devRant - A fun community for developers to connect over code, tech & life as a programmer

Search - "free therapy"

196

mBeierl

768

6y

The beginning of my freelancing time. I was so naive. Didn't even used contracts...

This one client wanted a website with 2 specific features until a certain time. It should look nice, but only the features functionality was defined. All seemed reasonable at first.

I delivered 2 weeks before the deadline. The client was furious, as it didn't look like they imagined. They wrote me 8 lengthy emails with very fractioned feedback. It was becoming unreasonable.

But hey, I'm a newbie in this business. I have to make myself a name, I thought.
Oh was I naive....

This whole project went on for 2 more months. The client was unhappy with every change and 2-5 emails a day with new demands were coming in. I was changing things they wanted done 2 days ago, because they changed their mind.

Then they started to get personal. They were insulting me and even my family. My self-confidence dropped to an all-time low.

In the end I just sent them all the code for free and went to therapy.

BTW: this was also my most important experience, as things went up hill from then on. As Yoda once said: The greatest teacher, failure is.

rant horror freelance clients wk86

8
29

hax0r

251

8y

devRant is like free therapy and I love free. 😁

undefined free therapy

2
6

kiki

33049

91d

Did I suffer through 2023? Hell yes! Fuck 2023! A LOT of doubt, anxiety, thinking that I live wrong somehow.

Yet, I’m completely satisfied with the results of 2023, with what I was able to accomplish. It means I do, in fact, live my life right. If I carry on doing what I do, I’ll be getting what I get. Here’s what happened to me in 2023:
- Cat!
- No more sugar
- No more smoking
- First time reading paper books in 15 years
- Made me a new website (miloi.am/engine) that, for the first time in my life, isn’t about me as a job candidate, but about me as a person.
- SENT MY DEVRANT LINK to my CEO! Dreaded this coming out for YEARS. Finally did it. He read my posts, told me I’m free to be who I am, told me he already knows me well, that he wasn’t surprised, and overall didn’t care much.
- New name, new pronouns
- Learned how to cook: soups, pancakes, falafel, other popular dishes. Most importantly, now when I go through the store, I’m not afraid of thinking about cooking. I look at something, and I know how to cook it, more or less.
- Found a good psychiatrist, got properly diagnosed, got properly prescribed
- Made a FIRE architecture at my work
- Conceived (and partly implemented) four monetizable side projects (that I can’t monetize yet because of my passport situation)
- Several VERY important insights that completely changed who I am. Several super crucial self-therapy skills.

Let’s see what happens in 2024 😛

random

4
0

bettybilton

-3

4y

The Use of Recycled Heart Devices
There are many controversial issues in the healthcare, and some of them seem so debatable that it is difficult to chose which side to support. One of such issues is the use of recycled heard devices – implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) that were previously used by people who could afford them and changed them to a new model or died. These devices are still in good condition and have some battery life remaining. Scientists like Pavri, Hasan, Ghanbari, Feldman, Rivas, and others suggest that these ICDs can be reused by those patients who cannot pay for them.
The issue has caused many arguments. Federal regulators and ICDs manufacturers in the United States prohibit the practice of such a reuse; however, it is allowed in India, where very few people can afford defibrillators. The use of recycled ICDs can be regarded as inferior treatment to the poor. People who cannot pay for the expensive devices still deserve the healthcare of the highest quality as any wealthy person. For this reason, other means of providing healthcare to poor people should be found as it is unethical to make them feel humiliated or deprived of medical aid guaranteed to them by the Declaration of Human Rights. Harvard medical experts claim: flagship projects must remain free of the taint of the secondhand, in part by making it clear when devices can safely be reused.
These scientists also doubt the safety of ICDs reuse. Despite the fact that all devices are carefully transported and sterilized, there is still a danger of infection transmission. The experts, for instance, claimed that three people died because of stroke, heart failure, and myocardial infarction. Though it is not proved to be caused by recycled ICDs, there is no evidence about the relevance of the reused devices to these deaths. It can be presumed that the failure of the defibrillator did not prevent the problem. In general, their findings prove that the alternative reuse of ICDs is a comparatively riskless life-saving practice.
There is another side of the problem as well. It is obvious that human life is sacred; it is given to one person only once, so it should be protected and preserved by all means (humanlike, of course) possible. If there cannot be another way out found, secondhand ICDs should be applied to patients who cannot pay for their treatment. If the world is not able to supply underprivileged patients with free devices, richer countries can, at least, share what they do not need anymore. One may draw a parallel between recycled defibrillators and secondhand clothes. There is nothing shameful about wearing things that were used by another person. Many organizations supply children in poor countries with garments in a good condition that richer people do not wear anymore. For the same reason, reused defibrillators in a proper state can be implanted to those patients who cannot afford new devices and will not be able to survive without them. Underprivileged patients in some developing countries receive alternative treatment of drug therapy, which, in this case, can be regarded as inferior method. Apparently, if to consider the situation from this viewpoint, recycled heart devices should be used as they allow saving people’s lives.
The use of recycled implantable cardioverter-defibrillators is illegal and risky as they are classified as single-use devices. Moreover, despite the fact that the results of researches on the topic proved to be positive, there were cases when some people with recycled ICDs died because of stroke, heart failure, or myocardial infarction. It is unethical to break the law, but at the same time, person’s life is more important. If there is no other possibility to save a person, this method must be applied.
The article was prepared by the qualified qriter Betty Bilton from https://papers-land.com/

rant treatment heart devices health

3

Top Tags

rant linux code windows fuck i java c programming android dev the is javascript js joke life a python

Weekly Rant

Most unrealistic deadline you've had?

devRant © 2021 Hexical Labs LLC
Privacy Policy | Terms of Service