Yes, this would violate HIPAA law. Even if in some alternate universe it didn't, it'd still be a terrible, intrusive, cringeworthy idea. Who comes up with ideas this awful? Social media people need to get out more.
This particular use of CRISPR-Cas9 should be pretty low risk. Tumors are often surrounded by lymphocytes, cells which ordinarily have the power to kill cancer cells -- but many cancers give off signals that cause the lymphocytes to ignore tumors cells and let them grow. It's like the mafia buying off the local cops. Modifying tumor-reactive lymphocytes ex vivo might wake them up and help them do their job and go after the tumor again. In a patient with terminal cancer, this treatment should be pretty low risk and could give him a bit longer to live.
I can see that as a likely explanation. PII is supposed to be handled as securely as PHI, and companies are supposed to make an active effort to minimize how much they store. But who has time?
You're probably right. These data collection practices probably started in the pre-ACA era, when insurers could get away with more. Also, maybe they want to know what they're up against if an insured party threatens them with legal action.
Why is a healthcare insurance provider collecting income information on the people they insure? That's none of their business. The answer is probably 'just because they can,' but that doesn't mean I have to like it.
That's not the way do to it. The camera should be recording for the whole shift, but if the officer doesn't unholster a weapon, that day's footage gets erased at the end of the shift. If a weapon is drawn, footage around that event would be saved. Less privacy worries for the officers, and more incentive for them to resolve situations without firing.
These newer implants could still cause tissue damage over time at a slower rate, but rats don't live more than 2-3 years. Sounds like they need to test this in a species with a longer lifespan before using human subjects.
I feel your pain. I wear progressives, and for my first pair, the optimal focal area was ridiculously small just as you describe. A couple of years ago I went to a new optometrist and explained that I wanted glasses that had a more natural feel for close viewing. That 'spot' effect isn't there, and I love them.
My AA has offered to help process my emails, but I'd much rather do it myself, since I learn more and remember more that way. Why I would ever want pre-processed mail is beyond me. Where is the demand for this product? I just don't see it.
I would just approach my fellow humans with the Mossberg 500 and ask if anyone remembers the value of pi. I live in Silicon Valley: even the zombies would remember it.
People are generally irrational, and child abusers maybe even more so. I doubt this punishment will deter anyone who's rationalizing away their abuse of others.
Genomic medicine can be as simple as having your genome sequenced and interpreted by someone who knows what they're doing. Healthy people usually have several genetic polymorphisms or mutations, only some of which are significant, and sequencing can help you learn which genetic findings are significant health risks, and which are harmless. What you're talking about is gene therapy, which is a lot more involved.
Five years? In tech time, that's like the Pleistocene era!
Good strategy for Google -- limit the supply for a ridiculously long time, making it invite-only to increase the recipients' impressions of a great favor having been bestowed on them -- all of which should increase demand over what it might've been if any old schlump could buy a pair. Too bad Google didn't think through the social side effects. How do you relate to someone who might or might not start recording you at any time without your knowledge? I'm not interested in buying a pair and being 'That Guy' (gal, in my case).
Seriously! We MD's and other hospital staff all have to get mandatory patient privacy and security training every year. Some people at the DEA need to do this too because they are WAY out of line.
Slashdot Mirror
I have the same reaction, and would much rather use a decent-sized screen.
Yes, this would violate HIPAA law. Even if in some alternate universe it didn't, it'd still be a terrible, intrusive, cringeworthy idea. Who comes up with ideas this awful? Social media people need to get out more.
This particular use of CRISPR-Cas9 should be pretty low risk. Tumors are often surrounded by lymphocytes, cells which ordinarily have the power to kill cancer cells -- but many cancers give off signals that cause the lymphocytes to ignore tumors cells and let them grow. It's like the mafia buying off the local cops. Modifying tumor-reactive lymphocytes ex vivo might wake them up and help them do their job and go after the tumor again. In a patient with terminal cancer, this treatment should be pretty low risk and could give him a bit longer to live.
Yeah; too bad my pepper spray won't work.
How on earth is this not a massive violation of the HIPAA Privacy Rule?
I get that perceived income has some value. I just don't see an insurance company being able to extrapolate that from the data they have access to.
I can see that as a likely explanation. PII is supposed to be handled as securely as PHI, and companies are supposed to make an active effort to minimize how much they store. But who has time?
You're probably right. These data collection practices probably started in the pre-ACA era, when insurers could get away with more. Also, maybe they want to know what they're up against if an insured party threatens them with legal action.
Why is a healthcare insurance provider collecting income information on the people they insure? That's none of their business. The answer is probably 'just because they can,' but that doesn't mean I have to like it.
That's not the way do to it. The camera should be recording for the whole shift, but if the officer doesn't unholster a weapon, that day's footage gets erased at the end of the shift. If a weapon is drawn, footage around that event would be saved. Less privacy worries for the officers, and more incentive for them to resolve situations without firing.
These newer implants could still cause tissue damage over time at a slower rate, but rats don't live more than 2-3 years. Sounds like they need to test this in a species with a longer lifespan before using human subjects.
I feel your pain. I wear progressives, and for my first pair, the optimal focal area was ridiculously small just as you describe. A couple of years ago I went to a new optometrist and explained that I wanted glasses that had a more natural feel for close viewing. That 'spot' effect isn't there, and I love them.
And if the NSA were going through Pon Farr, I'd stay the hell away.
My AA has offered to help process my emails, but I'd much rather do it myself, since I learn more and remember more that way. Why I would ever want pre-processed mail is beyond me. Where is the demand for this product? I just don't see it.
Either that or some impressive cognitive dissonance.
"Oh look at that smoking hot babe! I gotta keep that - oh no wait, how do I change my default settings? My girlfriend will just
ONE IMAGE SUCCESSFULLY POSTED TO FACEBOOK TIMELINE
vi vi vi: the number of the beast.
I've used Virgin Mobile for the past six years, pay $30/mo and am as satisfied as I've ever been with any phone carrier.
And as a mathematician, I would already remember more significant figures for pi than I would likely be able to get from a bullet-scatter pattern.
I would just approach my fellow humans with the Mossberg 500 and ask if anyone remembers the value of pi. I live in Silicon Valley: even the zombies would remember it.
People are generally irrational, and child abusers maybe even more so. I doubt this punishment will deter anyone who's rationalizing away their abuse of others.
Genomic medicine can be as simple as having your genome sequenced and interpreted by someone who knows what they're doing. Healthy people usually have several genetic polymorphisms or mutations, only some of which are significant, and sequencing can help you learn which genetic findings are significant health risks, and which are harmless. What you're talking about is gene therapy, which is a lot more involved.
Five years? In tech time, that's like the Pleistocene era! Good strategy for Google -- limit the supply for a ridiculously long time, making it invite-only to increase the recipients' impressions of a great favor having been bestowed on them -- all of which should increase demand over what it might've been if any old schlump could buy a pair. Too bad Google didn't think through the social side effects. How do you relate to someone who might or might not start recording you at any time without your knowledge? I'm not interested in buying a pair and being 'That Guy' (gal, in my case).
The folks at CERN will be disappointed. Also, you get all of my imaginary mod points.
Seriously! We MD's and other hospital staff all have to get mandatory patient privacy and security training every year. Some people at the DEA need to do this too because they are WAY out of line.