Point of fact, I’m not bobs_monkey, the originator of the rhetorical tone. Fax in healthcare continues to survive well past its prime because there is an inherent loophole: analog data transfer is functionally unsuited to encryption. This allows fax to be operated at a “best effort” level of security. There are handling protocols that are meant to keep traditional fax transmissions as private as possible, but these are layer 8 processes with limited enforceability. Beyond that, traditional fax represents a pathway around requirements on encryption while still meeting HIPAA compliance standards.

FOIP is an improvement, but it still allows for interoperability with a traditional fax machine connected to a POTS line in some GP’s office that they’re unwilling to part with. That means the FOIP user can only be confident of the transmission being secure on their side. I can’t speak to the overall adaptation of FOIP in hospital systems, but I do know that there are non-isolated instances of hospitals still relying on traditional fax as opposed to adopting a cloud-fax solution. Hell, there are still major hospitals using SL-100s as their primary phone switches.

I don’t even want to get into codec mismatches, because that falls out of scope when it comes to a privacy discussion.

Long story short, achieving HIPAA compliance is a low bar with regards to fax, and if that were to change I believe we’d see fax disappear (finally!) shortly thereafter.

I’m not disagreeing with you, but the fax loophole does need to be closed.

By now I should know better
Your queen is never free

So tell me about your little
Gambit on file c

Chesse you can always sell
En passant to me

I agree with all you’ve said, and I tend to add both systems when expressing a meaningful measurement. My statement is pointed more towards situations where someone hasn’t done so and it throws some poor soul into a meltdown.

Counterpoint: there is no continent named “America.” “North American,” “South American,” and even “Central American,” or “Latin American,” for added specificity, are completely sufficient demonyms for the denizens of the continents (and subreigon) writ large.

Regarding weights and measures:

I don’t think in metric, and there’s a strong possibility that I never will. I came of age in an educational system that taught metric units alongside imperial, but also in a day-to-day world that heavily skews towards imperial units.

If I see metric units that I can’t immediately interpret in my head, it’s absolutely trivial for me to get the conversion by other means. It’s equally as trivial for someone who uses metric to make the opposite conversion.

Anyone losing their shit about it is acting performatively.

I agree with your list, but I also have to point out the irony of throwing in a “for the 'muricans” in reference to an American multinational company.

A pop-tart

Blackberry jam is my go-to

The Aquabats

That’s a big reaction for a tongue-in-cheek comment on an unpopular opinion post! Joe, is that you? I’m sorry they used Steve in Crossroads instead of you, but you gotta let it go! Sometimes the student becomes the teacher!

Joking aside, the whole “soul” thing can be seen as somewhat of a compliment in a sense. Blackmore, Yngwie, Satch, Petrucci, Vai, Johnson, and other neoclassical players strove for technical perfection. The bits and bobs of music that are generally lumped into the idea of “soul” are the mistakes, the imperfections, the unintended, the miniscule fuckups. As an off the top example, think of Merry Clayton’s voice cracking as she belted out a vocal masterwork in her pajamas and curlers after being dragged out of bed at midnight to back up Mick Jagger. It’s imperfect, it’s unrepeatable, and it’s amazing.

Contrast that with what the technical shredders were intending to do: they wanted to hit every note with exacting precision every time they played. It’s no less impressive than those one-off moments like Gimme Shelter, but it’s markedly different. Listeners who don’t identify with the sound sometimes perceive a sort of sterility in the style, whether deserved or not. The degree of technicality alone can almost come across as machine-like. That doesn’t mean that it has no merit, or that anyone who feels it deeply is in some way “defective”. These guys wouldn’t have had 40+ year careers if nobody was feeling what they were doing.

Enjoy what you enjoy, groove to what grooves you, and above all else, be secure enough in your own taste that a bit of banter about a genre doesn’t seem like a personal attack. Remember: Barry Manilow has sold over 85 million albums, so there really is a market for everything!

No? Well…

For me, that description fits Yngwie more than Satriani. Satch had at least 1%, maybe even a whopping 2% soul. Vai is probably sneaking up on double digits.

I like the list, but there’s a disturbing lack of Steve Earle.

Any system capable of countering a determined attempt to spread misinformation would by design attach penalties to such lies, and those penalties would be enforced on the liars. What successful fix could even be proposed that withholds blame?

Yup, I’m almost certain it’s an IBM 5160 series, maybe even a 5162.

Carry on…