaking of my post, perhaps you missed where I said the following:
"Then again, if it's a small shop and you're not really dealing with protected information on the network (say, medical records for example), then you may be fairly lax as to what users can/can't do at the workstation.
*IF* however, you have federal and or state guidelines you MUST follow with regards to protecting identity and health information, then sorry pals, your workstation is locked down. Nope -- no unauthorized memory sticks. Nope, no internet access -- other than white listed work related sites. Nope, no access to install software."
You are just one of the many cranks who think they *KNOW* how to run a business and *YOUR* standards of user access are best. Bull fucking shit. Run your own business the way you want to and spend your resources in a way that you see fit. How dare bully your views on other entities.
These practices I've spoken about are sound business decisions for the single reason that it dramatically reduce the cost a company puts out in IT staff for troubleshooting/fixing busted systems. Further, it dramatically reduces their exposure to lawsuits. Nevermind meeting state/federal requirements.
Such tidbits as:
Are policies and procedures in place to prevent unauthorized installation of software on any computer used by the laboratory?
Is there documentation that programs are adequately tested for proper functioning when first installed and after any modifications, and that the laboratory director or designee has approved the use of all new programs and modifications?
Is there documentation that laboratory computer procedures are reviewed at least annually by the laboratory director or designee?
Is there an adequate tracking system to identify all persons who have added or modified software?
We haven't even begun to discuss Medi-Cal compliance requirements since 05...
You want a pissing contest? I've been on the LAB side of things for over 20 years -- in IT for 16. I've written procedure manuals for numerous labs and sat on a number of HIPAA panels in `01-`03.No kidding. However, there ARE laws that prevent laboratories from operating without CAP certification... And it's very hard for a lab to operate if it cant collect revenue from MediCal or some 3rd party payor because it failed a surprise inspection due to compliance weaknesses.
I'm a control freak? You are an asshat who appears to enjoy making WAGs about other people.
Re-read your own claptrap. And maybe read this thread to get some context... or at least open your eyes while you pretend to read.
I don't give a dingo's kidney if someone wants to pay their bills using company equipment. If they don't have authorization, they can't. It has nothing to do with me. I don't make policy, I just implement it. I'd really like to see that discussion between the billing manager and the GLM... "um, Carlos wants internet access to he can pay his bills".
With regards to "work related" software, where the flying fuck did you read that gem? You are the poster child for ASS-u-ming. You've no idea the federal and state regulations with regards to software, access, information/patient protection measures that are required in the healthcare industry. It's not a matter of CONTROL, it's a matter of CAP or CLIA or MediCal compliance. The biller who whats to pay his bills -- remember him? How's he going to pay after he gets his last paycheck because the lab lost it's MediCal licence for compliance violations and we can no longer collect revenue?
Ignorant prick.
Way to misrepresent my post.
For what it's worth, each department has access request forms they complete for each new hire and modification requests for change of responsibilities. If their supervisor requests access outside the scope of what has been determined necessary for their work it's out of my hands and they need to justify that access to the general lab manager.
Each departments access requirements were worked out by the department managers, upper management and IT (yes, I have/had input but hardly final say). I didn't set policy -- I enforce it. That is part of my job description.
You sound like a whiner to me. With your attitude, I wouldn't hire you refill paper, nevermind change toner.
At our shop, we have two physical networks. The LAB network which is locked down. Then there is the administration network. That network is used by HR, CEO, CFO, etc and we run a policy similar to what you describe.
During a routine maintenance job (clean workstations/mice/keyboards), one of my guys found a post-it under a plebs keyboard. It read: "Do you think I'm foolish enough to keep my password here? HAH! I use my birth date so I don't have to!"
I found the note hillarious. It was a HS kid working as a data entry drone. Now she works for me while going to college earning twice as much.
But it was nice of you to put words in my mouth.
The rest of your post is more ignorant crap I'll ignore.Have you ever considered that you are simply an asshole? Who lacks the ability to read and think critically? Who spews words based on gut reactions rather than thinking things through?
Flying colors, thank you very much.Because the client-services phone jockey is going to need to do this? yeah right. Internet access is limited to only those who NEED it as part of their job. Data entry, transcription, customer service, whatever does not NEED internet access to enter patient data, results or man the phones. You're a warped prick to suggest otherwise.
We're not just talking about teaching employees how to protect data, we're PREVENTING employees from stealing data. That job has been assigned to us by the feds via medical compliance regulations.
How about ignorant ACs keeping STFU instead of bitching about stuff they know nothing about?
I think it's more the case that you are focused in on the restrictions that effect you rather than getting a view of the "big picture". The trees are blocking your view of the forest.
Print Screen -> jpg -> IPOD HD.
Cut/Paste from APP -> text File -> IPOD HD.
Scan
You've obviously never worked with state/federal payors who are cracking down on fraud. Not only from the entity making the claim for service, but forcing the entity making the claim to police their own CLIENTS for fraud. There are volumes of various types of regulations and procedures that CAP/CLIA/Medi require and we are regularly inspected for compliance.
Sucks to be in IT in the medical field sometimes.
And how would their morale hold up when their employer is either shut down, fined in to oblivian or loses their ability to bill medical or some critical private insurance (essentially, you go out of business) for not providing necessary safegards for indentity/medical history? I don't think that their morale will be that high when they get their last check...
A radio is fine. A tape deck. Even a CD player. Hell... even an MP3 player is fine so long as it's not hooked up (and unable to hook up) to a workstation.
And if the "screwed up" machine was infected with a malware which keylogged and/or sent information (such as client personal information/transaction records/ssns/ccard numbers) or perhaps medical records to some PC in Denmark BEFORE you restored from that image?
Then again, if it's a small shop and you're not really dealing with protected information on the network (say, medical records for example), then you may be fairly lax as to what users can/can't do at the workstation.
*IF* however, you have federal and or state guidelines you MUST follow with regards to protecting identity and health information, then sorry pals, your workstation is locked down. Nope -- no unauthorized memory sticks. Nope, no internet access -- other than white listed work related sites. Nope, no access to install software.
I've had users ask me for permission to install some "app" they like to use. The simple answer is "no" and I don't want to waste my breath re-hashing the same reasons. So I say "No. Check your employee handbook, page 12 for why" and walk away. I'm not going to have anyone of my guys jump through paperwork hoops to keep CAP or CLIA or MediCal happy so someone can have their computer go "ding" at a certain time using their favorite software.
Read all about it here
Interesting story.
I don't think we'll find a very large corporate install base of "upgrade" versions of Vista. This will affect home users the most.
I'm more concerned with the "'per device' obsession" TFA mentions. I'm in no hurry to swap out XP/2k workstations at my shop for Vista -- and this just re-enforces that. I doubt I'm the only IT professional who feels that way.
Bingo.
While it's not a "million dollar" shack, it's "mansion" priced virtually anywhere else in the country. And it's a "fixer-upper".
I'm paying through the nose so that I don't spend 2+ hours a day on the road. I've got no real "mad money", but at least I spend more time with my family than most of my peers.
Where do you live? The unibomber's shack? In power alone, I'm about 7x that. Our house spends about $100 alone on gas (car) each month.
That said, what he did was a neat -- but your suggestion is accurate. He spent way to much to save way to little.