We are beginning to investigate smartphone based solutions, which, in order to be compliant with US privacy regulations have expensive recurring monthly charges, and will involve installing and maintaining microcells in our hospitals.
1) Don't you already have microcells in your hospitals? I work with comms folks at a large medical center, and that's one of the things they do, ensure cell coverage throughout their hospitals. I don't know, maybe that's atypical and ahead of the curve or something, but I wouldn't have thought so.
2) Depends on what you mean by "expensive" recurring charges. There's really no reason that HIPAA compliance should entail expensive charges--but I'm thinking on a per-user basis and you might be thinking the aggregate is expensive. Or you might be talking with vendors who are simply using HIPAA as an excuse to overcharge for what is actually a pretty simple service to provide.
3) Unlike the typical/. poster, I actually know what I'm talking about here. I'm working on designing and quoting such a thing for a big medical system right now;-)
4) Our biggest concern is not cost, it's reliability. Where do all the failures with SMS and iMessage come from--how can we avoid that and deliver top reliability and low latency without draining your battery?
It's called weighing the benefits. The benefits of a modern smart phone far outweigh the limited benefit of a reliable pager for the vast majority of scenarios.
First off nobody said you have to give up your smartphone in order to use a pager.
Second off, reliability is the only advantage of a pager, so if you do not need reliability, then hell no you don't need a pager.
Your original post is still ridiculous; the idea that you'd turn down a company because they offer a more reliable emergency contact is just stupid.
I seriously would not do business with any company who had as a point of contact, a pager number. In the age of smart phones (with battery packs and alternative charging methods) why go backwards, in a worst case have an older cellphone that lasts days.
Yeah, just because the pager is far more reliable, phooey on that old stuff...
Why doesn't someone developing medical devices see this as a market and develop a pager for the medical industry if pagers are no longer being made?
It's not the pagers. It's the paging systems. The market has dropped greatly, so maintaining transmitter towers, repeaters, the whole system, is a hard business to be in. Reliability is exactly why some large medical systems run their own metro-wide paging systems.
I live in a rural mountain location, and know that certain map software, therefore certain GPS units, give really horrible directions to my location--as in sending you on a long detour on a brutally rough & steep dirt road through a state park several miles from me, or in another case giving directions that are flat-out impossible to follow. I explain this to service people before giving them the actually simple directions. And yet, some of them go ahead and use their GPS and get totally lost, even after having been told that their GPS is likely to give them incorrect directions!
Hating on people working for legit companies operating within the law is a bit much. But hating on that asshole with "windows support" who knows good and damned well he's trying to infect your machine with malware in order to extort you, well not hating that jerk would be ridiculous.
A patent should be about your brilliant invention of how to do something, in detail, that nobody else could figure out. It should not be about what to do, without any details on the how.
That, combined with patent examiners knowledgeable enough to recognize and reject software patents that consist of going from requirements to design by gluing together well-know techniques, would eliminate the real problems. It wouldn't satisfy RMS, but it would limit software patents to the extremely rare ones that are truly novel and non-obvious.
Well, let's see, Apple is a high-pressure workplace, to which people go when they cannot make it at Tesla. Wait, what???
The article is mostly based on the opinion of a single hipster jackass who felt that he was too good to apply at Apple, backed up by the opinion of a few other people who don't want to work there, and a recruiter. Note the lack of information from anyone who has actually ever worked there.
... tax... which Tim Cooke has said is a driving force for Apple to make their products overseas.
Citation? Because I don't think he ever said that.
But I do know that he has said there is simply no way in the U.S. to get in one place the 10s of 1000s of workers with the equivalent of 2-year associates degrees that are required to keep those factories running.
The entire point of this is to first convince many people to say "why yes, that does seem reasonable" then advance to "but we can't do it if service providers use secure encryption, and that's why we must be provided back doors"! Granted, most email is not stored encrypted with the account owners' public keys, but that's what this "hypothetical" is about, require back doors, then apply that to all stored communications, not just email.
A person who applies to the industry leader and then turns down the job because they "already found something" don't even have a serious professional career, they're a fry cook looking for a paycheck.
You're off-point. This wasn't about turning down a job offer with Google; this was about not waiting any longer to find out if a job would be offered.
The process as described is unreasonable and utterly disrespectful to applicants. There is no rational reason Google could not make its decisions more quickly.
I replaced the old router serving as the house AP with a Ubiquity UniFi AP-AC-PRO - a nice fairly low cost enterprise-class AP over the holidays. (It only costs $150!)
And I have to admit, I'm impressed - covers three floors and everything with full signal at 2.4GHz, and at 5GHz, it's actually usable on all three floors.
Thanks for that; I need to look into one of these;-)
Most of the code there is obvious. No need for copyright or licensing. The answer to "how do I do a rotate an unsigned integer?" isn't a work of art. Even the longer snippets of code are just that: snippets. They're composed of techniques that are widely known and widely used, and most certainly these snippets were copied from somewhere else in the first place!! There's almost never anything original in stackexchange. Having to put attributions on this is like having to use attributions with tweets. The code snippets almost certainly can not be copyrighted as they're too small and the original authors are unknown or can't be reached.
Why the hell has this not yet been modded up to +5???
What next, we can't use code snippets from "The C Programming Language, Kernighan and Ritchie" without attribution? Because there have been billions of copies of those snippets over the years.
Ages ago, I bought a book on cross-platform GUI development, which was advertised as having a useful library explained in the book and included on the CD that came with the book. And guess what? Yep, there was a license printed in there, which basically prevented any reasonable use at all of the library. Somehow, the author and the lawyers had not actually communicated regarding the purpose of the CD;-) Didn't matter anyway, the book and the framework turned out to be really crappy...
The awful moderation is by far the biggest problem. It's so frustrating to ask a perfectly good question, get some good answers to it, and then later on some micropenised moderator comes along and starts muddling with the questions and answers just to make himself feel like his micropenis isn't as small as it is.
Yeah, I've never used SO heavily, just occasionally. But over the last few months it does seem like fully half of the few queries I have that lead me to SO, are closed as "not relevant to programming", despite being obviously 100% relevant to programming. Seriously, what kind of jackass moderates a question about setting network call timeouts FROM CODE as not being about programming.
I know it didn't used to be that way, because it was only in 2015 that I encountered the first obviously incorrect, probably malicious, "not relevant" moderation. And it has grown to be all the damn time now. I used to be happy when google put an SO question at the top of my responses because it was likely to provide good info, now I'm starting to be annoyed by it.
I had a very, very tiny pool of doctors (almost all pediatricians who see no Medicare patients...
Yeah, if not for that loophole, I would have been driven out of the business years ago... The biggest problem is the requirement for re-certification after *any* code change, which basically requires waterfall style development with at most 3 releases, maybe 4 if you have god-like competence in your project management, per year. That's a near-perfect way to completely disallow any and all innovation.
Yeah, I write EHR software for a living, and I firmly believe that assholes like you are one of the major problems with EHR software. Doctors have a tough job, and jerk-off entitled know-it-all developers with bachelor's (or associate's, or no) degrees who don't listen and get defensive at every little criticism of the shit-ass god-awful workflow monstrosities they create, are a huge problem.
How ALL of the posts ranting that there is no safe level of alcohol consumption, that all studies show damaging health effects, etc, are AC. Not one rabid teetotaler will put his name to his posts.
You sound like a classic alcoholic in denial. All medical studies have shown that alcohol is bad for you and has no health benefits. No amount is "OK".
Saying something over and over does not make it true. This is complete bullshit.
It's not just to curtail abuses of power either, but to protect good cops who take the appropriate actions but afterwards are second-guessed and told they acted inappropriately.
Yep, I bet at least 90% of complaints are bogus. And for the rest, the cameras will help toward the more timely removal of those officers not suited for the job.
We have ScanSnap scanners at work and one of the biggest pains is they do NOT support the TWAIN/ISIS driver standard.
True. You want TWAIN or ISIS, you have to move up to fi series scanners. I personally don't care about using standalone scanning software--it gets me what I want.
Slashdot Mirror
We are beginning to investigate smartphone based solutions, which, in order to be compliant with US privacy regulations have expensive recurring monthly charges, and will involve installing and maintaining microcells in our hospitals.
1) Don't you already have microcells in your hospitals? I work with comms folks at a large medical center, and that's one of the things they do, ensure cell coverage throughout their hospitals. I don't know, maybe that's atypical and ahead of the curve or something, but I wouldn't have thought so.
2) Depends on what you mean by "expensive" recurring charges. There's really no reason that HIPAA compliance should entail expensive charges--but I'm thinking on a per-user basis and you might be thinking the aggregate is expensive. Or you might be talking with vendors who are simply using HIPAA as an excuse to overcharge for what is actually a pretty simple service to provide.
3) Unlike the typical /. poster, I actually know what I'm talking about here. I'm working on designing and quoting such a thing for a big medical system right now ;-)
4) Our biggest concern is not cost, it's reliability. Where do all the failures with SMS and iMessage come from--how can we avoid that and deliver top reliability and low latency without draining your battery?
It's called weighing the benefits. The benefits of a modern smart phone far outweigh the limited benefit of a reliable pager for the vast majority of scenarios.
First off nobody said you have to give up your smartphone in order to use a pager.
Second off, reliability is the only advantage of a pager, so if you do not need reliability, then hell no you don't need a pager.
Your original post is still ridiculous; the idea that you'd turn down a company because they offer a more reliable emergency contact is just stupid.
I seriously would not do business with any company who had as a point of contact, a pager number. In the age of smart phones (with battery packs and alternative charging methods) why go backwards, in a worst case have an older cellphone that lasts days.
Yeah, just because the pager is far more reliable, phooey on that old stuff...
Why doesn't someone developing medical devices see this as a market and develop a pager for the medical industry if pagers are no longer being made?
It's not the pagers. It's the paging systems. The market has dropped greatly, so maintaining transmitter towers, repeaters, the whole system, is a hard business to be in. Reliability is exactly why some large medical systems run their own metro-wide paging systems.
I live in a rural mountain location, and know that certain map software, therefore certain GPS units, give really horrible directions to my location--as in sending you on a long detour on a brutally rough & steep dirt road through a state park several miles from me, or in another case giving directions that are flat-out impossible to follow. I explain this to service people before giving them the actually simple directions. And yet, some of them go ahead and use their GPS and get totally lost, even after having been told that their GPS is likely to give them incorrect directions!
Hating on the people making the calls is wrong...
Hating on people working for legit companies operating within the law is a bit much. But hating on that asshole with "windows support" who knows good and damned well he's trying to infect your machine with malware in order to extort you, well not hating that jerk would be ridiculous.
A patent should be about your brilliant invention of how to do something, in detail, that nobody else could figure out. It should not be about what to do, without any details on the how.
That, combined with patent examiners knowledgeable enough to recognize and reject software patents that consist of going from requirements to design by gluing together well-know techniques, would eliminate the real problems. It wouldn't satisfy RMS, but it would limit software patents to the extremely rare ones that are truly novel and non-obvious.
As if containing distilled water were not a solved engineering problem.
Ah, but you're forgetting how utterly corrosive and powerfully toxic pure water is ;-)
Pure H20 cannot be consumed by humans .
No problem.
Pure H20 cannot be consumed by humans .
Of all the completely ridiculous asinine made-up bullshit I've read on /. over the past decade, this is the tops o' them all.
Well, let's see, Apple is a high-pressure workplace, to which people go when they cannot make it at Tesla. Wait, what???
The article is mostly based on the opinion of a single hipster jackass who felt that he was too good to apply at Apple, backed up by the opinion of a few other people who don't want to work there, and a recruiter. Note the lack of information from anyone who has actually ever worked there.
Every sale they make of an Apple Product in the US is booked through Ireland so that they pay no corporate income tax on those sales.
Bullshit. What's booked in Ireland are EU sales.
... tax... which Tim Cooke has said is a driving force for Apple to make their products overseas.
Citation? Because I don't think he ever said that.
But I do know that he has said there is simply no way in the U.S. to get in one place the 10s of 1000s of workers with the equivalent of 2-year associates degrees that are required to keep those factories running.
The entire point of this is to first convince many people to say "why yes, that does seem reasonable" then advance to "but we can't do it if service providers use secure encryption, and that's why we must be provided back doors"! Granted, most email is not stored encrypted with the account owners' public keys, but that's what this "hypothetical" is about, require back doors, then apply that to all stored communications, not just email.
A person who applies to the industry leader and then turns down the job because they "already found something" don't even have a serious professional career, they're a fry cook looking for a paycheck.
You're off-point. This wasn't about turning down a job offer with Google; this was about not waiting any longer to find out if a job would be offered.
The process as described is unreasonable and utterly disrespectful to applicants. There is no rational reason Google could not make its decisions more quickly.
Indeed. This way you get sort-of the "crop of the cream", i.e. the worst of the best ones.
Perfect description!
I replaced the old router serving as the house AP with a Ubiquity UniFi AP-AC-PRO - a nice fairly low cost enterprise-class AP over the holidays. (It only costs $150!)
And I have to admit, I'm impressed - covers three floors and everything with full signal at 2.4GHz, and at 5GHz, it's actually usable on all three floors.
Thanks for that; I need to look into one of these ;-)
Most of the code there is obvious. No need for copyright or licensing. The answer to "how do I do a rotate an unsigned integer?" isn't a work of art. Even the longer snippets of code are just that: snippets. They're composed of techniques that are widely known and widely used, and most certainly these snippets were copied from somewhere else in the first place!! There's almost never anything original in stackexchange. Having to put attributions on this is like having to use attributions with tweets. The code snippets almost certainly can not be copyrighted as they're too small and the original authors are unknown or can't be reached.
Why the hell has this not yet been modded up to +5???
What next, we can't use code snippets from "The C Programming Language, Kernighan and Ritchie" without attribution? Because there have been billions of copies of those snippets over the years.
Ages ago, I bought a book on cross-platform GUI development, which was advertised as having a useful library explained in the book and included on the CD that came with the book. And guess what? Yep, there was a license printed in there, which basically prevented any reasonable use at all of the library. Somehow, the author and the lawyers had not actually communicated regarding the purpose of the CD ;-) Didn't matter anyway, the book and the framework turned out to be really crappy...
The awful moderation is by far the biggest problem. It's so frustrating to ask a perfectly good question, get some good answers to it, and then later on some micropenised moderator comes along and starts muddling with the questions and answers just to make himself feel like his micropenis isn't as small as it is.
Yeah, I've never used SO heavily, just occasionally. But over the last few months it does seem like fully half of the few queries I have that lead me to SO, are closed as "not relevant to programming", despite being obviously 100% relevant to programming. Seriously, what kind of jackass moderates a question about setting network call timeouts FROM CODE as not being about programming.
I know it didn't used to be that way, because it was only in 2015 that I encountered the first obviously incorrect, probably malicious, "not relevant" moderation. And it has grown to be all the damn time now. I used to be happy when google put an SO question at the top of my responses because it was likely to provide good info, now I'm starting to be annoyed by it.
I had a very, very tiny pool of doctors (almost all pediatricians who see no Medicare patients...
Yeah, if not for that loophole, I would have been driven out of the business years ago... The biggest problem is the requirement for re-certification after *any* code change, which basically requires waterfall style development with at most 3 releases, maybe 4 if you have god-like competence in your project management, per year. That's a near-perfect way to completely disallow any and all innovation.
Yeah, I write EHR software for a living, and I firmly believe that assholes like you are one of the major problems with EHR software. Doctors have a tough job, and jerk-off entitled know-it-all developers with bachelor's (or associate's, or no) degrees who don't listen and get defensive at every little criticism of the shit-ass god-awful workflow monstrosities they create, are a huge problem.
How ALL of the posts ranting that there is no safe level of alcohol consumption, that all studies show damaging health effects, etc, are AC. Not one rabid teetotaler will put his name to his posts.
You sound like a classic alcoholic in denial. All medical studies have shown that alcohol is bad for you and has no health benefits. No amount is "OK".
Saying something over and over does not make it true. This is complete bullshit.
It's not just to curtail abuses of power either, but to protect good cops who take the appropriate actions but afterwards are second-guessed and told they acted inappropriately.
Yep, I bet at least 90% of complaints are bogus. And for the rest, the cameras will help toward the more timely removal of those officers not suited for the job.
We have ScanSnap scanners at work and one of the biggest pains is they do NOT support the TWAIN/ISIS driver standard.
True. You want TWAIN or ISIS, you have to move up to fi series scanners. I personally don't care about using standalone scanning software--it gets me what I want.