You sir, are very demonstrably ignorant of this issue. I'm so sick and tired of you right-wing American F**ks who do not understand the FIRST THING about universal health care. First, yes, Canadians travel to the US for healthcare but many Americans also come here because it's WAY, WAY cheaper to pay for world-class hospital care here if you need it and are not covered in the US (which is about 11% of the overall American population according to: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/1... ). BTW, in Canada, that number is 0%. Everyone is covered; well, unless you're an American coming up here trying to get healthcare 'cause you'll die in the US - then you'll have to pay for it... about 25% or so of typical US charges for many things. *WE* may travel to the US because it's FASTER to get certain types of procedures in the US - specifically elective and those for non-life threatening conditions - and pay an insane amount of money for it. Obviously, this means RICH Canadians. Having had three major surgeries here in Vancouver over the last four years, which were all performed by extremely qualified surgeons and support teams in a timely manner even though none of them were for life-threatening conditions in the short term. In the US, my insurer (if I was lucky enough to have one) would probably still be dicking me around on wether or not they'd cover it. I can also tell you that if I had been in the US, as an independent software developer, it's very unlikely I'd have any coverage at all except for perhaps under the ACA. So there. While I wish no ill on you just because you're a right-wing 'tard, part of me kinda hopes that you find yourself suddenly without HC and with no ability to pay for it - and needing it or you'll die. Then maybe you'll get it.
I posted above... I'm with you man. My C is pretty rusty but I can do UI / feature design and would very much be interested in doing testing, QA, etc. Eudora with it's MDI, unequalled search capability, MBOX format, filtering, and folder creation/transfer capabilities make it the best (IMHO) email client out there bar none. Tried the rest, stayed with the best.
I have had that happen maybe twice and all it does is crash the app (been using Eudora since the late 90's). Based on my reading, there's no way any BO vulnerability exploit will be able to do anything on your box (at least under Windows) beyond crashing the program. If you know something that I don't please post a link to some technical article that explains how the EXE could be exploited to do more than crash it.
Yup, me too (same version). I've tried several other email clients but nothing compares to Eudora IMHO still - even with it's deficiencies. The MDI interface, the easy (albeit at times klunky) filter creation, excellent multi-parameter search capability, MBOX format (excellent to train my Spamassassin on the mail server), easy folder creation and transferring, etc. etc. Yes, there are security concerns but not if you're careful and set things up correctly.
If someone decides to take on the project of modernizing it, please reach out to me - I'M IN to help! (post reply to this post with some way to get in touch).
For Pete's sake! It's CRISPR; it's an acronym and not a word so it needs to be all incapitals. I'm getting really tired of the/. editors not bothering to actually edit the posts they approve. The level of English diction here is just terrible and getting worse by the month.
From the homepage on their website:
For Business:
"We provide products and services tailored to businesses of every size and need. Find your solutions here."
And for the home:
"Connections for your home and for your family
TV, Internet and phone are about more than simple communication. They enrich our lives, connect us to the world and put us in constant contact with the people and things that matter most. So, together, we're creating connections that go far beyond the technology we provide."
Sure sounds like they're trying to get customers. Hopefully, they'll lose most of 'em due to their simply awful business practices. This company is even worse than Comcast.
So, checking https://earth.google.com/web with Brave 0.19.123, FF 57 and Edge 38 I get three quite different behaviours:
On Brave, I get a partially rendered intro screen that is basically freezes during load. This is probably because Brave 38 still has a few bugs and kinks in it's rendering and JS engines and can't handle the non-standard JS and CSS that google is using for this "new and improved" version of Earth.
On Edge, you see this message: "Oh no! The new Google Earth isn't supported by your browser yet. Try this link in Chrome instead. If you don't have Chrome installed, download it here."
On FF57 you see the message: "Google Chrome is required to run the new Google Earth. Please try this link in Chrome. Learn more. ".
Interesting that they singled out MS for a pretty missleading message... as if to imply that Edge is lagging behind in dev but for FF they're just saying you must have Chrome - because of course the new version of Earth ignores web standards which Edge actually does a pretty good job of adhering to. This is pretty damn evil of them. I mean, I get that it's a competitive expression but still... if I were MS I'd sue. We all need to fight this sort of behvior by just not using non-compliant web apps. I for one will not ever be looking at Earth in Chrome because this sort of shit just should not stand. Ditto for *anything* that can only be viewed in Chrome. Shame on you google.
FTA: "The new tunnel would also be used to test the scramjet, a new type of jet engine"...
So not new; scramjets have been built on an experimental basis since the early 1950's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Wish people would edit their articles more carefully. What *is* new is that scramjets are finally becoming a practical reality and _that's_ very interesting.
for wrongful dismissal. The fact that this F'd company's CTO left their *entire operation* vulnerable to such a simple and possible blunder means he should be fired, not the new hire. Someone tell that asshat, it's 2017... there is absolutely NO excuse for what happened being even remotely possible. And the fact that the new hire was following *verbatim* instructions in the setup doc and caused the issue is beyond laughable... I would fire the CTO for extreme incompetence. Whatta douchebag.
I have a few things to say about this and I hope you'll bear with me. This is an issue of importance to me and although I'm not a physician or clinician I have some background and have done a great deal of research on the issue in part because I've developed a free (with no advertisements!) mobile/desktop web-app to try to help people take control of, manage, track and report their BP over time. The app works well and I'm about to roll it out for general use (just testing with friends for now). But to the article...
First, the sample was 85 patients. That's a rediculously low number for the study to be of any serious value. Honestly, I'm not even a clinician or researcher and I could get a couple of hundred people in a controlled study pretty quickly! Given that there are millions of inexpensive home BP monitors out there, they should be looking at at least 2,000+ samples for this to be considered "meaningful" IMHO.
That said, the notion that home machines can be/are very inaccurate is widespread and this study just reinforces a strong bias against inexpensive home machines by many physicians who just don't seem to believe that spending less than a few hundred dollars can get you a machine that can provide meaningful readings.
Well - as others have pointed out - a reading that's off by 5mm Hg for a typical borderline hypertensive patient with a nominal at-rest systolic of 140mm Hg (a value that physicians call "borderline" or "stage 1" hypertension and are only "slightly worried" that the patient has a problem) means an error of about 3.5%. This is... absolutely nothing. It is not only well within the margin of error for *gold-standard* methods but considering the variability of BP due to even the slightest change in physical position it's far below the "noise". Try this: use a calibrated automatic sphygmamomometer and take FOUR readings (the kind found in hospitals - the article is talking about home machines). Then, while the cuff is inflating, tense your body up. Hold your breath and push out. The systolic pressure will rise way, way more than 5mm Hg and likely the diastolic too. Similarly, "white-coat" syndrome or being nervous for any reason will do much the same. Also, keep in mind that the device might give an inaccurate high reading but again, if that's within 5% it is NOT significant no matter what the study concludes. Seriously, no physician does anything different if your avg. systolic is 145 versus 140.
Note that for an *actual* hypertensive patient with an at-rest systolic above 160mm Hg, an error of 5mm Hg low - even 10mm Hg - is unlikely to change the clinical diagnosis of "classic hypertension" at all. Any phyisician presented with a log of consistent 150mm Hg +/- 5% at-rest systolic readings will give the same advice to the patient (though, sadly, the advice is often suspect and poorly understood by the physician) and diagnose them with "classic hypertension".
The fact is that even if your machine is 5% out on average, chances are it's going to give you an important indicator as to where you are with your BP and more particularly how it changes over time and with activity. More importantly, instead of throwing out the device because it's accuracy is +/- 5% *per reading*, that does not factor much and people should educate themselves as to how to obtain meaningful results under similar conditions from one day to the next. They should DEFINITELY compare their machine against a gold-standard test in their doctor's office; any responsible physician will let you bring your machine in and run a few tests against his manual sphygmamomometer "gold standard". If not, find one who will. If yours is out by 5%, it either doesn't matter (your are - or you are borderline - hypertensive) or it's of marginal importance.
My biggest concern with an article like this is that people will say: "well, fuck-it, this is not totally accurate and so it's meaningless" and avoid buying a monitor. That is not true in any sense and really, while manufacturers should strive to build more accurate machines, the fact is that regularly using a machine that's 5-10% inaccurate is far, far better than not monitoring at all.
are advertised seeking specifically 'C' is that a large portion of people who routinely program in C are not employed as programmers per se. It is the language (as many others here have pointed out) used to code for embedded systems and real-time control devices but these are generally programmed by Electrical Engineers or techs who are not listed on the company rolls as "programmer". In the math, physics and chemistry academic environments, guess how simulations and models are coded? Yep, in C (and yes, physicists and mathematicians programming on the CUDA platform largely use C too). FORTRAN is hardly ever used these days. Aside from my own experience, I have numerous friends who work as engineers, physicists, mathematicians - and even biologists - who regularly code in C. However, that's not their job function and most of them are, frankly, not great coders if you're looking at clarity and standardization of code. The EE's working on embedded sys stuff are probably the best of this lot because they realize that other people WILL have to read and work with their code.
Actually, I remember many discussions back when we were still using 8-inch floppies that postulated that some kind of non-volatile solid-state storage was coming. The *idea* was obvious to everyone even in the 70's and early 80's but the technological expression was unknown. I specifically remember (unfortunately not where I saw it) a rendering in a magazine (probably Byte) of a device with a small clear plastic hatch above a square socket into which you hot-plugged a sugar-cube sized piece of solid-state memory (an artist's conception). I seem to recall that this "nonexistant device" would use a miniaturized, faster kind of EEPROM (Intel created the first EEPROM, the 2816 back in 1978)... mmmm... sounds a lot like Flash Memory! Seriously, EVERYONE with any sense knew that something like that was coming... and long before most./ readers were born.
I run a small software dev company in Vancouver. The other day, I received a bulk email re: outsourcing to India that caught my eye. This company is offering the typical $14 (Jr. Prog) rate blah blah blah BUT they will do it ON SPEC. Meaning, you don't pay up front; you don't pay until you "like" the result. I was blown away by that offer (though I'm still very trepedatious). It "feels" like no-risk but as I've no experience with outsourcing I'm curious if anyone's had any experience with this. Obviously there's a time-sink in dealing with them and setting up the project but really, I have to consider if it's smart paying "local" contractors $50, $75 an hour when potentially a well-defined project (clearly a key requirement) could come in at far less cost. Of course I'd rather work local but if I'm up against a competitor that outsources successfully I'm not going to be able to compete on price right? Unless of course the outsourcers take too friggin long but if I'm not paying in advance, what really is the risk? Take that with a grain of salt because it's clearly a very complex question and very project dependent - but one has to consider such outsourcing to remain competitive.
I suspect that this issue - which is already a huge concern for us "Western" developers - will become the dominant issue very soon. We've all laughed at the outsourcing horror stories we've heard about but it's more to the point to ask and hear about SUCCESFUL projects in that domain. If you just dismiss this, you're being naive. I'd like to see some hard stats on fail/success but I suspect that there's no good way to get at that info in an unbiased and honest manner.
This scares me because I feel I have to explore the option but I have no idea what this will ultimately mean for my business - will it be a boost to the bottom line or just erode overall project revenues?
I think John Larson's being naive; yeah, we all have examples of laughable outsourcing horror stories but that's just anectodal and if they're willing do do a project "on spec" we should all be concerned; there's no way these guys will stay in business if they're standing by their work to get paid and it's not up to par.
Slashdot Mirror
You sir, are very demonstrably ignorant of this issue. I'm so sick and tired of you right-wing American F**ks who do not understand the FIRST THING about universal health care. First, yes, Canadians travel to the US for healthcare but many Americans also come here because it's WAY, WAY cheaper to pay for world-class hospital care here if you need it and are not covered in the US (which is about 11% of the overall American population according to: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/1... ). BTW, in Canada, that number is 0%. Everyone is covered; well, unless you're an American coming up here trying to get healthcare 'cause you'll die in the US - then you'll have to pay for it... about 25% or so of typical US charges for many things. *WE* may travel to the US because it's FASTER to get certain types of procedures in the US - specifically elective and those for non-life threatening conditions - and pay an insane amount of money for it. Obviously, this means RICH Canadians. Having had three major surgeries here in Vancouver over the last four years, which were all performed by extremely qualified surgeons and support teams in a timely manner even though none of them were for life-threatening conditions in the short term. In the US, my insurer (if I was lucky enough to have one) would probably still be dicking me around on wether or not they'd cover it. I can also tell you that if I had been in the US, as an independent software developer, it's very unlikely I'd have any coverage at all except for perhaps under the ACA. So there. While I wish no ill on you just because you're a right-wing 'tard, part of me kinda hopes that you find yourself suddenly without HC and with no ability to pay for it - and needing it or you'll die. Then maybe you'll get it.
I posted above... I'm with you man. My C is pretty rusty but I can do UI / feature design and would very much be interested in doing testing, QA, etc. Eudora with it's MDI, unequalled search capability, MBOX format, filtering, and folder creation/transfer capabilities make it the best (IMHO) email client out there bar none. Tried the rest, stayed with the best.
I have had that happen maybe twice and all it does is crash the app (been using Eudora since the late 90's). Based on my reading, there's no way any BO vulnerability exploit will be able to do anything on your box (at least under Windows) beyond crashing the program. If you know something that I don't please post a link to some technical article that explains how the EXE could be exploited to do more than crash it.
Yup, me too (same version). I've tried several other email clients but nothing compares to Eudora IMHO still - even with it's deficiencies. The MDI interface, the easy (albeit at times klunky) filter creation, excellent multi-parameter search capability, MBOX format (excellent to train my Spamassassin on the mail server), easy folder creation and transferring, etc. etc. Yes, there are security concerns but not if you're careful and set things up correctly. If someone decides to take on the project of modernizing it, please reach out to me - I'M IN to help! (post reply to this post with some way to get in touch).
For Pete's sake! It's CRISPR; it's an acronym and not a word so it needs to be all incapitals. I'm getting really tired of the /. editors not bothering to actually edit the posts they approve. The level of English diction here is just terrible and getting worse by the month.
From the homepage on their website: For Business: "We provide products and services tailored to businesses of every size and need. Find your solutions here."
And for the home:
"Connections for your home and for your family
TV, Internet and phone are about more than simple communication. They enrich our lives, connect us to the world and put us in constant contact with the people and things that matter most. So, together, we're creating connections that go far beyond the technology we provide."
Sure sounds like they're trying to get customers. Hopefully, they'll lose most of 'em due to their simply awful business practices. This company is even worse than Comcast.
So, checking https://earth.google.com/web with Brave 0.19.123, FF 57 and Edge 38 I get three quite different behaviours: On Brave, I get a partially rendered intro screen that is basically freezes during load. This is probably because Brave 38 still has a few bugs and kinks in it's rendering and JS engines and can't handle the non-standard JS and CSS that google is using for this "new and improved" version of Earth.
On Edge, you see this message: "Oh no! The new Google Earth isn't supported by your browser yet. Try this link in Chrome instead. If you don't have Chrome installed, download it here."
On FF57 you see the message: "Google Chrome is required to run the new Google Earth. Please try this link in Chrome. Learn more. ".
Interesting that they singled out MS for a pretty missleading message... as if to imply that Edge is lagging behind in dev but for FF they're just saying you must have Chrome - because of course the new version of Earth ignores web standards which Edge actually does a pretty good job of adhering to. This is pretty damn evil of them. I mean, I get that it's a competitive expression but still... if I were MS I'd sue. We all need to fight this sort of behvior by just not using non-compliant web apps. I for one will not ever be looking at Earth in Chrome because this sort of shit just should not stand. Ditto for *anything* that can only be viewed in Chrome. Shame on you google.
FTA: "The new tunnel would also be used to test the scramjet, a new type of jet engine"... So not new; scramjets have been built on an experimental basis since the early 1950's: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Wish people would edit their articles more carefully. What *is* new is that scramjets are finally becoming a practical reality and _that's_ very interesting.
for wrongful dismissal. The fact that this F'd company's CTO left their *entire operation* vulnerable to such a simple and possible blunder means he should be fired, not the new hire. Someone tell that asshat, it's 2017... there is absolutely NO excuse for what happened being even remotely possible. And the fact that the new hire was following *verbatim* instructions in the setup doc and caused the issue is beyond laughable... I would fire the CTO for extreme incompetence. Whatta douchebag.
I have a few things to say about this and I hope you'll bear with me. This is an issue of importance to me and although I'm not a physician or clinician I have some background and have done a great deal of research on the issue in part because I've developed a free (with no advertisements!) mobile/desktop web-app to try to help people take control of, manage, track and report their BP over time. The app works well and I'm about to roll it out for general use (just testing with friends for now). But to the article... First, the sample was 85 patients. That's a rediculously low number for the study to be of any serious value. Honestly, I'm not even a clinician or researcher and I could get a couple of hundred people in a controlled study pretty quickly! Given that there are millions of inexpensive home BP monitors out there, they should be looking at at least 2,000+ samples for this to be considered "meaningful" IMHO.
... absolutely nothing. It is not only well within the margin of error for *gold-standard* methods but considering the variability of BP due to even the slightest change in physical position it's far below the "noise". Try this: use a calibrated automatic sphygmamomometer and take FOUR readings (the kind found in hospitals - the article is talking about home machines). Then, while the cuff is inflating, tense your body up. Hold your breath and push out. The systolic pressure will rise way, way more than 5mm Hg and likely the diastolic too. Similarly, "white-coat" syndrome or being nervous for any reason will do much the same. Also, keep in mind that the device might give an inaccurate high reading but again, if that's within 5% it is NOT significant no matter what the study concludes. Seriously, no physician does anything different if your avg. systolic is 145 versus 140.
That said, the notion that home machines can be/are very inaccurate is widespread and this study just reinforces a strong bias against inexpensive home machines by many physicians who just don't seem to believe that spending less than a few hundred dollars can get you a machine that can provide meaningful readings.
Well - as others have pointed out - a reading that's off by 5mm Hg for a typical borderline hypertensive patient with a nominal at-rest systolic of 140mm Hg (a value that physicians call "borderline" or "stage 1" hypertension and are only "slightly worried" that the patient has a problem) means an error of about 3.5%. This is
Note that for an *actual* hypertensive patient with an at-rest systolic above 160mm Hg, an error of 5mm Hg low - even 10mm Hg - is unlikely to change the clinical diagnosis of "classic hypertension" at all. Any phyisician presented with a log of consistent 150mm Hg +/- 5% at-rest systolic readings will give the same advice to the patient (though, sadly, the advice is often suspect and poorly understood by the physician) and diagnose them with "classic hypertension".
The fact is that even if your machine is 5% out on average, chances are it's going to give you an important indicator as to where you are with your BP and more particularly how it changes over time and with activity. More importantly, instead of throwing out the device because it's accuracy is +/- 5% *per reading*, that does not factor much and people should educate themselves as to how to obtain meaningful results under similar conditions from one day to the next. They should DEFINITELY compare their machine against a gold-standard test in their doctor's office; any responsible physician will let you bring your machine in and run a few tests against his manual sphygmamomometer "gold standard". If not, find one who will. If yours is out by 5%, it either doesn't matter (your are - or you are borderline - hypertensive) or it's of marginal importance.
My biggest concern with an article like this is that people will say: "well, fuck-it, this is not totally accurate and so it's meaningless" and avoid buying a monitor. That is not true in any sense and really, while manufacturers should strive to build more accurate machines, the fact is that regularly using a machine that's 5-10% inaccurate is far, far better than not monitoring at all.
are advertised seeking specifically 'C' is that a large portion of people who routinely program in C are not employed as programmers per se. It is the language (as many others here have pointed out) used to code for embedded systems and real-time control devices but these are generally programmed by Electrical Engineers or techs who are not listed on the company rolls as "programmer". In the math, physics and chemistry academic environments, guess how simulations and models are coded? Yep, in C (and yes, physicists and mathematicians programming on the CUDA platform largely use C too). FORTRAN is hardly ever used these days. Aside from my own experience, I have numerous friends who work as engineers, physicists, mathematicians - and even biologists - who regularly code in C. However, that's not their job function and most of them are, frankly, not great coders if you're looking at clarity and standardization of code. The EE's working on embedded sys stuff are probably the best of this lot because they realize that other people WILL have to read and work with their code.
Actually, I remember many discussions back when we were still using 8-inch floppies that postulated that some kind of non-volatile solid-state storage was coming. The *idea* was obvious to everyone even in the 70's and early 80's but the technological expression was unknown. I specifically remember (unfortunately not where I saw it) a rendering in a magazine (probably Byte) of a device with a small clear plastic hatch above a square socket into which you hot-plugged a sugar-cube sized piece of solid-state memory (an artist's conception). I seem to recall that this "nonexistant device" would use a miniaturized, faster kind of EEPROM (Intel created the first EEPROM, the 2816 back in 1978)... mmmm... sounds a lot like Flash Memory! Seriously, EVERYONE with any sense knew that something like that was coming... and long before most ./ readers were born.
I run a small software dev company in Vancouver. The other day, I received a bulk email re: outsourcing to India that caught my eye. This company is offering the typical $14 (Jr. Prog) rate blah blah blah BUT they will do it ON SPEC. Meaning, you don't pay up front; you don't pay until you "like" the result. I was blown away by that offer (though I'm still very trepedatious). It "feels" like no-risk but as I've no experience with outsourcing I'm curious if anyone's had any experience with this. Obviously there's a time-sink in dealing with them and setting up the project but really, I have to consider if it's smart paying "local" contractors $50, $75 an hour when potentially a well-defined project (clearly a key requirement) could come in at far less cost. Of course I'd rather work local but if I'm up against a competitor that outsources successfully I'm not going to be able to compete on price right? Unless of course the outsourcers take too friggin long but if I'm not paying in advance, what really is the risk? Take that with a grain of salt because it's clearly a very complex question and very project dependent - but one has to consider such outsourcing to remain competitive. I suspect that this issue - which is already a huge concern for us "Western" developers - will become the dominant issue very soon. We've all laughed at the outsourcing horror stories we've heard about but it's more to the point to ask and hear about SUCCESFUL projects in that domain. If you just dismiss this, you're being naive. I'd like to see some hard stats on fail/success but I suspect that there's no good way to get at that info in an unbiased and honest manner.
This scares me because I feel I have to explore the option but I have no idea what this will ultimately mean for my business - will it be a boost to the bottom line or just erode overall project revenues?
I think John Larson's being naive; yeah, we all have examples of laughable outsourcing horror stories but that's just anectodal and if they're willing do do a project "on spec" we should all be concerned; there's no way these guys will stay in business if they're standing by their work to get paid and it's not up to par.