Consider when you plug it in. How do you assure that it makes and maintains a ground connection first and breaks it last? How well will it handle the momentary shorts as you plug in? Analog signals in the audible range tend to be fairly insensitive to all of that. Digital connections operating in the MHz range are a different story.
It's funny how IT is a pure cost center right up until it suggests shutting down one of those pure costs for 5 minutes. Then suddenly it's "OMG NO! we'll loose bazillions!"
It could easily be alarm fatigue. After the 500 billionth 'red alert' that turned out to be someone checking their bank balance during lunch, a warning or 2 about a suspicious attachment can easily fly under the radar.
It happens in hospitals too and sometimes people die as a result.
But it would have a central post. Axial connections don't work for this application.
It is worth noting that it is mostly poorly made USB connectors that have the center post break with no particular force. A manufacturer that uses such an inferior part will choose the inferior version of any standard connector.
Looking at that study, it shows a small potential benefit to people who have already had a heart attack but is confounded by administration of another non-statin cholesterol drug. What we're looking for is benefit to the vast majority of people prescribed the drugs in spite of showing no sign of a heart attack.
If we're just not going to worry about efficacy anymore, why not just open a snake oil stand? Even better, since efficacy doesn't matter, we can save money by administering statins in homeopathic doses. One pill could make 6 billion doses so strong you only need to take one and you're good for life!
They could recoup the losses from the extra studies bu trimming their advertising back to more reasonable levels.
Consider, would you buy a new car if it was sold 'as-is'' and they can't provide any evidence it will run?
If you used no particular force, what would keep a symmetrical connector from snapping off the same way?
It's an excuse to have pie. Pull the stick from your ass and have some Pi.
Eplerenone is not a statin. It's effects aren't even similar to a statin. Why even cite it?
Oddly, statins may not be a total loss, there is some evidence that they may be useful within 24 hours of a heart attack or for people with chronic heart failure. Both seem unrelated to LDL levels. Those studies are paywalled, so I can't read enough to see if there's really anything to them or not (you'd be surprised how many studies summaries differ from the actual outcome).
That is a common statement that I actually disagree with. I know somebody who struggles with drug side-effects and constantly ends up taking what on paper should be sub-optimal therapies because they're still better than nothing and the mainline therapies cannot be tolerated. I don't think that it is ever to give doctors more options
The key part of my statement is "for the particular patient". In your friend's case, the newer drugs may be justifiable if the side effects are more tolerable. For someone that doesn't have problems with the side effects, the older less expensive drugs will be better. I fully support the choice being available, I just want to see better choices made rather than grabbing whatever's newest without even considering the cost/benefit. Perhaps from the medical community collectively realizing a need to do better, or perhaps approvals restricted to cases where the first line treatment is ineffective or intolerable. But in the general case, I think "better than nothing" isn't exactly a ringing endorsement when there are already other medications available.
I agree that no study can be comprehensive enough to completely eliminate the possibility of rare side effects and interactions. Only time can tell that tale. That is a really good reason to prefer older and better proven drugs unless the new one has a REALLY compelling benefit.
Based on what you're saying, it seems very possible to me that there are ranges at which the transponder signal can be receive but the skin paint has not.
Signals in both directions will attenuate according to the normal square-of-distance law. Suppose that the aircraft is at a distance from the radar such that the signal is attenuated to just below the detection threshold. That is the radar can not get a skin paint -- but barely. However, the strength of the radar signal that strikes the aircraft at that range is 4X (in an ideal world; in reality its probably even higher) the strength of the signal that arrives back at the radar receiver. This is because doubling the distance (which assumes perfect reflection; in reality it's not quite that good) will quarter the power.
Therefore, the transponder can very likely detect the incoming radar signal -- and respond to it -- at ranges beyond which the radar can get a skin paint, since it receives 4X as much power.
The question, then, is whether the transponder replies with greater energy than the reflection at those long ranges. If so, then there is a zone in which the transponder signal can be detected but the skin paint cannot. Turning off the transponder in that zone would make the plane instantly and completely disappear from radar.
I actually gave that some thought, since it really does work well for stereo audio. Then I realized that it's the nature of the signal that makes that OK. Nothing in the audio signal is all that sensitive to being briefly shorted or connected to the wrong pin. OTOH, for USB both sides REALLY need ground to connect first and to have power connect only to power. It also has to work at considerably higher frequency.
Oddly enough, many kids seem to be fine with trying another orientation, it's the adults that try cramming connectors together.
I accept that all else being equal, a plug that doesn't care about orientation is slightly better. But all else is not equal here. The Apple connector adds complexity to the design that increases cost and failure rate. To add insult to injury, some of that complexity is added specifically to accomplish a goal that is detrimental to me. A universal power connector is too important to let a single sue-happy corporation control it.
As for the Linux thing, I choose Linux FOR it's usability. Offer me a free copy of Windows or OSX and I will still choose Linux.
Because the keyed side and the smooth side is so very clear, with or without looking.
So you acknowledge that adding a bump on the top would address the issue adequately.
I don't think they really ignored them. They just prioritized them incorrectly.
Let's pretend to ignore the giant squid in the kitchen.
Something like that.
The next Vesuvius is about to erupt under corporate headquarters.
So... the emails warning of the threat were treated as spam? That's kinda funny.
It's not worth fixing with a proprietary socket that actively detects generic versions and rejects them while more than doubling the cost. It would be worth fixing with a fully open design. Or it could be fixed with color coding the shell around the connectors. It could even be fixed by putting a bump on the top of the connector to make orientation clear.
At the same time, I don't see a bunch or people ripping their hair out because their house key needs a particular orientation.
Honestly, how hard can be be to look after the source of executive pay?