That sounds reasonable but tend to not work out for non-trivial systems. It's better to always update, even in production, and detect failures and mitigate them.
You've had experience mitigating boot failures on 50,000 PCs, while every minute of downtime is costing the company many thousands of dollars?
No, because I release/stage updates to a small pilot group first the first night(s) and only roll them out to the masses if the pilot group(s) have no issues or only when those issues are resolved.
I suppose your "ignore problems and then blame any/everyone else" for not properly managing your infrastructure style works for you too.
Don't laugh, as sometimes losing weight before gastric by-pass surgery is required as otherwise the risks of operating are simply too great. Also, if the patient isn't likely to be compliant before surgery it can be a sign that there won't be compliance after surgery and overeating, even months later, can be very problematic.
However, I can see why a surgeon would want to avoid "non-urgent" surgery on a patient if they could significantly reduce the risk by losing some weight first.
This isn't surgeons evaluating the risk and making an informed decision as to whether or not they could be reduced by losing weight. This is politicians and bureaucrats making the unilateral decision to essentially punish anyone who doesn't meet their arbitrary guidelines.
You will be healthy comrade!
Politicians? No, because health trusts aren't run by politicians. Bureaucrats in the health trust (and it is only one trust), possibly, but there will also be a medical lead within the trust on its board, and it may have originated with the medical lead, based on clinical risk.
What does that matter to the parents? They have every right to attempt to extend their own child's life, even if it is a hopeless case.
I keep seeing it said that the government had nothing to do with it. Hogwash. The hospital is a government institution in England. The courts are a government institution. It was the hospital, one government institution, going to the courts, another government institution, to deny the parents the ability to try to extend the child's life. It was government against the individual from beginning to end.
The hospital is not a government institution, it's part of a trust, which is under NHS England, over which the government has some control. The control the government has directly over a hospital is pretty much zero, unless it is failing in an egregious way, although it has influence over policies that the hospital must adhere to, which are set via NHS England (or the bodies in the other countries in the UK, but I am not sure what happens in the Channel Islands, Isle of Mann, or Gibraltar, and NHS is delegated to relevant assemblies or governments in those countries).
Courts, in the UK, are a Crown institution. There is legislative control and oversight over processes, but not over judges. In that sense it's not really so different to the USA, although the description of the relationship is less succinct.
The relationships are a bit complex, so if you are not from the UK it might not be obvious. Given the complexity of the British constitution, even if you are from the UK it's not always obvious!
Seriously? If I trip and tear some ligaments in my knee, what does smoking have to do with it?
Causing the injury, assuming you didn't trip because you were concentrating on lighting a cigarette, nothing. Your chance of dying on the operating table or having a post-operative embolism, plenty.
What is "non-urgent surgery," anyway? If it wasn't urgent, why would it require surgery?
Surgery that isn't urgent. For example, if you are obese and smoke, then a gastric band might help you lose weight. Will you die in the next 6 months if you don't have it? No. Is smoking as well as being obese an increased risk factor for operative or post-operative complications? Yes.
Can you explain to me how this was not the case in any time in history, or any place on Earth?
Just because something happened in the past doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do better. Or would you rather bring back despotic kings and arbitrary laws and execution, as that was the case for most of history too?
Oh, so the child couldn't suffer and your second point was utter bullshit?
It took you all of three sentences to contradict yourself.
Being brain dead means that the higher brain functions are not working. However, it does not mean that the person does not react to painful stimuli, which suggests that there may be an ability to feel pain and thus suffer. I'd suggest reading up on the subject before making pronouncements.
That's a complex question. It's not directly the government, as it is devolved into trusts, and the government can only directly interfere with their running if they are failing based on a series of criteria. The central government can't interfere at all in the hospitals in Wales or Scotland, as those fall under the Welsh Assembly and Scottish Government respectively. GPs are private businesses contracted by the NHS to provide services. Many hospitals and services used by the NHS are privately run, and contracted to provide services by NHS trusts.
Just because there is a path from A to B does not mean that there is any intention of taking it. There's a path from here to Slough, but I don't anticipate going that far.
Bullcrap. It's just like public schools in the USA. In the name of equality, we replaced local control of school standards and funding with one size fits all
The health system in the UK is devolved. For example, prescriptions are free in Wales. Even within England, each trust (locality) handles things a little differently. So it's not much like public schools in the USA.
A Ponzi scheme is one designed explicitly to profit a very few and is deliberately fraudulent, with its mechanisms hidden. Social Security does not seem to fit this definition.
Nissan spent years developing the Leaf and it really shows, and Tesla did likewise.
The issue with the Leaf (or the Renault Zoe) is range, as it's still approximately half that of a Tesla. I don't know about Nissan, but Renault charges a fee for the battery each month, but will then replace it when required, which takes away a barrier. If the Leaf had twice the range (i.e. 240 miles) I would have bought one, and when I next need a car then if one, or something similar, is affordable and the range is better, then I am fairly likely to do so.
Also note that when government picks winners and losers, government tends to do a stupid job.
Is the correct metric number or size of failures, or more like a VC firm, and the ROI over many ventures, some of which may be failures? (Return, if it's not purely financial is notoriously hard to measure)
If utility exists as such, and can be measured, then whilst it may happen after a product is created, the likely utility can be estimated, which is what companies do all the time. The estimate may not be exact, but estimates often aren't.
Slashdot Mirror
I was calculating on it being 5 coffees of at least $2 retail value per working day. :)
A hot treadmill plus laptop, if they keep the music down, is the perfect healthy office environment, surely?
So after deducting the coffee, then, it's about $200/month. Doesn't sound that bad.
Ricky Gervais is writing it now.
Do you have a newsletter to which I can subscribe?
Some people like a work-home separation. Also if you want to work closely in person with a couple of other people, then it can also make sense.
That sounds reasonable but tend to not work out for non-trivial systems. It's better to always update, even in production, and detect failures and mitigate them.
You've had experience mitigating boot failures on 50,000 PCs, while every minute of downtime is costing the company many thousands of dollars?
No, because I release/stage updates to a small pilot group first the first night(s) and only roll them out to the masses if the pilot group(s) have no issues or only when those issues are resolved.
I suppose your "ignore problems and then blame any/everyone else" for not properly managing your infrastructure style works for you too.
Ahh... not auto-updates, then.
Hi I'm here for my Gastric By-pass surgery!
Loose some weight first...
What?!
Don't laugh, as sometimes losing weight before gastric by-pass surgery is required as otherwise the risks of operating are simply too great. Also, if the patient isn't likely to be compliant before surgery it can be a sign that there won't be compliance after surgery and overeating, even months later, can be very problematic.
You are correct. I have some eggs on the fridge and I will go and place some on my face in a bit.
This isn't surgeons evaluating the risk and making an informed decision as to whether or not they could be reduced by losing weight. This is politicians and bureaucrats making the unilateral decision to essentially punish anyone who doesn't meet their arbitrary guidelines.
You will be healthy comrade!
Politicians? No, because health trusts aren't run by politicians. Bureaucrats in the health trust (and it is only one trust), possibly, but there will also be a medical lead within the trust on its board, and it may have originated with the medical lead, based on clinical risk.
What does that matter to the parents? They have every right to attempt to extend their own child's life, even if it is a hopeless case.
I keep seeing it said that the government had nothing to do with it. Hogwash. The hospital is a government institution in England. The courts are a government institution. It was the hospital, one government institution, going to the courts, another government institution, to deny the parents the ability to try to extend the child's life. It was government against the individual from beginning to end.
The hospital is not a government institution, it's part of a trust, which is under NHS England, over which the government has some control. The control the government has directly over a hospital is pretty much zero, unless it is failing in an egregious way, although it has influence over policies that the hospital must adhere to, which are set via NHS England (or the bodies in the other countries in the UK, but I am not sure what happens in the Channel Islands, Isle of Mann, or Gibraltar, and NHS is delegated to relevant assemblies or governments in those countries).
Courts, in the UK, are a Crown institution. There is legislative control and oversight over processes, but not over judges. In that sense it's not really so different to the USA, although the description of the relationship is less succinct.
The relationships are a bit complex, so if you are not from the UK it might not be obvious. Given the complexity of the British constitution, even if you are from the UK it's not always obvious!
Seriously? If I trip and tear some ligaments in my knee, what does smoking have to do with it?
Causing the injury, assuming you didn't trip because you were concentrating on lighting a cigarette, nothing. Your chance of dying on the operating table or having a post-operative embolism, plenty.
What is "non-urgent surgery," anyway? If it wasn't urgent, why would it require surgery?
Surgery that isn't urgent. For example, if you are obese and smoke, then a gastric band might help you lose weight. Will you die in the next 6 months if you don't have it? No. Is smoking as well as being obese an increased risk factor for operative or post-operative complications? Yes.
Can you explain to me how this was not the case in any time in history, or any place on Earth?
Just because something happened in the past doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do better. Or would you rather bring back despotic kings and arbitrary laws and execution, as that was the case for most of history too?
Oh, so the child couldn't suffer and your second point was utter bullshit?
It took you all of three sentences to contradict yourself.
Being brain dead means that the higher brain functions are not working. However, it does not mean that the person does not react to painful stimuli, which suggests that there may be an ability to feel pain and thus suffer. I'd suggest reading up on the subject before making pronouncements.
Who owns and runs the hospitals in the UK?
That's a complex question. It's not directly the government, as it is devolved into trusts, and the government can only directly interfere with their running if they are failing based on a series of criteria. The central government can't interfere at all in the hospitals in Wales or Scotland, as those fall under the Welsh Assembly and Scottish Government respectively. GPs are private businesses contracted by the NHS to provide services. Many hospitals and services used by the NHS are privately run, and contracted to provide services by NHS trusts.
In this case it is most definitely not one-size-fits-all, as it's one health trust (a locality) doing this.
Just because there is a path from A to B does not mean that there is any intention of taking it. There's a path from here to Slough, but I don't anticipate going that far.
Bullcrap. It's just like public schools in the USA. In the name of equality, we replaced local control of school standards and funding with one size fits all
The health system in the UK is devolved. For example, prescriptions are free in Wales. Even within England, each trust (locality) handles things a little differently. So it's not much like public schools in the USA.
A Ponzi scheme is one designed explicitly to profit a very few and is deliberately fraudulent, with its mechanisms hidden. Social Security does not seem to fit this definition.
NASA has 'access' to far more money.
NASA also has a much wider remit.
Nissan spent years developing the Leaf and it really shows, and Tesla did likewise.
The issue with the Leaf (or the Renault Zoe) is range, as it's still approximately half that of a Tesla. I don't know about Nissan, but Renault charges a fee for the battery each month, but will then replace it when required, which takes away a barrier. If the Leaf had twice the range (i.e. 240 miles) I would have bought one, and when I next need a car then if one, or something similar, is affordable and the range is better, then I am fairly likely to do so.
Also note that when government picks winners and losers, government tends to do a stupid job.
Is the correct metric number or size of failures, or more like a VC firm, and the ROI over many ventures, some of which may be failures? (Return, if it's not purely financial is notoriously hard to measure)
The one thing I'm fairly certain will never happen is the Hyperloop. It's a pipe dream no doubt.
Pipe dream - haha.
Artificial fertilisers work well if there is soil to hold it. In the absence of sufficient soil of the right sort it gets leached out quickly.
If utility exists as such, and can be measured, then whilst it may happen after a product is created, the likely utility can be estimated, which is what companies do all the time. The estimate may not be exact, but estimates often aren't.