You just don't realize how powerful a common DSP is or don't realize how much computation is involved in encoding and decoding MP3.
Don't be a condescending and arrogant jerk. I know enough about DSPs to know it's easy to transform one waveform into another. That's not the point.
It's not just goddamn firmware. Each hearing aid is programmed to compensate for a patient's loss. Which requires diagnostics and the resulting profile to be uploaded.
An incorrectly programmed hearing aid can worsen the hearing loss over time. The risk to the patient's hearing is as significant as listening to an amplified earpod at deafening levels. It is NOT just implants that have risk associated.
You're trivialising what goes into a hearing aid. Leaving out stuff like analysis and programming of frequency shifting etc. They're still way overpriced but it doesn't help your case to oversimplify.
Except for the medical device part you just described a dirt cheap mp3 player or bluetooth headphone.
Last time I checked, a dirt cheap mp3 player couldn't be hooked up to a computer and tailored to boost particular frequencies precisely. No a crappy digital equaliser doesn't count.
I'm loving this conversation here because I've gotten crucified in slashdot before for making simmilar comments to the whole thread here.
I don't wonder why.
I grew up in a family of top managers of Boeing systems engineers. They hated computers. My dad never even learned how to turn one on.
Being a Luddite is nothing to be proud of.
He hired other monkey to use the computers.
Nor is being a snob. Too bad he didn't hired other monkey teach you English.
As A child I was regailed with wonderful stories of every hard lesson in safety my dad had learned over his lifetime.
Explains why you like inflicting drivel on other people.
He loved world war II because they got to use cutting edge designs for balls out performance yet at the same time learned how to make things reliable by disecting the accident.
That 50-70 million people killed was worth it! Or so he tells you. Not to mention those mamed.
He would tell me about the accident that taught them that the engine pumps need to be at full speed but flow stalled on take off so that there's no lag when you hot swap after a pump fails. He told me of the accident where they learned not to route 100% of the control system wiring through any one junction box. etc...Probably because of all these hard won lessons boeing for years insisted on fully mechanical or hydraulic flight surface controls.
Oh, so mechanical systems can have catastrophic failures too? Apparently not a less you cared to learn.
Whereas Airbus and other jumped on the fly-by-wire concept early. My dad would spit after hearing some youg person tout all the advantages of fly by wire. He knew them perfectly well. He was big on accepting new innovations to reduce fuel costs and increas performance. He was not a luddite.
Yes he was. You just finished telling me he never learnt to turn a computer on and called that monkey work.
But he had a safety background that told him these electonic systems were hard as hell to validate and hard as hell to make truly independent from each other.
How the fuck would he know if he refused to use electronic systems?
For example they often used triple redundant computers and if one of them disagreed the other two would vote it off the island and stop listening to it. From what I've read it's now suspected that the latest airbus crash in the pacific had one of it's root problem in the voting nexus where a superior computer over ruled a more primitive safety system.
So mechanical systems can have catastrophic failures and so can electronic ones. You do realise you can have redundant mechanical systems and a mechanical voting "nexus" don't you? Bad design doesn't get any better or worse because you use a computer which is just another kind of machine.
While we all know that computer software validation is hard if not impossible. It's not something we readily admit here on slash dot.
Whereas an infinite number of states in a mechanical system can be validated?
It's because for years people like my dad would throttle the innovations the computer engineeers wanted to implement.
You mean your dad is one of the reasons Boeing is fighting to maintain dominance. You'll notice that now all aircraft are being designed to work with fly by wire, composites and complex computers. Your father's WWII glory days are long gone. No aircraft company's going to come back and compete with pure mechnical designs. Our aircraft today are safer and much more efficient than WWII designs. There's a reason those designs were superceded.
I think as a result there became this culture of computer engineers that present
It's a medical device - that means it's subject to more stringent controls and potential law suites. It can actually deafen someone if it fails in the right way. It can cause someone to not hear that car and get hit. These people can sue.
It's a specialty item made in more limited production runs than a netbook. Less people can be expected to purchase decent hearing aids (ironically in part because they're expensive). Bit of a viscous cycle there - if they were cheaper more people would buy them which would make them cheaper.
Finally our medical tech companies are greedy. The whole business is about cornering someone so that they need your product or end up with a shite quality of life and then milking them.
I'm the bread winner in my family. My wife wears 2 hearing aids. The model she uses are mid range. They cost about $3k each in Australian dollars on the Aussie market and have to be replaced roughly every 5 years. I'm still greatful she can hear me. I do wish they were cheaper.
But nothing. You're asking a legal question, you need to go to a legal expert. Slashdotters are not legal experts, they just think they are, and their advice is worse than useless.
Goes to show what you know! We think we're experts at EVERYTHING, not just law. And we're pedantic and petty! We know it better than you do and your spelling sux and your mother ate worms! And we're abusive. I'll demonstrate: Get it right, loser!
(Anyone who mods this as anything other than humour is a complete moron).
Some of us eat in the bedroom or fuck in the kitchen you know! Sometimes we do both in the same room and/or both at the same time.....mmmmm whipped cream.
Is this the same rule as "9 women can't make a baby in 1 month"? I tried to explain the rule to our HR lady and it didn't go over really well with her.
I thought Tiger Woods was trying to prove that rule wrong.
Blah blah....will whoop your ass and make you worship DHH.
BRING IT.
Here it is. Consider it brung. Your burger store training manual. Only 2 phrases you really need to remember. "Yes sir". And "Would you like fries with that".
Heh......this is what happens when you rush super-fast to comment without reading the article, post something unrelated, and end up getting modded down. You end up thinking slashdot moderation is awful.:)
Heh? Stop pontificating for 5 minutes would you? I haven't been modded down and my comment relates to the summary and is not meant to say anything negative about the article. Are you even aware of the irony of you rushing to criticize me without provocation? Pipe down.
A good programmer has experienced many languages and done things in many ways. A good programmer has compared all these various experiences and understands the advantages and disadvantages of each language and programming technique. A good programmer doesn't get bogged down in line numbers and GOTO statements and never move beyond that. If someone does get bogged down they never had the attitude to be a good programmer.
I gave up on existing frameworks for quite some time now, and since I am lazy but have to write lots and lots of code, I started creating my own tool sets to generate CRUD structures, value objects and now also front end code. It's a pain in the ass to do it, but I force myself doing it that way rather than just doing the same old thing over and over again. Finally I have developed a set of tools that I use on every project to do the same things that I would have ended up doing by hand anyway and my speed of production output grew by some ridiculous amount
If I did that my current employer would own it so I'd have to start again at my next job, I'd have to maintain it as various frameworks it was built against evolved (eg. hibernate annotations vs xml config files) etc.
Ken: "Programming is hard!" Not intended to be taken personal. However, what do you actually want to do after your tools do everything for you? It seems you want to be a designer, not a programmer....
No, I just don't want to solve the same crappy problem over and over while the business goals go unsatisfied.
Why would you say that, and anon, unless you're just trolling?
Yeah I've used a whole stack of different tools and they all suck. Care to enlighten me about which ones don't? I'm willing to bet you're just in love with your favourite toolset despite it's deficiencies.
Man, you complain well. But you don’t seem to do anything against it. It’s like my last boss. (Ever!)
You know what the first thing is, that I do in a new environment?
Man you pontificate well but you don't seem to understand that my boss does not pay me to create programming tools, nor am I stupid enough to lose my job pretending that.
Code me a generic CRUD generator (database/persistency, logic, gui). E.g. a tool that renders me a whole application out of the SQL database definition. Or in other words: The difference between SQL and tools like MS Access.;)
Fantastic. Since you've build such a wonderful magical tool and since you can convince your boss to let you spend time on that, I'm sure you can convince him to open source it.
Then I can push out generic software faster than I can write up the data models. Add the little bit that usually is the business logic, and tadaa!
In my last job, we were at the limits of our capacity. Too much work for too few people. And I offered my boss, to cut our work load by 90% (realistically!), when he would give me two to five days of free time. He denied with “We don’t have time for that.” And why not? Hm? Because you don’t take the time for this! It was one of those typical PHB moments. Needless to say: I quit.
Needless to say you weren't missed. Now the truth comes out. Some of us have a family to feed.
Now I’m on to what is basically a completely new OS (Linux kernel, new shell (cli and gui), and legacy interface to GNU) that goes a huge step further, by generalizing it as much as physically possible. (Actually, I can prove that it can’t be generalized more, without becoming less efficient again.)
You wrote a whole OS did you? Fantastic. Can't wait to see the source code...and for hell to freeze over.
Slashdot Mirror
You just don't realize how powerful a common DSP is or don't realize how much computation is involved in encoding and decoding MP3.
Don't be a condescending and arrogant jerk. I know enough about DSPs to know it's easy to transform one waveform into another. That's not the point.
It's not just goddamn firmware. Each hearing aid is programmed to compensate for a patient's loss. Which requires diagnostics and the resulting profile to be uploaded.
An incorrectly programmed hearing aid can worsen the hearing loss over time. The risk to the patient's hearing is as significant as listening to an amplified earpod at deafening levels. It is NOT just implants that have risk associated.
Who are you to question his English?
Your reply lost its credibility at this point and I read no further.
Cover your ears and yell la la la la la. It makes all the bad things go away. Idiot!
You're trivialising what goes into a hearing aid. Leaving out stuff like analysis and programming of frequency shifting etc. They're still way overpriced but it doesn't help your case to oversimplify.
How the FUCK is this a troll.
Assholes.
Except for the medical device part you just described a dirt cheap mp3 player or bluetooth headphone.
Last time I checked, a dirt cheap mp3 player couldn't be hooked up to a computer and tailored to boost particular frequencies precisely. No a crappy digital equaliser doesn't count.
Wow. Just wow.
I'm loving this conversation here because I've gotten crucified in slashdot before for making simmilar comments to the whole thread here.
I don't wonder why.
I grew up in a family of top managers of Boeing systems engineers. They hated computers. My dad never even learned how to turn one on.
Being a Luddite is nothing to be proud of.
He hired other monkey to use the computers.
Nor is being a snob. Too bad he didn't hired other monkey teach you English.
As A child I was regailed with wonderful stories of every hard lesson in safety my dad had learned over his lifetime.
Explains why you like inflicting drivel on other people.
He loved world war II because they got to use cutting edge designs for balls out performance yet at the same time learned how to make things reliable by disecting the accident.
That 50-70 million people killed was worth it! Or so he tells you. Not to mention those mamed.
He would tell me about the accident that taught them that the engine pumps need to be at full speed but flow stalled on take off so that there's no lag when you hot swap after a pump fails. He told me of the accident where they learned not to route 100% of the control system wiring through any one junction box. etc...Probably because of all these hard won lessons boeing for years insisted on fully mechanical or hydraulic flight surface controls.
Oh, so mechanical systems can have catastrophic failures too? Apparently not a less you cared to learn.
Whereas Airbus and other jumped on the fly-by-wire concept early. My dad would spit after hearing some youg person tout all the advantages of fly by wire. He knew them perfectly well. He was big on accepting new innovations to reduce fuel costs and increas performance. He was not a luddite.
Yes he was. You just finished telling me he never learnt to turn a computer on and called that monkey work.
But he had a safety background that told him these electonic systems were hard as hell to validate and hard as hell to make truly independent from each other.
How the fuck would he know if he refused to use electronic systems?
For example they often used triple redundant computers and if one of them disagreed the other two would vote it off the island and stop listening to it. From what I've read it's now suspected that the latest airbus crash in the pacific had one of it's root problem in the voting nexus where a superior computer over ruled a more primitive safety system.
So mechanical systems can have catastrophic failures and so can electronic ones. You do realise you can have redundant mechanical systems and a mechanical voting "nexus" don't you? Bad design doesn't get any better or worse because you use a computer which is just another kind of machine.
While we all know that computer software validation is hard if not impossible. It's not something we readily admit here on slash dot.
Whereas an infinite number of states in a mechanical system can be validated?
It's because for years people like my dad would throttle the innovations the computer engineeers wanted to implement.
You mean your dad is one of the reasons Boeing is fighting to maintain dominance. You'll notice that now all aircraft are being designed to work with fly by wire, composites and complex computers. Your father's WWII glory days are long gone. No aircraft company's going to come back and compete with pure mechnical designs. Our aircraft today are safer and much more efficient than WWII designs. There's a reason those designs were superceded.
I think as a result there became this culture of computer engineers that present
It's a medical device - that means it's subject to more stringent controls and potential law suites. It can actually deafen someone if it fails in the right way. It can cause someone to not hear that car and get hit. These people can sue.
It's a specialty item made in more limited production runs than a netbook. Less people can be expected to purchase decent hearing aids (ironically in part because they're expensive). Bit of a viscous cycle there - if they were cheaper more people would buy them which would make them cheaper.
Finally our medical tech companies are greedy. The whole business is about cornering someone so that they need your product or end up with a shite quality of life and then milking them.
I'm the bread winner in my family. My wife wears 2 hearing aids. The model she uses are mid range. They cost about $3k each in Australian dollars on the Aussie market and have to be replaced roughly every 5 years. I'm still greatful she can hear me. I do wish they were cheaper.
There's an app for that.
iAsshole?
If Apple were a person he would be a total douche
He'd also be wearing a turtleneck, have a starbucks double half-calf-frappa-moccha-chino, goatee, and thick black-rimmed glasses.
Oh yeah, and a liberal arts degree.
I hope you mean half CAF or CAFE. Whether he's a douche maybe up for debate but whether he takes half a cow (even a small one) in his coffee isn't!
But nothing. You're asking a legal question, you need to go to a legal expert. Slashdotters are not legal experts, they just think they are, and their advice is worse than useless.
Goes to show what you know! We think we're experts at EVERYTHING, not just law. And we're pedantic and petty! We know it better than you do and your spelling sux and your mother ate worms! And we're abusive. I'll demonstrate: Get it right, loser!
(Anyone who mods this as anything other than humour is a complete moron).
Small apartment?
Stay out of my bedroom, welcome to my kitchen?
Some of us eat in the bedroom or fuck in the kitchen you know! Sometimes we do both in the same room and/or both at the same time.....mmmmm whipped cream.
Track that you nosey idiots. Unless they're going to stipulate that all employees must WEAR their phones.
Is this the same rule as "9 women can't make a baby in 1 month"? I tried to explain the rule to our HR lady and it didn't go over really well with her.
I thought Tiger Woods was trying to prove that rule wrong.
Blah blah....will whoop your ass and make you worship DHH.
BRING IT.
Here it is. Consider it brung. Your burger store training manual. Only 2 phrases you really need to remember. "Yes sir". And "Would you like fries with that".
The irony is that under the covers, it's all done with jump instructions anyway.
Heh......this is what happens when you rush super-fast to comment without reading the article, post something unrelated, and end up getting modded down. You end up thinking slashdot moderation is awful. :)
Heh? Stop pontificating for 5 minutes would you? I haven't been modded down and my comment relates to the summary and is not meant to say anything negative about the article. Are you even aware of the irony of you rushing to criticize me without provocation? Pipe down.
A good programmer has experienced many languages and done things in many ways. A good programmer has compared all these various experiences and understands the advantages and disadvantages of each language and programming technique. A good programmer doesn't get bogged down in line numbers and GOTO statements and never move beyond that. If someone does get bogged down they never had the attitude to be a good programmer.
You wouldn't suggest that if you knew who I was employed by.
Oh, my god, he's displaying this and he has all these #ifdefs and "copies of projects" within his workspace.
You clearly missed the #ifdef MARKETING_BULLSHIT
I gave up on existing frameworks for quite some time now, and since I am lazy but have to write lots and lots of code, I started creating my own tool sets to generate CRUD structures, value objects and now also front end code. It's a pain in the ass to do it, but I force myself doing it that way rather than just doing the same old thing over and over again. Finally I have developed a set of tools that I use on every project to do the same things that I would have ended up doing by hand anyway and my speed of production output grew by some ridiculous amount
If I did that my current employer would own it so I'd have to start again at my next job, I'd have to maintain it as various frameworks it was built against evolved (eg. hibernate annotations vs xml config files) etc.
Ken: "Programming is hard!"
Not intended to be taken personal. However, what do you actually want to do after your tools do everything for you? It seems you want to be a designer, not a programmer....
No, I just don't want to solve the same crappy problem over and over while the business goals go unsatisfied.
Why would you say that, and anon, unless you're just trolling?
you use the right frameworks but wrong tools...
Yeah I've used a whole stack of different tools and they all suck. Care to enlighten me about which ones don't? I'm willing to bet you're just in love with your favourite toolset despite it's deficiencies.
Man, you complain well. But you don’t seem to do anything against it.
It’s like my last boss. (Ever!)
You know what the first thing is, that I do in a new environment?
Man you pontificate well but you don't seem to understand that my boss does not pay me to create programming tools, nor am I stupid enough to lose my job pretending that.
Code me a generic CRUD generator (database/persistency, logic, gui). E.g. a tool that renders me a whole application out of the SQL database definition. Or in other words: The difference between SQL and tools like MS Access. ;)
Fantastic. Since you've build such a wonderful magical tool and since you can convince your boss to let you spend time on that, I'm sure you can convince him to open source it.
Then I can push out generic software faster than I can write up the data models. Add the little bit that usually is the business logic, and tadaa!
In my last job, we were at the limits of our capacity. Too much work for too few people. And I offered my boss, to cut our work load by 90% (realistically!), when he would give me two to five days of free time. He denied with “We don’t have time for that.”
And why not? Hm? Because you don’t take the time for this!
It was one of those typical PHB moments.
Needless to say: I quit.
Needless to say you weren't missed. Now the truth comes out. Some of us have a family to feed.
Now I’m on to what is basically a completely new OS (Linux kernel, new shell (cli and gui), and legacy interface to GNU) that goes a huge step further, by generalizing it as much as physically possible. (Actually, I can prove that it can’t be generalized more, without becoming less efficient again.)
You wrote a whole OS did you? Fantastic. Can't wait to see the source code...and for hell to freeze over.
If it was me it would not be a financial decision unless I had run out of money.
But then I'm not sure I'd hang around either.