knowitall

About

Banned
Username
knowitall
Joined
Visits
170
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
825
Badges
1
Posts
1,648

Reactions

654Like0Dislike55Informative

  • Apple officially acquired NeXT 23 years ago, changing everything

    knowitallknowitall
    NeXTStep was absolutely pivotal for Apple.
    designrwatto_cobra

  • WhatsApp client flaw allows hackers to read files stored on any device

    knowitallknowitall
    I am missing something at the last line?

    Still elevated rights are needed to do more than local damage. 
    watto_cobra

  • What the EU mandate for a common smartphone charger means

    knowitallknowitall
    EU is a joke of course, its second biggest member just left.
    This is a simple problem, with a simple solution: chargers should be universal, not only in voltage (110/220) but also support intelligent charging and have a (for example) USB-C female connector. Added bonus is that computers, most people have, can already charge such devices, even without buying a separate charger.
    Problem(s) solved.
    In practice this is already happening, because Chinese device makers include a (male) USB connector to (whatever) device connector, but exclude the transformator (to save cost).
    So, effectively, the industry, in its race to the bottom (prices) regulates itself.
    Time to unplug the EU too.

    razorpit

  • Apple to attend meeting promoting easy access to health data

    knowitallknowitall
    knowitall said:
    When it isn't absolutely clear that the ‘patient’ is in demand and it isn't (physically
    ) possible to share the data by doctors and others with similar capabilities, without explicit authorization (of the ‘patient’), this is a very bad idea.


    This isn't the problem (as emergency care overrides consent and HCPs are able to request access to health data for their patients without requiring a specific authorisation by the patient.)

    The problem is that the patients themselves are largely walled off from their own health data. This is known to be a source of a few problems, such as incorrect diagnosis, and HCPs not having a clear understanding of the patient in time-critical scenarios (e.g. ER), this also gives rise to unnecessary costs in testing. On the lower-risk scale it also stymies patients from easily seeking out additional care, receiving cost effectively treatments, seeking second opinions or making more informed lifestyle decisions.

    Part of the rationale in keeping the records out of patients hands is because the quality of the record may also be poor and require significant interpretation, as one commenter noted a range of conditions may be falsely diagnosed to take advantage of incomplete insurance coverage. Another doctor would likely be able to recognise such tactics in the record, while a patient may see the conditions and make incorrect health decisions, or suffer a psychological impact from falsely believing they are very unwell.

    There is also the ability to limit the records to health care professionals, but allow the patient to carry them with them in a decentralised way (this would avoid the problem of hacking, as the records would not be centrally stored.)
    All requests of information are allowed?
    Thats certainly not the case in the Netherlands because for example a company doctor is not allowed to get information of any doctor treating the ‘patient’ unless explicitly approved (by the ‘patient’).

    But if so, the problem is a lot bigger and the patients data rights must first be firmly established.

    Patients themself not able to get to the information is of course insane and has to be rectified. Its also a patients right to  clear all data and to request that no centralized health records are created.

    You mention privacy concerns, thats one thing, but the reality is that this kind of information is sold to the highest bidder, say insurance companies and all kinds of other companies seeking ways to monetize this. 
    Also, records made by other doctors are either completely discarded (because every doctor thinks his own measurements and diagnosis is the best)  or seen as completely and unquestionably true and so biasing (often in a very negative way) the professional opinion of the doctor reading it.
    And last, records can contain or obtain mistakes that can be deadly, thats why all data must be questioned and measured again, invalidating the whole purpose of such records.
    I would advice not to use them.  


    GeorgeBMac

  • Apple to attend meeting promoting easy access to health data

    knowitallknowitall
    When it isn't absolutely clear that the ‘patient’ has full control over this data and it isn't (physically
    ) possible to share the data by doctors and others with similar capabilities, without explicit authorization (of the ‘patient’), this is a very bad idea.

    edit: fix
    watto_cobra