That doesn't _explain_ anything. Compare the level of detail to http://www.fastmailstatus.com.
2,559 karma · joined July 21, 2010
When I switched from Gmail a few years ago (https://masnick.org/2013/07/19/fastmail/), one of the most striking changes was how fast FastMail's interface was compared to Gmail. FastMail did a huge update to their search code just as I switched, and I haven't looked back.
BTW I don't get all the negativity in the comments about Mac-only tools. A huge number of developers use Macs specifically for well-designed third party software with *nix goodness. I wish other platforms had the same quality of third party software, but they just don't. This is mostly because it is much more difficult to make money selling software for other platforms, for whatever reason.
In any case, I don't see the justification for ragging on someone for developing for (1) the platform they choose to use themselves and (2) the only platform where indie devs can make any money.
The reason this is important is that long term sustainability is probably the most important feature for websites for non-nerds. People just don't want to deal with moving content to a new service, learning a new interface, etc. For this reason I would only recommend something that looks like it will be around for 5+ years. I'm confident that SquareSpace is stable and has a business model that works, whatever other flaws they have.
Infection control practices are assumed to be effective when adhered to. With a disease like Ebola, it's almost guaranteed that health care providers will follow the rules to the letter, at least in the US (and hopefully everywhere).
So: scary.
"Contact and airborne precautions are indicated for suspected and confirmed cases" refers to:
- Contact: wearing disposable gowns and gloves to interact with the patient
- Airborne: putting the patient in a negative pressure room (to avoid spreading air from the room around the hospital), and wearing a N-95 respirator or PAPR (http://www.3m.com/Product/information/Powered-Air-Purifying-...) in addition to the contact precaution stuff.
Source: http://www.cdc.gov/HAI/settings/outpatient/basic-infection-c...
That gives you a sense of what you'd need to do to safely interact/care for someone with Ebola. However, remember that several doctors treating Ebola have come down with the disease during the current epidemic. Hopefully (for the rest of us), there was some sort of infection control lapse that lead to their infection, rather than these infection control measures not being sufficient.
The New Yorker has such great content – I'm excited they are adopting a less user-hostile interface for accessing it.
So many problems.
- Their control panel was over plain HTTP (not HTTPS)
- Super confusing interface, very difficult to set up, looked like it was held together by chewing gum and duct tape
- They continue to refuse to actually delete my account, even though I asked for (and got) a refund
Digital Ocean is 1000x better if you want cheap cloud hosting IMO.
I see this enough in papers that it seems pretty standard to me, and it especially makes sense in a paper where the editors think there are potential ethical issues.
If I was an author of this paper, I would have actually spent a sentence or two explaining why there was not a risk to human subjects, etc.
The way they address this by basically saying it is ok because of the ToS that no one reads is the worst possible way to handle this. It seems to me more like no one thought about it at all than that the editors carefully considered it. I just don't see how you get from recognizing big ethical issues to not even addressing them in the manuscript.
> But, if that were the case, the peer reviewers and the journal in which it was published should have flagged that. That it was published shows they didn't have any significant concerns.
This would not be a scientific ethics issue if they explained their IRB review in the manuscript. It is so unusual to not do this that it is a reasonable assumption something funny is going on, in my experience.
For example, the journal could be incentivized to look the other way in order to publish a high publicity article. I'm NOT saying that's what PNAS did, but just because something is published doesn't mean it's ethical. (See: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20137807)
In this case, I don't think there was actual risk but just reading the PNAS paper it doesn't sound like the study went through the proper process. If it was reviewed by an IRB then it did go through the proper process and it's ethically sound, but a PR nightmare.
When you publish a paper, you are supposed to write in the body of the manuscript if it's been approved by an IRB and what their ruling was. I'm surprised it was published without this, even though it apparently was?
It's also appropriate to address ethical issues head-on in a paper about a study that may be controversial from an ethical perspective.
If it really was approved by an IRB, then the researchers are ethically in the clear but totally botched the PR.
If not, then I think the study was not ethical.
The key feature for me is that you can access messages through a web app, and through native desktop apps on Mac and Windows. This means that I can really use it with people who aren't on Macs/iOS all day for iMessage, which is most of the world outside of tech unfortunately.
The open protocol means that anyone can write their own client and pull out message transcripts.
The business model is a little sketchy (donated Russian social network money I think) but at some level who cares: if it disappears I can just switch to something else (that probably won't be as good unfortunately).
I know there has been some controversy about their encryption, but I would not trust any IM platform with perfect security. I care much more about reliability and availability on multiple platforms, which is where Telegram wins hands down.
A few things that may be helpful for people considering making the switch:
- If FastMail's IMAP import doesn't work for you, this might (it worked for me): http://protips.maxmasnick.com/export-gmail-to-fastmail-or-an...
- If you want to try FastMail "risk free" so you can switch back to Gmail if you don't like it: http://protips.maxmasnick.com/how-to-test-fastmail-risk-free...
- My own writeup about my experience switching to FastMail from Gmail: http://www.maxmasnick.com/2013/07/19/fastmail/ (discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6069944)
I disagree that the existing public key repositories are what people should be using and that the twitter/github integration is pointless. In today's world, we often want to communicate with people we have never met in person. An old tweet or a gist that hasn't changes in a long time seems like a pretty safe way of verifying someone's identity. Apart from the NSA[^1], it's hard to imagine a situation where both keybase was compromised with a bad public key, and twitter/github was compromised by invisibly changing an old tweet (not possible to edit without a big hack) or a gist (not possible to edit without creating a change history within a big hack). So this makes a lot of sense to me as a way to easily verify identity.
[^1]: At this point I'm not sure I would trust any encrypted online communication if the NSA wanted to read it.
I wrote a blog post about switching from Gmail to FastMail last summer that may be of interest to anyone considering switching: http://www.maxmasnick.com/2013/07/19/fastmail/ (HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6069944).
Also totally agree re: quantified-self time tracking and its usefulness.
1) Please, PLEASE make sure it's quick/easy to enter time with the keyboard. Right now the main log time interface doesn't let you tab to select the project drop down. I feel like I should be able to tab to this field after the optional comment field. Enter anywhere in the form (except maybe the optional comment) should save the entry and get me ready to enter a new one. For your target audience (devs), I think good keyboard-only support is key.
2) There should be an easy way to see the total time for each day, maybe just next to the date on the Activity page. In any case, I shouldn't have to run a query to see how much I've worked today.
3) Have queries (via the Overview tab) alter the URL so a query can be bookmarked. Ideally this would be with relative dates so I could bookmark https://ding.io/overview?user=1&project=x&client=y&time=this....
This looks really good. Harvest is the de facto for time tracking with good UX, but even their UX could use some refinement (my 3 comments above all apply to Harvest also, I think). You're definitely giving them a run for their money.
BTW, I really like having the client and project in one searchable drop down. Separating these was one of my biggest annoyances with Harvest.
I think there are a lot of 3rd parties that integrate with the new Basecamp to provide time tracking. Harvest is the one that immediately comes to mind. While this might seem to not be as good as a first party experience, I would argue that it is better to use a real time tracking app like Harvest, which is waaaaay more capable than the time tracking in Basecamp Classic.
Whatever criticisms you might have of Basecamp, they are certainly focused on avoiding feature creep and bloat. I suspect they agree with my assessment that Harvest et al. provide a better time tracking experience, so there is no reason to complicate their product with a (poorer) duplication of their features.
With H1N1, there is actual risk of serious illness or death for young, healthy people. Public awareness of this is key in increasing vaccination rates.
Even without H1N1, the US government is pushing flu vaccines hard for everyone [1]. Apart from a few very rare contraindications, pretty much everyone is eligible for a flu vaccine. There are essentially no serious side effects.
So, you should get your flu shot.
1: The government's goal is to have 90% of 18-64 year olds vaccinated for seasonal influenza by 2020 (http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/objec...). We are a long way away from that now, with vaccination rates for the general population around 45% (http://www.cdc.gov/flu/fluvaxview/nifs-estimates-nov2013.htm).
(Posting again here so you (might) be notified.)