Some people consider it verbose? Wow. After starting with backbone and then later on discovering angular, I can confidently say it is not as verbose as other well known frameworks (such as backbone).
Apparently the same reviewer says it's worse[0], unless he's talking about a different book. This surprises me based on Schneier's popularity, but having not read the book and not being an expert on crypto, I wouldn't know.
There should have been some warning on this link. That picture of that grieving (I assume) father was too much. I get the point the author is trying to make but it didn't have to be an /r/wtf subreddit.
"Some places like Matasano, Stripe, Github and I’m sure many others are aware of this and are equally aware that it has the potential to harm their company a great deal." I actually had the pleasure interviewing with Matasano. I thought their process was fun and really enlightening in regards to what they do. Everyone I met during the process were really cool (and extremely smart).
Honestly, there were none. I think giving someone a challenge to do a their own pace was a perfect idea. I interview candidates in a discussion format so I can attempt to gauge passion, competency, and potential. I have been interviewed by startups where the guy on the other end of the phone seems annoyed to even have the call. The fact someone in your position in the company does direct phone calls to engage your candidates is EXTREMELY positive because you are showing care for your company by being that involved to know your candidate.
Heading out to Mountain View for an on-site interview with Matasano next week. So far the process has been great for me too. It has been challenging but they (tptacek and co.) still manage to do a great job of moving things along quickly.
Hopefully I don't scare them off after they've flown me out (and I've spent 16 hours on planes and in airports).
SEEKING WORK -freelance/remote -
Skills:
- ASP.NET
- NodeJS
- SQL Server
- PostgreSQL
- HTML5
- Javascript
- CSS
Contact mac1175@gmail.com for more info.
I JUST bought the kit yesterday. The FDA is right though. Imagine making extreme decisions (e.g., double masectomy to avoid breast cancer) based upon the information. This is making me consider cancelling my order.
If you are screening for something, the first test should have a low rate of false negatives. Anyone testing positive on that test should take a second--possibly more expensive--test with a low rate of false positives.
If you remove big blobs of flesh from yourself on the basis of a single test, you are not making your medical decisions wisely. The only decision you should be making on the basis of 23&Me results is whether to take another test that is more specifically targeted at the potential problem.
If 23&Me says you have BRCA, you don't get a double mastectomy. You talk to your doctor. You perform self-exams more often and more thoroughly. You get additional screenings that are not cost-effective for the general public with a lower risk profile. That's the whole point of consumer-grade genetic screening.
If I did see something that suggested a possibility of something, I would go the direction of what you mentioned in the last paragraph.
Although I agree with the FDA's actions, a consumer getting a thorough genetic exam is possibly what prompted this. Check out the artidcle http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-25/fda-tells-google-ba.... Turns out United Healthcare raised a concern which I believe is might be money-related. If your test results suggest a high possibility of some health issue from an non-FDA approved company and you requested a more accurate test, then I can see the health insurance companies getting involved.
you would not take serious action in any condition based on an cheap DNA test, would you?
I would suspect that it might serve as a possible flag and then you can talk to your doctor to further investigate any issue.
Plus 23andme is clear when showing the results that everything is based on probabilities, there's not a single %100 change of anything, it just tells you that people with similar DNA markers (in X, Y or Z study) seem to have a higher/lower chance of X or Y.
Have a google image search for "coloidal silver". See the people who have turned themselves blue. permanently blue - it's not going to change.
People are stupid. This isn't a label on a chainsaw saying "don't lick the blade". This is reasonable regulation of a product being marketed as a medical product.
I wouldn't but some would. I am more interested in my genetic lineage. To get a more accurate test like the one Angelina Jolie did would be a better option.
Good ol' puritanical work ethic. I do my best to work smarter. One of the reasons I try to stay current with the latest technology is to see what benefits it would have on my work efficiency.
