Monday, December 28, 2009
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
10 Trends for 2010 -Comments
1. Last Season.. : Cloud Commuting needs only the benefit of Circumstance, not happenstance. Cloud Commuting's biggest obstacles are Security and Management Insecurity. For companies who depend on Social Interaction among creative's, it may be slightly more difficult, but do-able. Cisco's advances in "presence" along with IBM's, argue that one good approach is for an expansion office to incorporate a true Home Office execution, with Conferencing, multi-screen setups including "Whiteboard" and Virtual Recording (a la meeting SOX requirements) wherein the "specs and equipment for a worker's "virtual office" are generated by the company, and maintained by them. We're not talking a lot of money, either; certainly MUCH LESS that the equivalent cost of an worker's office incorporated into an office building framework, so much less as to make it a "no brainer."
In addition there are the societal benefits of caving, on average 300 Commuting hours, 475 +/- gallons of gas and tons of pollution, roadway maintenance.
Worker satisfaction? Up. Worker productivity? Up.
Management anxiety? Up, but declining over time as results become apparent.
Expect the "coded network," an internal protocol that allows for completely secure use of Cloud Commuting
2. BYOC.. To the extent that this becomes part of the "tiered security" that's coming, this may be helpful. To the extent that Cloud Commuting takes hold, it becomes a non-issue.
3. App Store(s): Unlikely, at least in the Cloud Commuting environment. It also flies in the face of using software to increase productivity. In the future, AI-assisted Personal and Office systems will utilize software assembled "on the fly" to accomplish tasks of enormous complexity. "How many ABC customers have purchased Product A in the last 6 months. Calculate rate of usage and projected purchases for next six months?" Analyze Energy interruptions in Baltimore, Maryland for last six months and Year-by-Year for last ten years."
Personal use, personal Clouds (which are coming) a strong possibility.
THE App is this arena is the Personal Avatar, and AI dedicated to You, and resident in Your Cloud.
However, to the extent that Mobile becomes the Convergence vehicle for Data and Communications in the near future, and assuming the FCC creates the needed Bandwidth framework. it remains to apply the AI to Converged device capabilities to get to the same place.
4. Mobilized (and Monetized) locals: Here we separate Corporate utility from Personal. The continuing integration of computer program-driven technology into everything from house energy metering, to house appliance and security management, the "Smart House" of past failure, will finally come to fruition. Corporately, the evolution of Cloud Commuting obviates some of the CRM problems that continue to grow with the complexity of corporate existence with a society. To whatever extent a business's daily existence is impacted by automation, the objective is to make it easier for Customers, including B2B and B2C to satisfy their needs and fulfill their missions more efficiently. Most importantly, the Newspaper industry, on the verge of becoming the "buggy whips" of the Millennium, are rapidly adopting a "head-in-the-sand" attitude instead of doing the one thing that could guarantee their future. (I could tell you more about this, but I'd have to charge).
5. Online Credit and Banking. This is an accelerating trend. Only the lack of Tiered, foolproof security, prevents further evolution, even a revolution in the banking process for Business and Consumer interests. These will be solved, there will be 99% LESS physical Bank Branch locations in a generation, with all banking performed electronically. Not only will physical banking disappear (see Cloud Commuting) , the new Bank Business Model will be a Geico-type model. Complete dedication to operating efficiency, automated operations, constant devotion to analyzing and reducing areas of expense for the benefit of consumer loyalty and profitability as a desired result.
6. Social Nets: One of the Social Nets (interesting the use of "Nets", maybe as in Internet?) will offer a new framework for individual involvement, one which takes the important step of changing the Convenient to the Necessary, the Voluntary to the "can't live without it."
(I's tell you what it is but I'd have to charge for it-sorry).
7. This and Social go together, as far as I can see. You already know a lot, maybe more than you want to, about your Facebook Friends and more recently, Groups. The Business side of this framework, the Lead Generation and Conversion to Sale process, will work for some applications, services and Groups, not so much for individuals overall.
8. Energy Show (aka Cloud Energy). But, more than just the Information Management of Energy that this implies, will be the absolute rapid evolution of self-sustained Home Energy production and Management. We are a short way from the technology that will make any household grid-independent, efficiently and cost-effectively, even though it will take a generation to either rebuild, retrofit or build-as-new a household-based, discrete framework for energy and communication.
Business will continue to depend on traditional grids, even though security considerations will encourage long-term moves to grid-independence or back up energy management. Cloud commuting changes the equation as well, since the need for offices and all the related infrastructure and energy dependence is reconstituted in the Home Office framework. The up-to-now somewhat lackadaisical attitude of Energy Suppliers and supply security considerations will be forcibly subjected to "attitude readjustment" as Cloud Commuting, Cloud Health and Cloud Education needs make imperative reliable, 100% uptime energy supplies.
9. See 8.
10. Multi-player (Million Player) Game "Clouds." Not going to happen. Takes away the individual competitive nature of the Online Gaming universe. Changing the nature of Gaming to include managing Army and military components as large-scale forces and redesigning the game universe to accomplish that-see Civilization II, Alpha Centauri, Sim City and all the rest to speculate about that evolution. Second Life-type Clouds, individually tailored "Own your own City, or Planet, or Universe!! Click here for Payment Plans." (Now, I'd like the complexity and Strategy of that framework!)
Not included in your list,but things I'd like to see added as 2010 Starters:
**Cloud Education; a completely home-based system of Instruction and Learning, AI assisted, CQ-motivated (Curiosity Quotient) (See "They Can All Be Geniuses" http://www.helium.com/items/1557879-education-computer-assisted-learning-technology-based-learning-cloud-education).
**Cloud Health: Home-based diagnostic and AI-assisted software that looks at "you" as often as needed, daily if necessary, monitors, through scanner-based diagnostics and a few-very limited needed-accessories for specialized functions that allow medical Professional health-as-a-Distance, some of which is being done now with Remote Diagnostics, and even distance-directed surgical procedures.
Barry Dennis
Barry Dennis
Woodstock, Maryland
1-443-319-4444
Woodstock, Maryland
1-443-319-4444
Monday, November 23, 2009
FCC/Telecom/Cable/Berkman Study Broadband
It's amusing that the highly tarnished "pots" (the Cable, Telco and Wireless monopolies) are calling the ideologically disadvantaged "kettles" black.
Separation of Content and Infrastructure is the only true way to introduce and develop competition for Access and for Content presentation.
Reasonable access at reasonable prices ensures that diversified Content finds it's voice: Changing monopolistically-generated and subsidy-supported Infrastructure pipelines into competitive access gateways is absolutely necessary.
Cable, Telco and Wireless have to "spin off" their Content(programming, ISPs, Premium and Pay-per-view , other) into separately owned and managed companies so that Content providers can compete.
Content providers will have to offer combinations of programming using both metered and tiered usage business models that will guarantee lower competitive prices for consumers and business, and many, many more Content products and services.
If the FCC (with the FTC's genuinely offered input) fails to lead the way to Separation of Content and Infrastructure, we'll know who's been "persuaded" by lobbying, contributions and other pressures to again make the American Business and Consumer the victims in another regulatory rape by ideologues.
Separation of Content and Infrastructure is the only true way to introduce and develop competition for Access and for Content presentation.
Reasonable access at reasonable prices ensures that diversified Content finds it's voice: Changing monopolistically-generated and subsidy-supported Infrastructure pipelines into competitive access gateways is absolutely necessary.
Cable, Telco and Wireless have to "spin off" their Content(programming, ISPs, Premium and Pay-per-view , other) into separately owned and managed companies so that Content providers can compete.
Content providers will have to offer combinations of programming using both metered and tiered usage business models that will guarantee lower competitive prices for consumers and business, and many, many more Content products and services.
If the FCC (with the FTC's genuinely offered input) fails to lead the way to Separation of Content and Infrastructure, we'll know who's been "persuaded" by lobbying, contributions and other pressures to again make the American Business and Consumer the victims in another regulatory rape by ideologues.
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Redesign Health Care system using modern technology and health care business model
As long as we're questioning the astounding growth in health care costs, let's get a discussion of WHY out in front.
More new drugs coming to market, all for symptom relief, virtually none for cures. Does that strike you oddly?
It does me.
And considering that the side effects of many of these drugs are more threatening than the underlying disease, why do we -the FDA, Congress, us as Citizens, continue to allow conditions, programs and processes that are so obviously at the expense of the American public, the health care consumers like the retired and disabled?
Everybody in the health "food chain" blames the other guy; remember the old criminal defense, "SODDIT" (Some Other Dude Did IT)? When nobody takes responsibility, nothing gets done. The one "cure" that almost everybody with a vested interest seems to agree on is some version of Universal Health Care, with"Uncle" paying the bills.
That won't work, just drives up costs. And we can't keep saying the government (meaning taxpayers) just has to pay for it. It is only when we get individual responsibility for health care decisions and personal responsibility that we will get the system under control.
As long as somebody else pays, everybody wants a piece, and the bigger the better. Lots of people remember when "insurance" meant just that-you paid your premiums, the insurer paid the bills. What went wrong? Lots of people can add, and the cost of a family of four health premium on average is up to $8000.00 a year, in some areas and groups, up to $12,000, even more.
Who can pay these ridiculous premiums, and then have to pay deductibles and have caps on benefits even after all that? How much individual care would that $8,000 buy if consumers made the decisions? I'll bet if we gave consumers the chance it would surprise us, as long as the delivery system were structured along modern designs.
Yes, the "health denial" system needs reform; yes, there is a structure which would use free market economics to control cost, while INCREASING the quality of health care and delivery.
And, how about still using mostly hundred-year-old infrastructure in the health care industry, when we have a new twenty-first century capability to deliver more, for less. (If the Internet and Computer industry changed at the same rate as the medical industry, we'd still be using Abacus, sheepskins and quills)
And, if the system were restructured, doctors might welcome Medicaid and Medicare (Universal care) patients, rather than finding ways to "beat" the system to get paid. We can do better; we must, if the system is to survive for all of us.
America spends more on health care than any other country, yet ranks 12th to 15th in Quality of Care and in overall ranking. How can that make sense?
Throwing more taxpayer money at the problems is just not going to work without consumer-driven reforms.There is a solution that would work, if we can get past the "whose ox is being gored" phenomenon.
Here it is.
First, nationalize the Health Insurance industry, or make them part of the restructuring process by integrating insurance with the health care delivery process through ownership of health care facilities. Insurers collect hundreds of Billions of dollars in premiums and huge profits for managing the claims process and making non-medical coverage decisions, some unfairly, some efficiently, if not considerately.
Second, change the delivery of health Care by instituting a national system of privately-owned walk-in clinics, utilizing accepted national standards of health care, and staffed mostly by fully trained and licensed Registered and Practical nurses, along with salaried medical professionals, including an Internists or GPs, a Pediatricians, and an OB/Gyns. These folks would be rewarded by typical private business incentives like profit sharing, bonuses and so on, based on typical health care measurement standards like outcomes, quantitative and qualitative standards of health status
In areas where privately owned clinics do not choose to operate, and there should be few of these considering the profit potential, government-sponsored clinics with salaried professionals would practice. It is not hard to budget this approach since all the logistics are known(number of people to be served per clinic, square footage and equipment needed, minimum staffing requirements).
These are NOT hospitals, but clinics who can take advantage of the volume of "customers" to achieve economies of scale. Since these clinics are the "first line" in health care, they would be the emergency centers as well, able to diagnose conditions, and forward patients to hospitals as necessary. This would be the Intake point-of-contact for indigents, immigrants and others, whose use of high-cost emergency care in place of doctors or other medical alternatives are a significant upward cost driver. This would also be a good place to initiate home country bill-back for care of illegals. No refusal of care, just a better method of delivering needed care, and a way to make someone responsible for the cost.
What happens to the existing Doctor/Specialty Practice/hospital integrated system? It gets changed to accommodate the needs of twenty-first century health care business models. In the transition, the existing medical infrastructure must change to accommodate the new. There may be much crying, and gnashing to teeth, and huge lobbyist expenditures to preserve the status quo.
The status quo doesn't work.
Full-service hospitals would handle true emergencies like heart attacks, accidents, major incidents that require trained staff professionals to handle, and surgeries, Intensive Care, and the other things that hospitals are equipped to do.
Future hospital designs and remodeling of existing facilities could incorporate the walk-in model, could even take over the walk-in model if they were properly restructured. The idea here is to lower the cost of Intake and Management through lower-cost operations and overhead, while at the same time increasing efficiency to handle the required well-person maintenance.
Three. Alternatively, as noted above, existing hospitals could be formally restructured to become part of the Well Person management and Intake process. However, hospitals cannot be allowed to use their traditional, high-cost model of Operations and Administration to set rates; rates must be set on the Clinic Intake model, even if at a later stage, patients are admitted for tests, procedures and surgeries that would more likely have the higher costs associated with them.
The concept and business model is to introduce the efficiencies of a large -scale care business model, and modern technologies that such a structure would virtually force into the marketplace, computer aided procedures, even including computer-aided diagnoses models. Modern medical technology applied at the Intake point of contact with the health care consumer would and should, revolutionize the industry, to the substantial betterment of the health care consumer.
(It should be noted here that one of the most talked about Cloud Computing applications includes medical devices for home use that monitor, measure and manage a consumer's everyday health care, even providing Alerts when conditions exceed established standards. More on this another time).
If we consider that a "tiered" health care system offers real efficiency, while devoting the level and capability of resources when and as needed, we could provide more healthcare with less expense. At the very least, more people would get health advice and annual check-ups at overall costs that would allow more eligible people to be covered. Since the current system is forced to deal with the effects of demands of high-cost care from uninsured, and underinsured consumers, the opportunity for better care, more consistently, at lesser cost, is overwhelming.
The current system uses the highest cost care model, at all levels of intake, which obviously makes little sense. The current, practice-based medical business model, along with the unreasonable cost of using highest cost- determination model of care- the hospital complex-can be restructured to the "best practices" medical business model, delivering better care, to more people, at lower per-patient and overall annual and continuing costs.
Current health care practices, primarily the insurance costs, are in reality a "tax" on each of us, a huge tax and cost not justified by the social and economic needs for health care by American Citizens. This restructuring of the system, at the outset, would incur some expense, primarily during the transition to tiered care, and the building of the infrastructure. But, rapidly, the cost per patient, and the continuing cost of care provision would decline as better health care outcomes, reduced undiagnosed disease and well-person maintenance programs become part of the mainstream.
Some back of the envelope calculations indicate that consumers could pay out-of-pocket for all normal costs like Annual Health Checkups, Over-The-Counter medicines, and most prescription medicines, as well as pay a nominal amount for Catastrophic Care Coverage, and have several thousand dollars left over. Right now, healthy people pay for sick, insured pay for uninsured, and the system doesn't work.
If you believe that access to affordable health care is a Citizen's right, then the system has to be restructured.
This is one way.
As part of the restructuring and provisioning of care, require/suggest that EVERY person in the U.S. who is a Citizen gets an annual physical through the clinics. This process would enable early intervention when intervention-type care could be most needed, providing "well-person" health advice, looking at a person's or child's health and discerning conditions or changes that the person might not have noticed, or whom would benefit from this type of health care advice.
Clinics would be the perfect place for health care counseling regarding diet, family planning, and all the things that medical professionals agree would mitigate, even help prevent, the rapidly growing numbers and kinds of conditions and diseases that are affecting our society.
More new drugs coming to market, all for symptom relief, virtually none for cures. Does that strike you oddly?
It does me.
And considering that the side effects of many of these drugs are more threatening than the underlying disease, why do we -the FDA, Congress, us as Citizens, continue to allow conditions, programs and processes that are so obviously at the expense of the American public, the health care consumers like the retired and disabled?
Everybody in the health "food chain" blames the other guy; remember the old criminal defense, "SODDIT" (Some Other Dude Did IT)? When nobody takes responsibility, nothing gets done. The one "cure" that almost everybody with a vested interest seems to agree on is some version of Universal Health Care, with"Uncle" paying the bills.
That won't work, just drives up costs. And we can't keep saying the government (meaning taxpayers) just has to pay for it. It is only when we get individual responsibility for health care decisions and personal responsibility that we will get the system under control.
As long as somebody else pays, everybody wants a piece, and the bigger the better. Lots of people remember when "insurance" meant just that-you paid your premiums, the insurer paid the bills. What went wrong? Lots of people can add, and the cost of a family of four health premium on average is up to $8000.00 a year, in some areas and groups, up to $12,000, even more.
Who can pay these ridiculous premiums, and then have to pay deductibles and have caps on benefits even after all that? How much individual care would that $8,000 buy if consumers made the decisions? I'll bet if we gave consumers the chance it would surprise us, as long as the delivery system were structured along modern designs.
Yes, the "health denial" system needs reform; yes, there is a structure which would use free market economics to control cost, while INCREASING the quality of health care and delivery.
And, how about still using mostly hundred-year-old infrastructure in the health care industry, when we have a new twenty-first century capability to deliver more, for less. (If the Internet and Computer industry changed at the same rate as the medical industry, we'd still be using Abacus, sheepskins and quills)
And, if the system were restructured, doctors might welcome Medicaid and Medicare (Universal care) patients, rather than finding ways to "beat" the system to get paid. We can do better; we must, if the system is to survive for all of us.
America spends more on health care than any other country, yet ranks 12th to 15th in Quality of Care and in overall ranking. How can that make sense?
Throwing more taxpayer money at the problems is just not going to work without consumer-driven reforms.There is a solution that would work, if we can get past the "whose ox is being gored" phenomenon.
Here it is.
First, nationalize the Health Insurance industry, or make them part of the restructuring process by integrating insurance with the health care delivery process through ownership of health care facilities. Insurers collect hundreds of Billions of dollars in premiums and huge profits for managing the claims process and making non-medical coverage decisions, some unfairly, some efficiently, if not considerately.
Second, change the delivery of health Care by instituting a national system of privately-owned walk-in clinics, utilizing accepted national standards of health care, and staffed mostly by fully trained and licensed Registered and Practical nurses, along with salaried medical professionals, including an Internists or GPs, a Pediatricians, and an OB/Gyns. These folks would be rewarded by typical private business incentives like profit sharing, bonuses and so on, based on typical health care measurement standards like outcomes, quantitative and qualitative standards of health status
In areas where privately owned clinics do not choose to operate, and there should be few of these considering the profit potential, government-sponsored clinics with salaried professionals would practice. It is not hard to budget this approach since all the logistics are known(number of people to be served per clinic, square footage and equipment needed, minimum staffing requirements).
These are NOT hospitals, but clinics who can take advantage of the volume of "customers" to achieve economies of scale. Since these clinics are the "first line" in health care, they would be the emergency centers as well, able to diagnose conditions, and forward patients to hospitals as necessary. This would be the Intake point-of-contact for indigents, immigrants and others, whose use of high-cost emergency care in place of doctors or other medical alternatives are a significant upward cost driver. This would also be a good place to initiate home country bill-back for care of illegals. No refusal of care, just a better method of delivering needed care, and a way to make someone responsible for the cost.
What happens to the existing Doctor/Specialty Practice/hospital integrated system? It gets changed to accommodate the needs of twenty-first century health care business models. In the transition, the existing medical infrastructure must change to accommodate the new. There may be much crying, and gnashing to teeth, and huge lobbyist expenditures to preserve the status quo.
The status quo doesn't work.
Full-service hospitals would handle true emergencies like heart attacks, accidents, major incidents that require trained staff professionals to handle, and surgeries, Intensive Care, and the other things that hospitals are equipped to do.
Future hospital designs and remodeling of existing facilities could incorporate the walk-in model, could even take over the walk-in model if they were properly restructured. The idea here is to lower the cost of Intake and Management through lower-cost operations and overhead, while at the same time increasing efficiency to handle the required well-person maintenance.
Three. Alternatively, as noted above, existing hospitals could be formally restructured to become part of the Well Person management and Intake process. However, hospitals cannot be allowed to use their traditional, high-cost model of Operations and Administration to set rates; rates must be set on the Clinic Intake model, even if at a later stage, patients are admitted for tests, procedures and surgeries that would more likely have the higher costs associated with them.
The concept and business model is to introduce the efficiencies of a large -scale care business model, and modern technologies that such a structure would virtually force into the marketplace, computer aided procedures, even including computer-aided diagnoses models. Modern medical technology applied at the Intake point of contact with the health care consumer would and should, revolutionize the industry, to the substantial betterment of the health care consumer.
(It should be noted here that one of the most talked about Cloud Computing applications includes medical devices for home use that monitor, measure and manage a consumer's everyday health care, even providing Alerts when conditions exceed established standards. More on this another time).
If we consider that a "tiered" health care system offers real efficiency, while devoting the level and capability of resources when and as needed, we could provide more healthcare with less expense. At the very least, more people would get health advice and annual check-ups at overall costs that would allow more eligible people to be covered. Since the current system is forced to deal with the effects of demands of high-cost care from uninsured, and underinsured consumers, the opportunity for better care, more consistently, at lesser cost, is overwhelming.
The current system uses the highest cost care model, at all levels of intake, which obviously makes little sense. The current, practice-based medical business model, along with the unreasonable cost of using highest cost- determination model of care- the hospital complex-can be restructured to the "best practices" medical business model, delivering better care, to more people, at lower per-patient and overall annual and continuing costs.
Current health care practices, primarily the insurance costs, are in reality a "tax" on each of us, a huge tax and cost not justified by the social and economic needs for health care by American Citizens. This restructuring of the system, at the outset, would incur some expense, primarily during the transition to tiered care, and the building of the infrastructure. But, rapidly, the cost per patient, and the continuing cost of care provision would decline as better health care outcomes, reduced undiagnosed disease and well-person maintenance programs become part of the mainstream.
Some back of the envelope calculations indicate that consumers could pay out-of-pocket for all normal costs like Annual Health Checkups, Over-The-Counter medicines, and most prescription medicines, as well as pay a nominal amount for Catastrophic Care Coverage, and have several thousand dollars left over. Right now, healthy people pay for sick, insured pay for uninsured, and the system doesn't work.
If you believe that access to affordable health care is a Citizen's right, then the system has to be restructured.
This is one way.
As part of the restructuring and provisioning of care, require/suggest that EVERY person in the U.S. who is a Citizen gets an annual physical through the clinics. This process would enable early intervention when intervention-type care could be most needed, providing "well-person" health advice, looking at a person's or child's health and discerning conditions or changes that the person might not have noticed, or whom would benefit from this type of health care advice.
Clinics would be the perfect place for health care counseling regarding diet, family planning, and all the things that medical professionals agree would mitigate, even help prevent, the rapidly growing numbers and kinds of conditions and diseases that are affecting our society.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)