Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Use cases (Score 2) 58

by Camaro (#47017283) Attached to: For US Customers, Text Access To 911 Slowly Rolls Out

I read the article (gasp! Shocking, I know) and recognise there are certainly important use cases for texting 911. But I work in EMS on a volunteer basis and I would think that in most cases voice calls would work far better, especially in medical situations. There can be a lot of helpful information that can be transferred in a more timely manner that way. Symptoms, time of onset, if situation changes during time of response, number of patients. Working in a rural area it can also be challenging to get an accurate location. In some situations, the 911 operators will also guide the caller in providing early care, such as CPR in a cardiac patient. So yeah, if one is physically able, and it's safe to do, take the time to talk to 911. They know what questions to ask and they will pass that information to the responding agencies so they know what to expect on arrival. Doing the same thing by text would only slow things down.

Comment: Re:Here is why... (Score 1) 261

by Camaro (#45704189) Attached to: Streaming and Cord-Cutting Take a Toll On the Pay-TV Industry

I agree completely. I watch a fair bit of retro programming (mostly series from the 70s and 80s). Remember when the show itself was 49 minutes long? And the theme song itself was a whole 90 seconds? The cable/satellite companies seem to believe we'll blindly keep paying for LESS content. Yeah, right.

Comment: Re:Still won't fix monopolies (Score 1) 153

by Camaro (#45676267) Attached to: ITU Standardizes 1Gbps Over Copper, But Services Won't Come Until 2015

Just a little info here from an xplorenet user (indirectly). SaskTel resells xplorenet's "4G" satellite service to rural customers. It has been a bit better than the previous version we were on before. The introductory program was free hardware and installation and 5Mb/30GB for $55/month for a year. After the year the price went to $85/month. Recently they reworked the packages and we moved to 5Mb/40GB for the same money. One can also go to 10Mb speeds for more $$ or less monthly transfer amounts. With these plans there is no throttling. Theoretically if one goes over their cap, you pay more for whatever you use. I haven't tested this yet, though.

Comment: Re:Awful headline. (Score 3, Informative) 356

by Camaro (#41389995) Attached to: Roundup Tolerant GM Maize Linked To Tumor Development

I am a farmer in southern Saskatchewan, Canada. I do not, and have never worked for Monsanto or any other pesticide company. I have in fact used pesticides including some of Monsanto's glyphosate products (Roundup, Rustler and most recently RT540). Rates of application I have used range from 0.5-1.0 liters (0.13-0.26 US gallons) per acre of product mixed in 5-10 gallons of water. My use, though, is restricted to pre-seeding burnoff as I do not grow any glyphosate-tolerant crops.

Cloud

US Gov't Demands For Google Data Up 37% Over the Last Year 77

Posted by timothy
from the willie-sutton's-modern-corollary dept.
Sparrowvsrevolution writes "Governments are sticking their noses into Google's servers more than ever before. In the second half of 2011, Google received 6,321 requests that it hand over its users' private data to U.S. government agencies including law enforcement, and complied at least partially with those requests in 93% of cases, according to the latest update to the company's bi-annual Transparency Report. That's up from 5,950 requests in the first half of 2011, and marks a 37% increase in the number of requests over the same period the year before. Compared with the second half of 2009, the first time Google released the government request numbers, the latest figures represent a 76% spike. Data demands from foreign governments have increased even more quickly than those from the U.S., up to 11,936 in the second half of 2011 compared with 9,600 in the same period the year before, though Google was much less likely to comply with those non-U.S. government requests."
Microsoft

Why Visual Basic 6 Still Thrives 406

Posted by timothy
from the nuke-nuke-who's-there? dept.
theodp writes "Microsoft recently extended 'It Just Works' compatibility for Visual Basic 6 applications through the full lifetime of Windows 8, so VB6 apps will have at least 24 years of supported lifetime (VB6 shipped in '98). So why has VB6, 'the un-killable cockroach' in the Windows ecosystem, managed to thrive? 'Cockroaches are successful because they're simple,' explains David S. Platt. 'They do what they need to do for their ecological niche and no more. Visual Basic 6 did what its creators intended for its market niche: enable very rapid development of limited programs by programmers of lesser experience.' But when Microsoft proudly trotted out VB.NET, the 'full-fledged language' designed to turn VB6 'bus drivers' into 'fighter pilots,' they got a surprise. 'Almost all Visual Basic 6 programmers were content with what Visual Basic 6 did,' explains Platt. 'They were happy to be bus drivers: to leave the office at 5 p.m. (or 4:30 p.m. on a really nice day) instead of working until midnight; to play with their families on weekends instead of trudging back to the office; to sleep with their spouses instead of pulling another coding all-nighter and eating cold pizza for breakfast. They didn't lament the lack of operator overloading or polymorphism in Visual Basic 6, so they didn't say much.'"

It's been a business doing pleasure with you.

Working...