I have been a certified/licensed EMT for over 10 years.
"Medical devices are expensive to make." For many commonly-used devices (ECG, pulse oximeter, etc.), the level of technology implemented is magnitudes less than that of a decent smartphone. Sure, these aren't mass market items--but I'm also hard pressed to understand why it doesn't make sense to have an alternative to a LifePak which easily costs $15K+. Case in point: the AED you can easily buy from Costco in the neighborhood of $1K--and has lots of sophisticated logic. Just because the thing has blinky lights and makes "bing" noises doesn't mean it should be exorbitantly priced.
"People need a manufacturer big enough to sue." Circular reasoning on the best of days. Does a commercial implementer of this device need a legal team? Yes. Is the pragmatic implementation of a device at lower cost that's reliable and lawsuit-resistant possible? Absolutely.
Bingo! Though simple, it's actually a topic that is more sophisticated than people give it credit for.
During my tenure as an EMT for an ambulance service, I struggled with dry hands: hangnails were a constant problem. Since then, we've become more sophisticated in our sanitary practices and products (e.g., moisturizers with nitrile gloves are OK--but not with the previous generation of latex gloves).
Yes, I wish people wouldn't do that. That's why I don't care if someone calls me a hippie, a gun nut, or whatever epithet. I get to the point.
You, on the other hand, decided to launch a mini polemic on how to gain credibility. ("...everyone who isn't a fringe, gun-grabbing sociopath."). Please.
FYI, every time you use a term like "gun nut" or "lunatics with guns" when referring to your fellow citizens, you lose credibility with everyone who isn't a fringe, gun-grabbing sociopath.
Hate to break it to you, but when I see people get easily butthurt over being called a name, I generally refer to them as insecure nuts. Bravo.
Please note, I'm in favor of responsible firearms ownership, reasonable amounts of controls related to background checks and such and own a pre-ban weapon. I'm saying this to save you the trouble of calling me a bunny-kissing-tree-hugger-commie-liberal-fascist-Nazi with herpagonnasyphilAIDS.
I used to work for a small Texas company you've probably never heard of (Enron). Their Broadband Services division had, under their employ, some of the brightest minds in networking and video distribution for that era (unfortunately, the same cannot be said of their executive management).
In any event, here's why I like 4K--and related plans by a premier provider of 4K camera equipment (Red) to utilize their new Odemax acquisition to distribute it. (I also suspect that the ideas being employed by Red and Odemax are things that can be replicated in whole or substantial part by others.)
1) I really hate macroblocking: it looks ugly. Depending on the quality of TV and BluRay player, the macroblocking (and other artifacting) is better or worse--but it's still there even with well-produced BluRay disks. Even with relatively small screens (e.g., 42"), it looks like there could be some really nice gains in artifact reduction.
2) One more novel idea the architects at Enron Broadband employed was to build their own content distribution network, complete with Enron-provided fiber connectivity and servers placed at ISPs. These "head-end" servers at ISPs would reduce the host's peering costs and improve performance.
3) At least in metro areas where Odemax has a presence, the ISP's backbone capabilities will be less of an issue--and I suspect their WAN capacity is substantially more capable. 20 mbit/sec within an ISP's own network seems much more feasible (be it xDSL, DOCSIS, etc.).
My question for Jennifer: I've observed in work and professional life (my job is 50% nerd whisperer, 50% energy policy and political matters) that while laws that protect "the little guy" are practically worthless unless one is willing to shell out several hundred dollars for a lawyer--and perhaps even $10K+ for a litigator.
It's also scary and disheartening to hear an experienced and successful friend say that he selected a US Government-owned patent for technology his startup is implementing--if only because he hopes the Feds will come to his defense if he's sued for patent infringement.
Could you please suggest some political and/or legislative outcomes that we need to pursue to try to make access to law more egalitarian from technology and innovation standpoints?
The sheer smugness, ignorance, arrogance and incredible lack of knowledge is mind boggling.
...speaks the person who is not arrogant;-)
Seriously, why get wrapped around the axle on this? The US has 300 million people; India, one billion. It should be apparent that we've got a diversity of people in both places. RELAX, smoke a bhang, take a walk, build a another rocket, etc.
The systems I work on feed data to our SCADA systems. The entire network is completely walled off from the Internet, and even connectivity to our internal (non-operations) network is mediated by extremely secure bastion hosts.
I can understand that there may be a need for some access (e.g., system pages an operator to send a warning or emergency message), especially as this is a small town. Keep these sorts of connections absolutely to a minimum, and wrap several layers of security around it.
Correction: they're not doing it now. Wait a few years. Just like Microsoft with its Xbox - ultimately, it will have Windows for business, and XBox for consumers. Apple will work on a similar distribution.
I think to conjecture this is FUD. Maybe Apple will, but until then, I reject your FUD and replace it with my own reality.
There are many reasons why Apple would NOT want to do this, especially considering that there are a substantial number of Apple users that would _not_ want this to be the only method of getting new apps.
Slashdot Mirror
I have been a certified/licensed EMT for over 10 years.
"Medical devices are expensive to make."
For many commonly-used devices (ECG, pulse oximeter, etc.), the level of technology implemented is magnitudes less than that of a decent smartphone. Sure, these aren't mass market items--but I'm also hard pressed to understand why it doesn't make sense to have an alternative to a LifePak which easily costs $15K+. Case in point: the AED you can easily buy from Costco in the neighborhood of $1K--and has lots of sophisticated logic. Just because the thing has blinky lights and makes "bing" noises doesn't mean it should be exorbitantly priced.
"People need a manufacturer big enough to sue."
Circular reasoning on the best of days. Does a commercial implementer of this device need a legal team? Yes. Is the pragmatic implementation of a device at lower cost that's reliable and lawsuit-resistant possible? Absolutely.
You may have forgotten "your basic pleasure model" ;-)
Bingo! Though simple, it's actually a topic that is more sophisticated than people give it credit for.
During my tenure as an EMT for an ambulance service, I struggled with dry hands: hangnails were a constant problem. Since then, we've become more sophisticated in our sanitary practices and products (e.g., moisturizers with nitrile gloves are OK--but not with the previous generation of latex gloves).
I think maybe you ought to tell the railroad industry of your theories and see what they have to say about the futility of electric for towing....
BINGO!
Yes, I wish people wouldn't do that. That's why I don't care if someone calls me a hippie, a gun nut, or whatever epithet. I get to the point.
You, on the other hand, decided to launch a mini polemic on how to gain credibility. ("...everyone who isn't a fringe, gun-grabbing sociopath."). Please.
P.S. I was the debate champion at my high school.
That, sir, is horseshit. Post links or GTFO.
FYI, every time you use a term like "gun nut" or "lunatics with guns" when referring to your fellow citizens, you lose credibility with everyone who isn't a fringe, gun-grabbing sociopath.
Hate to break it to you, but when I see people get easily butthurt over being called a name, I generally refer to them as insecure nuts. Bravo.
Please note, I'm in favor of responsible firearms ownership, reasonable amounts of controls related to background checks and such and own a pre-ban weapon. I'm saying this to save you the trouble of calling me a bunny-kissing-tree-hugger-commie-liberal-fascist-Nazi with herpagonnasyphilAIDS.
It's clear you haven't actually read DC v. Heller and instead just copy and pasted a gun nut website bite from it.
Excellent rebuttal - seriously.
I love how you ask the same, hackneyed "questions" that climate change deniers have been trotting out for a while now. But keep going...
I used to work for a small Texas company you've probably never heard of (Enron). Their Broadband Services division had, under their employ, some of the brightest minds in networking and video distribution for that era (unfortunately, the same cannot be said of their executive management).
In any event, here's why I like 4K--and related plans by a premier provider of 4K camera equipment (Red) to utilize their new Odemax acquisition to distribute it. (I also suspect that the ideas being employed by Red and Odemax are things that can be replicated in whole or substantial part by others.)
1) I really hate macroblocking: it looks ugly. Depending on the quality of TV and BluRay player, the macroblocking (and other artifacting) is better or worse--but it's still there even with well-produced BluRay disks. Even with relatively small screens (e.g., 42"), it looks like there could be some really nice gains in artifact reduction.
2) One more novel idea the architects at Enron Broadband employed was to build their own content distribution network, complete with Enron-provided fiber connectivity and servers placed at ISPs. These "head-end" servers at ISPs would reduce the host's peering costs and improve performance.
3) At least in metro areas where Odemax has a presence, the ISP's backbone capabilities will be less of an issue--and I suspect their WAN capacity is substantially more capable. 20 mbit/sec within an ISP's own network seems much more feasible (be it xDSL, DOCSIS, etc.).
Movements don't need to have leaders.
You could use this same assertion against democracy ("people MUST be lead, fascism sounds good.").
How many snails am I allowed to rig up?
I, for one, welcome the creation of a Beowulf cluster of these snail-pulled carriages.
I agree: this article is complete crap. Nice job, Slashdot (slow clap).
Organgtool: +42 to you!
One word: guanxi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guanxi
HP is already dead: they died when they turned their backs on what Bill and Dave said in "The HP Way".
To me, the _real_ HP (engineering and innovation focused, not the "brand machine" someone mentioned earlier in this thread) is Agilent.
GREAT question!
My question for Jennifer:
I've observed in work and professional life (my job is 50% nerd whisperer, 50% energy policy and political matters) that while laws that protect "the little guy" are practically worthless unless one is willing to shell out several hundred dollars for a lawyer--and perhaps even $10K+ for a litigator.
It's also scary and disheartening to hear an experienced and successful friend say that he selected a US Government-owned patent for technology his startup is implementing--if only because he hopes the Feds will come to his defense if he's sued for patent infringement.
Could you please suggest some political and/or legislative outcomes that we need to pursue to try to make access to law more egalitarian from technology and innovation standpoints?
We don't live in a nation with Napoleonic Law you dickwads! One is innocent until proven guilty.
Go back to Fox News and eat your pablum like a good village idiot.
The sheer smugness, ignorance, arrogance and incredible lack of knowledge is mind boggling.
...speaks the person who is not arrogant ;-)
Seriously, why get wrapped around the axle on this? The US has 300 million people; India, one billion. It should be apparent that we've got a diversity of people in both places. RELAX, smoke a bhang, take a walk, build a another rocket, etc.
All my emails started showing up with fortunes and free eggrolls.
And ended with "in bed."
The systems I work on feed data to our SCADA systems. The entire network is completely walled off from the Internet, and even connectivity to our internal (non-operations) network is mediated by extremely secure bastion hosts.
I can understand that there may be a need for some access (e.g., system pages an operator to send a warning or emergency message), especially as this is a small town. Keep these sorts of connections absolutely to a minimum, and wrap several layers of security around it.
Correction: they're not doing it now. Wait a few years. Just like Microsoft with its Xbox - ultimately, it will have Windows for business, and XBox for consumers. Apple will work on a similar distribution.
I think to conjecture this is FUD. Maybe Apple will, but until then, I reject your FUD and replace it with my own reality.
There are many reasons why Apple would NOT want to do this, especially considering that there are a substantial number of Apple users that would _not_ want this to be the only method of getting new apps.
...and thought his resignation letter was spoofed by spyware running on a Windows PC.
sup /b/?