That's why we don't bother reading TFA. It doesn't change our minds, it doesn't change our comments. It doesn't make any difference if it is a Rick Roll.
The booster is strong in only one direction - the longitudinal one. If you try to catch it with cables, it goes on it's sides which are just thin walled aluminum, Like a giant beer can. It's a matter of weight. Tradeoffs.
Maybe it's not just us. The Middle East has a nearly 10,000 year history of localized warfare. WWI and WWII mearly made a messy place messier. We've been nibbling at the edges since then.
Well you would think that his technical staff would have, perhaps, maybe, gone over to his house once and made sure things were a wee bit hardened. It doesn't take a whole lot to compromise anybody and as countless spear phishing episodes have shown, once you crack the wall it's relatively easy to break it down entirely.
Of course, this all depends on TFA having some resemblance to the truth. The entire thing could have been made up, be a false flag, be a honeypot. Who knows?
Yep, I spent all summer of 2013, and I mean all summer, trying to beat our POS EHR into some semblance of utility. It was a total failure and it looks like I will be spending the entire summer of 2016 trying to figure out how we disentangle ourselves from this mess. A complete was of a lot of time and money that could have been spent doing something useful.
And "Meaningful Use" was a big part of the reason that our vendor screwed the pooch. It wasn;t a very good system to begin with (Healthland Centriq), had been developed before Meaningful Use was a gleam in the committee's eye and the vendor spent precious (well, cheap Indian) developer hours trying to shoehorn MU requirements into the system instead of getting it to just work. And that little game was repeated all over the country.
You're correct - he's just blowing steam. The biggest problem is that we don't know what is 'good' health care or 'good' use of an EHR. Doctors tend to view EHRs useful if it decreases 'paperwork' - stuff that is generally not thought to be helpful - but often is. Managers and accountants view EHRs useful if it either saves money by lowering expenses or increases revenue by better billing. Neither have anything necessarily to do with quality of care. The feds look at EHRs as useful if - well, nobody knows. It was supposed to magically improve quality and decrease cost. There was very little real data to suggest that they do either.
Personally, I think a useful EHR makes my day easier and helps with patient care. If I can get old results quickly, if I can view new results sensibly and if I can more easily communicate what I'm doing to other health care providers and the patient, then a number of vexing problems get better. Unfortunately, current EHRs don't do much of any of those things.
Well mine are somewhat different. I'm a physician and have been working with EHRs since the late 1990s. When we had 386 processors and liked it. Yep, there are asshole entitled doctors (and $your_favorite_whipping_person). Lots of physicians would like an EHR that would, you know, help out. Instead we get systems that are designed to 1) help the billing department (an important aspect of medicine, but not the most important) and 2) get little gold stars by following the Meaningless Abuse, er, Meaningful Use "guidelines'.
Medicine is not an easy subject to computerize. For one thing, the old saying 'whey you computerize chaos you end up with computerized chaos" is quite true. Much of medicine is still hunches, witchcraft and showmanship - things most computer systems really don't deal with well. The rest is completely driven to insanity by several decades of Medicare and Medicaid rulemaking on top of often completely contradictory rules by Congress. In it's current state, you can't possibly do everything correctly because you would run afoul of something along the way. I've often thought that if you tried to program an AI to follow Medicare rules it would eventually just unplug itself as the only rational approach.
And no, Obamacare didn't really change much - just added a few more insane rules to the giant pile.
Meaningful Use was one of those things that might have been a good idea if one person set it up and left it in a corner. But it morphed into a giant committee that had inordinate power over EHRs and singlehandedly did more to screw up the advancement of electronic health records than any other single decision by the US government.
There is a god. I will sacrifice a whole box of Rigatoni to His Noodliness in thanks.
It's all mumble mouth buzzwords, but yes, for some bog knows reason, it's typically referred to as CMS. Or other words inappropriate for a family oriented web site.
It only happens when running complex calculations like Mersenne primes. Who runs such calculations? It isn't the good citizens looking at their Facebook whatever it is that they look at. It's people doing crypto, ie, Terrorists.
So how do we stop Terrorists? Don't let them do complex crypto calculations.
Obama wiping his ass with The Second Amendment sure shows what he thinks of the civil rights of US citizens.
You're the confused one. Obama has been the best gun salesman ever. Every time he says the word 'gun', thousands fly off shelves. You think this isn't part of a well coordinated plan? How do you think Obama plans to support his retirement? Social Security? Remember, he's pretty young yet. His presidential pardon is just pocket change.
I bet that he is heavily invested in Smith & Wesson and Sturm Ruger....
You weren't reading the right history if you think that the US has been historically devoid of World Class Assholes. True, we don't have first tier psychopaths like Hitler but our history hasn't exactly been on the forefront of Goodness and Light.
Yes, nice article - now that we're more or less back on topic.
One question. If I understand the first few paragraphs (unlikely) then the major difference between your system and the quasi species model is that your system does not have a death mechanism (no, I'm not going there). But these are aormatic cyclic molecules that I would not think would be particularly stable. Would not just random degradation of the replicators imply death to the 'organism' or would that just be like cooking your hamburger?
So, design them so they displace more than they weigh so they 'float' over the ocean of sand. Friction might be an issue (and a bunch of other things) but it would be a fun engineering challenge.
The original acting was bad. Wooden characters. Stilted dialog. It was a few memorable lines, some great CGI / scene display and the fact that it's really a Western that made it great.
Slashdot Mirror
That's why we don't bother reading TFA. It doesn't change our minds, it doesn't change our comments. It doesn't make any difference if it is a Rick Roll.
TL;DR
Right.. The back yard with the bored lab puppy. Who would simply love a nice, chewy box to play with.
The booster is strong in only one direction - the longitudinal one. If you try to catch it with cables, it goes on it's sides which are just thin walled aluminum, Like a giant beer can. It's a matter of weight. Tradeoffs.
Europoors like to punish US tech companies because Europe can't be remotely competitive in tech
Oops.
Maybe it's not just us. The Middle East has a nearly 10,000 year history of localized warfare. WWI and WWII mearly made a messy place messier. We've been nibbling at the edges since then.
It's not always about you.
A suicide bomber in a car can't carry a hundred thousand kg of dynamite.
But you can get pretty damned close with a truck.
Oh, and it's worth pointing out that dial-a-yield nuclear bombs are often effectively neutron bombs at their lower yield settings.
Oh, thanks for that. As if I didn't need something else to make me feel more hopeful about our world.
Well you would think that his technical staff would have, perhaps, maybe, gone over to his house once and made sure things were a wee bit hardened. It doesn't take a whole lot to compromise anybody and as countless spear phishing episodes have shown, once you crack the wall it's relatively easy to break it down entirely.
Of course, this all depends on TFA having some resemblance to the truth. The entire thing could have been made up, be a false flag, be a honeypot. Who knows?
That's what he said.
Yep, I spent all summer of 2013, and I mean all summer, trying to beat our POS EHR into some semblance of utility. It was a total failure and it looks like I will be spending the entire summer of 2016 trying to figure out how we disentangle ourselves from this mess. A complete was of a lot of time and money that could have been spent doing something useful.
And "Meaningful Use" was a big part of the reason that our vendor screwed the pooch. It wasn;t a very good system to begin with (Healthland Centriq), had been developed before Meaningful Use was a gleam in the committee's eye and the vendor spent precious (well, cheap Indian) developer hours trying to shoehorn MU requirements into the system instead of getting it to just work. And that little game was repeated all over the country.
You're correct - he's just blowing steam. The biggest problem is that we don't know what is 'good' health care or 'good' use of an EHR. Doctors tend to view EHRs useful if it decreases 'paperwork' - stuff that is generally not thought to be helpful - but often is. Managers and accountants view EHRs useful if it either saves money by lowering expenses or increases revenue by better billing. Neither have anything necessarily to do with quality of care. The feds look at EHRs as useful if - well, nobody knows. It was supposed to magically improve quality and decrease cost. There was very little real data to suggest that they do either.
Personally, I think a useful EHR makes my day easier and helps with patient care. If I can get old results quickly, if I can view new results sensibly and if I can more easily communicate what I'm doing to other health care providers and the patient, then a number of vexing problems get better. Unfortunately, current EHRs don't do much of any of those things.
Well mine are somewhat different. I'm a physician and have been working with EHRs since the late 1990s. When we had 386 processors and liked it. Yep, there are asshole entitled doctors (and $your_favorite_whipping_person). Lots of physicians would like an EHR that would, you know, help out. Instead we get systems that are designed to 1) help the billing department (an important aspect of medicine, but not the most important) and 2) get little gold stars by following the Meaningless Abuse, er, Meaningful Use "guidelines'.
Medicine is not an easy subject to computerize. For one thing, the old saying 'whey you computerize chaos you end up with computerized chaos" is quite true. Much of medicine is still hunches, witchcraft and showmanship - things most computer systems really don't deal with well. The rest is completely driven to insanity by several decades of Medicare and Medicaid rulemaking on top of often completely contradictory rules by Congress. In it's current state, you can't possibly do everything correctly because you would run afoul of something along the way. I've often thought that if you tried to program an AI to follow Medicare rules it would eventually just unplug itself as the only rational approach.
And no, Obamacare didn't really change much - just added a few more insane rules to the giant pile.
Meaningful Use was one of those things that might have been a good idea if one person set it up and left it in a corner. But it morphed into a giant committee that had inordinate power over EHRs and singlehandedly did more to screw up the advancement of electronic health records than any other single decision by the US government.
There is a god. I will sacrifice a whole box of Rigatoni to His Noodliness in thanks.
It's all mumble mouth buzzwords, but yes, for some bog knows reason, it's typically referred to as CMS. Or other words inappropriate for a family oriented web site.
Nah, we blame this one on the NSA, to wit:
It only happens when running complex calculations like Mersenne primes. Who runs such calculations? It isn't the good citizens looking at their Facebook whatever it is that they look at. It's people doing crypto, ie, Terrorists.
So how do we stop Terrorists? Don't let them do complex crypto calculations.
QED.
He's really a PETA plant. I knew it! They're everywhere.
That's no dolphin.
I'm not saying it was aliens, but ...
Obama wiping his ass with The Second Amendment sure shows what he thinks of the civil rights of US citizens.
You're the confused one. Obama has been the best gun salesman ever. Every time he says the word 'gun', thousands fly off shelves. You think this isn't part of a well coordinated plan? How do you think Obama plans to support his retirement? Social Security? Remember, he's pretty young yet. His presidential pardon is just pocket change.
I bet that he is heavily invested in Smith & Wesson and Sturm Ruger....
You weren't reading the right history if you think that the US has been historically devoid of World Class Assholes. True, we don't have first tier psychopaths like Hitler but our history hasn't exactly been on the forefront of Goodness and Light.
Let's face it. We're all jerks.
You can't take the sky from me.
Oh. Wait.
Yes, nice article - now that we're more or less back on topic.
One question. If I understand the first few paragraphs (unlikely) then the major difference between your system and the quasi species model is that your system does not have a death mechanism (no, I'm not going there). But these are aormatic cyclic molecules that I would not think would be particularly stable. Would not just random degradation of the replicators imply death to the 'organism' or would that just be like cooking your hamburger?
So, design them so they displace more than they weigh so they 'float' over the ocean of sand. Friction might be an issue (and a bunch of other things) but it would be a fun engineering challenge.
Yes, we should come up with a term to describe that. Oh! I've got it.... Sandblasting.
Hey, this is great guys! Now I don't have to go see the movie.
I already have...
Oh, impatient one. You need to wait for the sequel to the sequels. You're talking about 10 hours of run time here, 5 movies or so at current rates.
Pray they don't alter it again....
The original acting was bad. Wooden characters. Stilted dialog. It was a few memorable lines, some great CGI / scene display and the fact that it's really a Western that made it great.