"Chromium, after all, is a Linux-based OS entering the smartbook/netbook market at a time when the product segment is already being well served by a variety of Linux distros, XP, and Windows 7."
Remember when Google entered the search engine space? It was being well served by Yahoo, Dogpile, MSN, Excite and a bunch of other search engine vendors... I mean really, how could they improve internet searching?
> Each mail was in a random mix of upper and
> lower cases, unformatted and written in
> strange language.
Sounds like typical l33t speak. Maybe she turns into a hacker in her sleep?
While I'm a firm believer in checklists, I have my doubts about the study. It sounds to me like this might have been conducted by a guy who has a bias toward having checklists (which I do too).
It'd be difficult to measure how many lives were saved by the checklist (as opposed to other factors). I bet he looked at the deaths, and then looked for mistakes in procedures (that could have been avoided with a checklist).
But there are some serious issues with this methodology. Were these patients going to die of something else? Would the checklist have prevented the mistake? And how many patients inadvertently lived due to mistakes that would have died, had checklist procedures been followed?
This message was posted in Slashdot tradition - without reading the article.
If using checklists saved even a *single* life, isn't it worth it?
There is nothing so easy but that it becomes difficult when you do it reluctantly. -- Publius Terentius Afer (Terence)
