Uhm yeah, thats great. I do believe they mean SAP as in SAP applications like CRM, ERP, SCM, PLM, etc., not just the database. Bit of a difference there.
Supernet is "in" Fort Mac, the hospital/health authority/whatever you want to call it is already using it for sending radiology images to Capital Health (Edmonton).
Well, most pharmacy systems do this all the time, either warning the pharmacist as they're data entering your prescription, or via the drug councelling sheet that the pharmacist provides you with your prescription.
The system we use (and developed) for our pharmacy runs off of data provied by First DataBank. Not only does it check for drug-drug interactions, but it also checks for things like drug-allergy, drug-medical condition, and duplicate therapy (ie., you're already taking this or you're already taking something very similar to this). It's pretty standard stuff. Pharmacy software has been doing this sort of thing for years.
As for being sued if an interaction doesn't come up, well... Did you inform the pharmacist of all your medical conditions? Did you purchase all of your previous prescriptions from the same pharmacy or chain of pharmacies (and even then many chains don't have centralized pharmacy management systems)? Hell, are you even seeing the same doctor or a doctor who has access to your medical/theraputic history so that they are aware of any potential interactions before they even prescribe the medication?
At the end of the day, no pharmacist in their right mind is going to rely 100% on what the software tells them anyway; they're going to use their own experience and judgement. The software is a tool for assiting the pharmacist, that's all.
For our InnoDB stuff, InnoDB Hot Backup (http://www.innodb.com/order.php) was the only thing I could find that seemed to fit the bill.
It's not perfect (it does lock the tables for a few seconds at the tail end of the backup), and it costs money... but I guess it all depends on how important that consistent backup is for you.
We actually ended up doing both a hot backup and a replicated copy to another server. We use mysqldump on the replicated copy to produce a consistent dump file that can be used in the event that anything happens to our binary backup. It's also nice having a server we can quickly failover to in case the core one blows up.
I don't necessarily see a problem with sharing a connection with a neighbour or two and splitting the bill. Sure, it most likely goes against your TOS, but it's not THAT big of a deal that your ISP is going to come knocking.
But, having large public WiFi networks, inviting hundreds (thousands?) of people to use it daily, and using a bunch of cable/DSL links to run it? Dontcha think thats pushing things just a *little* too far? The Cable/DSL companies, contrary to what a lot of people think, *are* trying to turn a profit. Just because you're paying $50 or so a month for a broadband link doesn't mean you've got the right to go ahead spread it around!
"It's very shortsighted that they are developing such a hostile relationship with early adopters of their own technology," said Anthony Townsend, a spokesman for NYCwireless.
I fail to see how a for profit company is being hostile by enforcing the terms outlined in its TOS, when ultimately you signed on the dotted line and agreed to adhere to it!
I'm all for free or cheap public WiFi networks, but you'd think they'd at least look at getting some legit links. Seems kind of silly to me to just go ahead and set everything up, advertise it, and then expect that TW/whoever else isn't going to be upset about it.
Slashdot Mirror
Uhm yeah, thats great. I do believe they mean SAP as in SAP applications like CRM, ERP, SCM, PLM, etc., not just the database. Bit of a difference there.
Supernet is "in" Fort Mac, the hospital/health authority/whatever you want to call it is already using it for sending radiology images to Capital Health (Edmonton).
Well, most pharmacy systems do this all the time, either warning the pharmacist as they're data entering your prescription, or via the drug councelling sheet that the pharmacist provides you with your prescription.
The system we use (and developed) for our pharmacy runs off of data provied by First DataBank. Not only does it check for drug-drug interactions, but it also checks for things like drug-allergy, drug-medical condition, and duplicate therapy (ie., you're already taking this or you're already taking something very similar to this). It's pretty standard stuff. Pharmacy software has been doing this sort of thing for years.
As for being sued if an interaction doesn't come up, well... Did you inform the pharmacist of all your medical conditions? Did you purchase all of your previous prescriptions from the same pharmacy or chain of pharmacies (and even then many chains don't have centralized pharmacy management systems)? Hell, are you even seeing the same doctor or a doctor who has access to your medical/theraputic history so that they are aware of any potential interactions before they even prescribe the medication?
At the end of the day, no pharmacist in their right mind is going to rely 100% on what the software tells them anyway; they're going to use their own experience and judgement. The software is a tool for assiting the pharmacist, that's all.
For our InnoDB stuff, InnoDB Hot Backup (http://www.innodb.com/order.php) was the only thing I could find that seemed to fit the bill.
It's not perfect (it does lock the tables for a few seconds at the tail end of the backup), and it costs money... but I guess it all depends on how important that consistent backup is for you.
We actually ended up doing both a hot backup and a replicated copy to another server. We use mysqldump on the replicated copy to produce a consistent dump file that can be used in the event that anything happens to our binary backup. It's also nice having a server we can quickly failover to in case the core one blows up.
I don't necessarily see a problem with sharing a connection with a neighbour or two and splitting the bill. Sure, it most likely goes against your TOS, but it's not THAT big of a deal that your ISP is going to come knocking.
But, having large public WiFi networks, inviting hundreds (thousands?) of people to use it daily, and using a bunch of cable/DSL links to run it? Dontcha think thats pushing things just a *little* too far? The Cable/DSL companies, contrary to what a lot of people think, *are* trying to turn a profit. Just because you're paying $50 or so a month for a broadband link doesn't mean you've got the right to go ahead spread it around!
"It's very shortsighted that they are developing such a hostile relationship with early adopters of their own technology," said Anthony Townsend, a spokesman for NYCwireless.
I fail to see how a for profit company is being hostile by enforcing the terms outlined in its TOS, when ultimately you signed on the dotted line and agreed to adhere to it!
I'm all for free or cheap public WiFi networks, but you'd think they'd at least look at getting some legit links. Seems kind of silly to me to just go ahead and set everything up, advertise it, and then expect that TW/whoever else isn't going to be upset about it.