OCinBuffalo

And yet, none of that changes the fact that you don't like IT people or our business culture, and the fact that we don't have to play by your rules throws you into fits of rage. I suit up maybe 20 days a year, and for the last 12 years, work starts for me when I roll out of bed. How's your blood pressure?

Right. I answer your question and solve the problems you raised...but this is about me? Your nonsensical indignation, and dare I say, envy...is about me? I nailed it. You know it. Time to get over your internet/"IT ain't fair" hissy fit. Things aren't ever going to be the way you think they should be on this. Move on.

To what purpose? Honestly, I don't understand. Why bother? What does headlines get her?

....For you to call it "successful"? Objectively now. And, this is for rational people, so if it is generally accepted by the board that you are irrational, please ignore this thread and start a new one about Sarah Palin, go play with your Sarah Palin, blow up doll, whatever. Anyway, right now, for me, success looks like: 1. Win the political battle to reform Obamacare. The country is already on their side on this, they have to get it done. We have done a TON of research on this thing, and believe it or, in my opinion not not everything is bad. But, so much of it, and the really important stuff, is bad that I have no problem throwing the baby out with the bath water. I imagine the good stuff will be kept in a reform bill. 2. Get control of spending and override Obama vetoes if necessary. Look, the veto is no excuse for either party, they all knew about the veto when they signed up. It's not like the veto is some mystical animal that has been recently discovered. The job is to either convince the President that their measures are sound, or, get out and convince the American people of this, and override the veto. 3. Immediately begin the process of entitlement reform. The big mistake that Democrats made, objectively, is trying to force too much change too quickly. The Republicans should learn from that and begin a gradual process of reform. Create easily definable goals, meet them, repeat. Who cares if it is done with big fanfare or not? Also, I am wondering, do you favor: 1. Repeal, Replace - or - 2. Reform wrt Obamacare?

“As a result, claims that directors and officers of many failed banks engaged in negligence lack credibility as such claims attempt to hold those directors and officers to an impossible standard of care,” Kaplan said. Yeah, right they made the weather system, and then they complain when it's raining. Of course then can't control for every up and down in the system. But that's not the point. They created the entire system itself, via whole lines of business that failed miserably.

No, I am basically writing you off on that part of the discussion. The amount of things you don't know simply take too long to explain given your whining about the amount of info. What I described, and you keep missing for some reason, is the fact that with this approach, the warrant can be definitive, and limited to the bad guy in question, with practically 0 chance of screwing up. My approach therefore beats the hell out of what is being proposed, and it does a much better job of giving us the data we need to arrest the bad guy. You can't know where a bad guy is going to go next on the internet. IF he thinks his Facebook account is being monitored, or he is just careful, he may just go to gmail and start a new account. You can't predict where he is going to go next and be waiting for him there when he gets there. If you have a keylogger, you don't have to worry, because wherever he goes, you know. And, it has the added benefit of being a more passive approach than trapping encryption keys. I almost guarantee that grabbing keys will cause a delay and different behavior when a site is accessed, and that delay/behavior, although seemingly slight in the real world, is a lifetime/blatantly obvious, and can be monitored with as little as basic javascript. Thus, the server side approach can be easily detected with some simple code. Hell you could do it with Firebug. If you know a bad guy goes to a certain coffee shop that has 3 PCs, you can install on all 3, and just never look at the what comes off the keyboards that aren't used by the bad guy. Delete the stuff that is irrelevant. Do that with a judge as a witness and everything is good. There's no "collateral opportunity"(whatever that means ) if the judge is shown that the irrelevant data has been deleted. Given all this, objectively, the server side approach is inferior. Client side is the way to go. We already have laws about that, which is why you see people's faces blurred out on TV whenever they show a bank robber in action. Why am I worried that "blurfaced me" was at the bank? Look...... Crusade? You started this by asking a question. So WTF cusade? I think you have gone around the bend on this internet thing dude. You don't like the fact that that we aren't subject to the same rules you are, and it pisses you off. That much is obvious. I'm immune to your kind, because I have been dealing with your crap my whole career. Yes, nothing about how my job works is "fair" to people like you, nothing. I freely admit that. We get more $$$, quicker promotions, better jobs, the works. You think we don't know it's not fair? But what the f are we supposed to do about it? Make it fairer for you? Please. Lighten up, Francis. All of your indignation and spite is going to change...exactly nothing. Time to re-think exactly who is on a "crusade" here.

I did read the article, but I also read a whole bunch of other stuff you didn't read. The article talks about skype, so that the casual reader can relate to it. Let me assure you that this article represents 5% authority on this subject, and barely scratches the surface. "Live IP traffic", or whatever you call it, almost always contains stored data that doesn't 100% belong to the user. Concise enough? Also, clearly the concept of "integration" eludes you. You can't pick and choose which transactions you listen to, if you are listening on Facebook's port via the new "backdoor". The only way would be to have everybody's encryption keys/user ids, and if you have them all, then there's no point in "security", we might as well just send tarballs of what we do/say to the government every day. I am assuming the bad guy isn't dumb enough to use a fixed IP, so you can't get him that way. If he is, then this whole thing isn't necessary. No, the only way would be to sit on the Facebook side of things and wait until he logs in and/or somehow get some really good spyware on his machine. You'd need a keystroke logger also. ------ Uhh......forget the rest of what I was gonna say and wrote already You could avoid all of this if you simply authorized FBI types to to install loggers on suspect's machines. THAT is all they need here. You do the keylogger thing, and NOW your phone comparison is totally legit, and it's totally fine for everybody else. That's the solution. It's costs next to nothing, and it only gets the bad guys, because it's on their machine, and not on a server. Good key loggers are a B word to detect, and some can even be very sneakily applied = flashing the ROM. Hell you could even make it look like a standard windows update thing. Forget all this other crap. This is how you do it, and it's ballsy because you can keep changing how they work. The only part that doesn't work is if the guy jumps from machine to machine. But, people usually use data sticks with that, and those are easy to swipe, flash, replace. Funny, I should have thought of this earlier, but I am not used to thinking on this side of the fence.

How about this as an explanation: 1. Obama thought they might be able to catch Republicans in a trap right before the election, and have something, finally, on the record that they would be willing to run on. They can't run on their record as it stands, and they are desperate. 2. So, they set up this bill and expected to nail Republicans. This way, they could say "See? Republicans are voting for the big banks, and against the people, etc.", or something similar. 3. Republicans outsmarted them somehow and sniffed out the procedural chicanery, and the thing sails through Congress. 4. Since it's such a goofy thing, Obama, in a panic, decides to pocket veto the bill, but... 5. He forgets that the Senate is still in session, and therefore he can't pocket veto it. 6. And now they are trying to play the whole thing off. 7. They can't blame the Republicans for any of this, since they are in control of all the procedure. I doubt we will ever be able to confirm or deny any of this fully, and it's just my theory. But how else do you explain the pocket veto gaffe, on legislation that was pushed by Democrats, after an unexpected near unanimous vote, on legislation pushed by Democrats? Something is rotten in the state of Denmark. I don't know the legal/procedural minutia well enough to say exactly, but this whole thing doesn't make any sense.

Yeah, yeah more of the same assclown behavior... ...doesn't change the fact that telling me that Islam itself is somehow disconnected from the Islamic world's problems is a assclown argument. Keep telling yourself you are superior by denying reality, though. That's helpful. Maybe if you cut/past blah some more...that might solve the problem. You won't take these problems seriously, so I see no reason why I should take your opinion on this seriously. Your approach is that of a child. If you close your eyes, and keep saying repeating the same crap, everything goes away, right? Keep posting the financial stuff though..that's useful.

No. Of course not, for rational people. The only thing the far-left is good at is complaining when they aren't in power. That should be blatantly obvious to any rational person. No weapons of mass destruction '= let the far-left be in charge of anything. Get it yet, retards? But, just like the gay marriage debacle, they are sure to blame everybody else but themselves for their turdball approaches, and super-turdball "solutions". Hell, Jimmy Carter is running around calling himself the "superior" President of his generation. Bill Clinton is the only Democrat to acknowledge his mistakes, learn from them, and meet with success. Hillary would have been a much better President than Obama, there's no question about that now. Too bad for us we have Jimmy Carter 2.0 now. Hopefully all the young Obama voters learn from their mistakes.

Nah, no fear here, so enough of the psychobabble. I'm just sick of schit blowing up...then it's blah etc., blah nuance, blah moderates, ...which concludes with "But...but...but Islam is a religion of peace" and, tools running around demanding that we acknowledge their assclown mantra: "I say super-insightful things like 'You can't judge all of Islam based on the actions of a few nuts.' This makes me morally superior to everyone else! See? I'm awesome!" Followed closely by schit blowing up again. After 10 years, this "religion of peace"/assclown mantra cycle has lost all credibility and is laughable now. We won't ever tolerate this Islamist BS, and if it takes 100 years to kill every last one of the nuts we will be there to see it done. Rational Americans know that there is no alternative. That's something the nuts don't seem to get. Ultimately, though, this is not about our tolerance. We won't tolerate their nonsense, period, and that ain't changing. This is about what the "good" Muslims are willing to tolerate. If most of them are willing to tolerate the nuts, then Islam on the whole cannot be considered a useful or beneficial philosophy. We will free ourselves from it, the same way we freed ourselves from Communism, which is clearly a useless philosophy.

Again, you are confusing the applications here. To use your phone analogy: There is a difference between what you say during a phone call, and a message on your answering machine, and your private finance spreadsheet on your computer. Again, your comparison is predicated on all these things being the same. Essentially, there's a difference between transmitted/transactional data and stored data. While the source of the transaction's data is itself, the stored data can be coming from someplace/someone who is not covered by the warrant. Their privacy and illegal search rights are being violated, and there's no way to tell you did it, until you do it. What's being discussed here is not only going after transmitted data(phone call), but also, stored data(answering machine). And, forcibly being able to access that stored data using a guaranteed piece of crap interface, that will be beaten by some 16 year old hacker the first week it is introduced. Do you see the confusion in your comparison yet? If not, here's the next part: IF we allow the government this back door, what is to stop them from accessing ALL the messages on the "answering machine", Since the computer is hooked up to the "answering machine", then they can access your private finances spreadsheet, too. There's no way to stop them, short of tagging every single piece of data/file, and even then, once they are in, there's no way to prove what they don't need = proving a negative. And they can't prove what they do need, because they won't know until they find it. So, it's real easy for this go from nothing to ALL, and no way to create a viable legal standard. Does any of this emulate listening at the central office? Not even close. I could write 2 more pages on other reasons why this comparison is flawed. I will be happy if you simply understand the difference between transactional data and stored.

Great, The Simpson's Economic Plan. As I recall that didn't do too well for Springfield, and the guy who proposed it made a lot of money on it and then took off when it failed. Hmm, but the big players in all this environtology dreck aren't looking to make big money off this, no, they are all about the planet. And sure, these un-elected people will hold themselves accountable and stand by the crap they are selling, they won't fail and then run away back to Harvard/Berkley. Art imitating life? Life imitating Art?

Speaking of old, defeated, crazier than a schit-house rat type posters...where oh where is Bad Lieutenant? Funny, I told him that killing those that oppose them is the tool of every leftist in history. They hardly ever come to power peacefully. Therefore, I told him that they absolutely have to kill people like me, because my very existence invalidates their entire BS ideology. I recently found out, by his own admission, that LABillsfan will probably have to go before I do, "so I got that going for me" Here we have that exact message encapsulated in a handy 4 minute video, and where oh where is that tool Bad Lieutenant now? I love it when reality cancels out leftist BS...and it's even better when they do it to themselves. I'm in the 20% of the voices that Marx said had to be silenced. And that makes me

I've been here for 5 years, and I can assure you that DC_Tom will never be worn out. If there's an idiot to beat, he will crush them for days/pages. Hey, it's fun to watch if nothing else. As far as conner goes: it's simple. He's the kid that hangs out with the cool kids, but he's not one of them and therefore takes all their abuse, but hey, he's hanging out with the cool kids I will grant you, the concept of PPP being "the cool kids" is scary. But, then again, by and large there is a lot of competency here. conner gets to hang out with people that actually know what the f they are talking about and/or have core competencies in the subject material...which he can't get at the Huffington Post boards. Just don't start a discussion about statistical methodology, please. Then you will see the full DC_Tom, "in full war regalia".

Uh...but, it is historically accurate to say that the SS and even Hitler himself purposely inserted Muslims or inspired them towards insurrection in both Egypt and Palestine, based purely on either Muslim ideology and/or hatred of the Jews. The concept of eradicating the Jews in Palestine was one of the central themes of this. Nasser was even part of these groups. Most of these efforts failed miserably, and, in a hysterical twist, their slight successes inspired the Jews to form their own paramilitary groups to defend themselves...which ultimately led to Palestinian Jews now being called...Israelis. Nice job idiots. Nothing like getting the exact polar opposite of what you intend. Oh, and my controversial source is...The History Channel BIAS!

Which, again, for the umpzillionth time, begs the question: why are we always first in the race to call him a bozo...by miles? Where are the supposed millions of moderate Muslims getting all the media attention they can and proving that "peace" is in fact that natural state of Islam? Are we supposed to be waiting for some "breaking point" whereby suddenly legions of moderate Muslims will come out en masse and condemn these bozos? When's that gonna be? Tired of hearing about it. Show me, or shut it. Oh, and once again, this is what happens when delusions of grandeur meets a serious need for attention, and phony "victimhood" all at the same time: Buddy: You honestly think any of us spend any time thinking of any of you, or your stuff, or your assclown religion, ever? NO. Retard. We're too busy working. Now leave us alone. The premise that somehow we want something, anything, from this turd or any of the "We are only Muslims" in Pakistan is ludicrous. Stop pretending that I care enough about you to want to bother taking any of your raggedy assed crap or land. How about: Stay the f in Pakistan and don't come here if you don't like us? I can guarantee you that we have 0 interest in voluntarily coming to a country that smells like a curry fart-off. Islamaphobe? BS. I have to care about something to "fear" it . I couldn't care less about this pissant, his pissant country, or his pissant religion.

Well, you asked for it...can't wait to hear the crying about the length of this post. These problems are large and complicated, therefore, defining the solution can't be done in 2 sentences. Only a simpleton looks for a simple story here. And hey, some people write entire books on this. I have kept it to a page. Last thing first: NO, you can't. The market price is by definition what the market will pay. You can artificially set that price, but regardless of your scheming that market price will remain. For example, Canada may have set it's prices for health care...but that doesn't stop those Canadians that can from paying market price for QUALITY, or timely, health care here. The market price will always exist, regardless of all socialist machinations. As far as your solutions, I don't see how they hurt, other than to say that giving care in Florida is by definition different than in Maine, and we have to make sure we remember that. You want the tools? We have them. And, the reason the "private sector" hasn't been good for health care is: the JV team has been working in your industry for a long time. I can prove this with voluminous technical detail if required. As far as my "proposed" solution? There's nothing "proposed" about it. We do this, daily. It comes down to our simple insistence that we, all of us, tell each other the truth about what is happening in our health care organization, every day, all the time. IF we document every single detail of what we do, and how we correct what we do, in real time, then we take the "negligence" argument away, and kick the d-bag lawyers to the curb. The question is always how, and we have the how. A few simple premises that our "thingy", because it's not a "solution" in the traditional sense, is based on(some of these are old standbys, some are not): 1. If you don't know what you, or your organization, are doing, in real time, there's no way you can do anything to fix it, in real time. Finding out tomorrow, that I was doing something dumb today doesn't help, and allows the d-bag surveyors, lawyers, etc., their opening. 2. You can't know the cost of doing business, if you don't know what your business activities actually cost you. Or, in this case, you can't talk about controlling the cost of care...if you don't know why and what costs you need to work on. 3. You can't know why and what costs you need to work on, if you don't know what each individual thing you do costs, both direct and indirect and including materials. 4. You can't stop fraud, if you can't monitor what each individual thing that was done costs, and determine if variance is due to fraud, or, that Mr. Jones simply crapped in the bathtub, which made the bath take twice as long as expected. 5. EMR, Integration, and basically everything you will hear at HIMMS does exactly 0 to measure and therefore control cost. Worse, it assumes "quality of care" is about patient outcomes. This is fundamentally flawed, and it's clear evidence of the amateurism of government employees/JV team private sector flailing about trying to do our job. a. Care needs to be a verb, not a noun. Patients may determine what we do, but not HOW we do it, and HOW we do it = quality. This fundamental misunderstanding of how quality assurance works, and how to apply its concepts properly, is the root cause of all kinds of buffoonery. b. If we are going to measure giving care, our focus must be on the care giver, not the outcome. You can't establish standards of performance...or performance indicators, based on patients. They are simply too varied. Instead we have to establish what a "good" task looks like and then measure how often we get it done properly and on time. Once we do that, we can figure out what wastes money, why, and attack it. This is not time motion, so don't even start. This is work sampling with some specific mods for health care, and some original thought as well. In essence, our "sample" never ends. c. The reason teams practice, and don't simply play games, is because they seek to get better at the fundamentals and/or skills. If our health care organization only focuses on the scoreboard at the end of the game(the patient outcome), and not what we did well/poorly during it(the tasks we do individually and as a team), then we have no chance at getting better as a team. 6. If we don't start getting sound raw data collected in health care...all the rest of the IT heavy artillery that has been/can be brought to bear is irrelevant. Example: Using business intelligence design patterns to predict falls in long term care is stupid if you can't accurately determine how many baths, who gives them/assist/independent etc., and when residents get them. Obama etc. keep talking about electronic medical records and integration. Both are 100% dependent on the quality of the raw data collected. It doesn't matter how many Billions of dollars are spent on what comes after bad raw data collection, it will fail. 7. Care providers don't work at desks. They work on the floor/unit/room/bed whatever. Therefore, giving care providers desktop oriented solutions is patently retarded. Worse, taking existing desktop solutions and attempting to bastardize them into mobile ones is even more retarded. Putting things on the wall simply means standing in line, and most care providers don't have that kind of time. Given this, and the amount of paper that is still in use in 2000 f'ing 10, it's not a shocker that most raw data is inaccurate, incomplete, or non-existent altogether. 8. Care providers need a vehicle they can use and put away, in less than 6 seconds. I have seen desktop computers attached to walls, collecting dust, and, laptop computers pushed around on carts, getting in the way....because people want to push their tired old crap on doctors/nurses/therapists/etc, and these providers end up rejecting these systems, hence the dust. 9. Things change, period. If solutions are designed around the Microsoft model, which is about 90% of health care software right now, then, when things change, you wait. Things change in health care at a much more rapid pace than in many other industries. So, you are likely to be waiting longer and for more things. And there's no guarantee that the change you get is the change you need. It may work for others, but usually nobody gets 100% of what they want. Unlike tired old Microsoft, etc., we don't make our clients wait for the next version to come out. We have innovated, and can roll immediate changes, not patches, broad or specific, for the whole group or a single user, because, changing literally everything, without performance hits, is inherent to the design. 10. People want to control the software they use. Literally everybody at least hates some part of the next version of Windows, but what the hell can they do about it? Due to our ability to change, or not change, ever, you get to decide on every detail of how your extension of our "thingy" works...if you want to. Or, you can just go with whatever somebody else built. It makes no difference to us, because this is also inherent to the design. In all cases, our integrations to other systems, health care or otherwise, are still uniform, even if your extension is completely different than the next guy's. Nice trick, huh? This is how we get $8/hr CNAs, housekeepers, etc. to buy in....and for that matter, $2000/hr docs as well. These are some of the the primary premises of what we do, there are many more, but you aren't paying me, so you don't get them. I don't allow us to stray from any of them. Right now, the ONLY way a health care provider can qualify as an "accountable care"(hysterical, because that was literally our old codename for this) provider under the new "meaningful use" standards that are coming is to implement something like our "thingy". We are it right now, unless there are other start-ups I don't know about...and that makes me smile

Oh boy....I can hear the engines of the bombers that are coming for this thread in the distance. My question is: do have time to get to the store and back before they get here? What a premise for a thread.

Distortion. Speaking for myself, I bashed the Obama economic team college professors, who don't live in the real world, came in and imposed their crackpot ideology on the country, failed, and then retreated right back to fantasy land at Harvard and Berkley. I am bashing them, and only them, because that's exactly what happened. Nobody said the entire Ivy League/Elite schools stink. What we did say: these people teach business/economics because their crackpot ideology prevents them from practicing it properly in the real world. The results of their foray into our world speak for themselves.

Donahoe! Was I right? .....no, but he did get Donahoe in there didn't he? Where does this man-crush come from? Did Donahoe pull Mort out of a river?

Perhaps I am over-tired, but that just made me giggle.

Oh great, thanks for that stat, I feel much better. Does anybody believe Kelsay is the 11th best LB in the league? Besides our misguided FO?

Oh, and the number of fish that this FAKE HANDLE hauls in never ceases to amaze... Instead of Deadliest Catch, this is Credulous Catch. Lots of gulliblefish here.

Don't worry. The people who are most likely to rip on you are democrats. That live with their mom. That work at La Nova.