Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Rural Electrification Act (Score 1) 279

by Aesculapius (#41099335) Attached to: 19 Million Americans Cannot Get Broadband Access

Why not follow the same procedure that was already done in 1936? The Rural Electrification Act gave federal loans to the electric companies with the sole purpose of delivering electricity to all rural areas.
The act created the Rural Utilities Service that also oversaw telephone. Perhaps adding data access to their purview...

+ - Evidence based defense against corporate filtering

Submitted by Aesculapius
Aesculapius (147375) writes "I am a physician owner of a moderate sized clinic. Over the past several years, we have successfully deployed and utilized an electronic medical records system. This greater use of computers by all the employees has led to a growing push for internet filtering. The rationalizations are the usual: prevent loss of productivity, reduce the organizations liability, and private surfing is beyond the scope of employment. A recent nebulous court decision has be used as proof of need for filtering: http://www.fredlaw.com/articles/employment/empl_0909_tmt_nob.html. The level of filtering seems to be progressing toward more of a white list system.

I take issue with this filtering for a number of reasons:
1. It shows a lack of trust in our employees, whom we trust with the health of others and the security of their information.
2. Filtering should not be used carte blanch instead of managing specific employees whose productivity is being affected by surfing
3. I don't believe that the liability is as significant as has been stated
4. Morale would be negatively affected

While I am a partner/owner, I am in the minority on this issue.

So, I ask you fellow slashdotters:
1. Am I wrong? Is the liability climate for this type of thing significant enough to provide more than basic (porn,warez,etc) filtering?
2. If not, what type of concrete information can I bring to my board and management team to help them make a more moderate policy on this issue? Things like productivity studies, liability analysis, case studies would be wonderful. If it is pertinent to the health care industry it would be better.

Thanks!
-A"

"Nature is very un-American. Nature never hurries." -- William George Jordan

Working...