Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment: Sure (Score 2) 307

by hilather (#48875623) Attached to: Blackberry CEO: Net Neutrality Means Mandating Cross-Platform Apps

“Unlike BlackBerry, which allows iPhone users to download and use our BBM service, Apple does not allow BlackBerry or Android users to download Apple’s iMessage messaging service,” he wrote.

Sure it does now. Had BBM been on other devices 5+ years ago, I don't think Blackberry would be in the shape it is now. Around that time BBM was all the rage, unfortunately it was Blackberry only. Now no one uses BBM....

Comment: Re:rubbish (Score 2) 164

by hilather (#48814731) Attached to: Man Saves Wife's Sight By 3D Printing Her Tumor

this entire story is nonsense, speaking as a qualified medical physicist in radiotherapy with decades of experience. First of all, for him to make a 3D model of a tumour, he is having to decide based on CT and/or MRI data what is or isnt the tumour, which by the way you might have noticed is the same information from the CT and/or MR scan that qualified radiologists and oncologists look at, and using treatment diagnosis and planning software (including auto segmentation techniques). So unless this guy suddenly read a book one night and became a fucking oncologist, he didnt pick out SHIT from a CT data set that a qualified oncologist "missed". Nor did he tell surgeons "how to get at" the tumour in a way that implies that was the holdup, like he figured it out while people who work with this for decades didnt get it.

ah now wait a minute, halfway down the article

"So although the first doctors told them to wait, Balzer and Scott sent the MRI results to a handful of neurologists around the country. Nearly all of them agreed that Scott needed surgery."

correct. OTHER QUALIFIED DOCTORS diagnosed the issue. Not some fucking clown with a 3D printer.

"The tumor had grown substantially, which indicated a far more grave condition than was initially diagnosed. But back at home, Balzer used Photoshop to layer the new DICOM files on top of the old images, and realized that the tumor hadn’t grown at all — the radiologist had just measured from a different point on the image."

this makes no sense at all and has either been misreported, or he went to a pretend hospital staffed by retards. NO INFORMATiON WHATSOEVER came to light from a 3D printed model of the SAME FUCKING DATA thats in the image. If someone measured wrong on a scan thats an error, just go back and review the images, or send them off again for a 2nd opinion rather than waste your time printing a fucking useless model

he sent a 3d model /image round when instead all he had to do was send the SOURCE DICOM files to these other doctors, which would have resulted in the exact same solution.

Fuck, every single time you see a story in your own field and realise its utter bullshit, you realise that ALL stories must be fucking bullshit, its just that you cant check up on stuff youre not involved with so easily

IANAD, and appreciate your analysis of the article, and generally agree with the points you make about the article. Articles are written by journalists that generally the reports end up coming out like a school yard game of telephone. But I think the 3d printed representation of the tumor may have been useful. I myself find physical objects and representations much easier to understand and comprehend than virtual equivalents.

Comment: Re:I considered doing the same myself (Score 1) 139

You shouldn't have to lock your data down. I can see GPL'd code and can use it and distribute it but I can't close source it and then resell it as a proprietary app and then say "hey if you didn't want me to use it you shouldn'thave made it available". That is the license we agree to. A clear license lines out acceptable use and it looks to me like they are trying to strike a balance between being solvent and user friendly. But freeloaders will ruin it for others.

I agree you shouldn't have to go to any extremes to lock down your own data. But when publishing an website online, there are certain standards you need to follow if you don't want people copying the data on your website. If they are allowing search engines to index their proprietary data, then they should have no expectation that others will not do the same.

Comment: I considered doing the same myself (Score 1) 139

The OSVDB went pay a few years ago. They have a wealth of interesting information and use to be fully open source however due to lack of community involvement they decided that the open source model wasn't working for them. If the OSVDB has a problem with people scraping their site, they should really update (or in their case - create) their robots.txt. I was interested in this data myself a year or so ago until I found out they wanted me to pay a subscription to access information I can view for free on their website and screen scrape for free if I really wanted to. Further more, I noticed that google has completely cached their site because they take no preventative measures against it. If anyone wanted this data, they could easily screen scrape it from the google cache and the OSVDB would be none the wiser. Why should anyone pay for data that the OSVDB has literally done nothing to protect?

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (2) Thank you for your generous donation, Mr. Wirth.