• Logicool Qvc-13ns Skype For Mac
• Logicool Qvc-13 Skype For Mac Windows 10

For further details see: Qlikview for Linux/Unix or Mac OS. Ask New Question. Software and Applications. Does QlikView work on Macs? Update Cancel. Ad by Looker. Looking for a business intelligence tool? See analysis of 15+ top BI vendors based on customer satisfaction, implementation timelines and more.

There seems to be a misconception regarding what Shkreli was found guilty of. The legal case here has very little to do with the pharmaceutical pricing controversy - it is a separate case based on a separate hedge fund that he managed. The gist of it is that he took people's money to start a hedge fund, lied to investors that the fund was doing fine when the hedge fund went belly up, but ended up returning everyone's money plus a sizable return when his separate pharmaceutical venture went well. When fraud happens those affected don't usually get their money back much less a return on that money. However, it's pretty clear what he did is also fraud (false documents, not returning people's money when they asked for it) even if the fact that investors came out better makes the plaintiffs less sympathetic. The government and media couldn't have asked for a better outcome.

The actual criminals on Wall Street and in Big Pharma, who had the foresight to line the right pockets, go ignored and the outsider who drew the ire of the public - for a decidedly amoral business decision with poor optics - is very publicly castigated. It's a win all around for a monumentally corrupt establishment, which has once again deferred meaningful scrutiny. Shkreli made the mistake of setting himself up as the perfect loudmouthed, flamboyant patsy. A data point about medication: I just paid for a pair of EpiPens; the generic version was $337 a pair (last I checked, the non-generic version was over $600).

I have pretty good health insurance, so I didn't pay that much myself, but my employer paid the rest. As a baseline, I had the pharmacist look up the equivalent medication for use with a syringe; a ten dose bottle was $5.99.

I know, not the same thing. But this confirmed what I'd suspected for years. I have to assume that the EpiPen delivery mechanism, which is really what we're paying for, is well debugged and optimized and essentially just a matter of ordering parts and assembling them; it would be mind boggling to have a COGs of more than a few dollars, or any significant conversion costs. The cost of the actual medication that the pens contain is apparently about sixty cents on top of that. Mylan is printing money.

Icing on the cake: The pens expire after a year. But you typically can't get pens that last that long, the ones I got already have a few months on them and will have to be replaced before the next school year ends or my son won't be able to attend class (the school is not allowed to administer 'expired' medication). This is an utter and corrupt racket. I'm writing my congressional representatives and senators.

Although technically true, the title is a bit misleading. He was acquitted from 5 of the 8 counts he was convicted of. Of the 8 counts, count 7 carried the biggest wait. This was in regards to the Retrophin securities fraud accusation where he was accused of a ponzi scheme amounting to over $10M. This was the only thing that would of brought him significant jail time but he was found not guilty.

Count 7 carried more wait than all the other counts combined and was the heart of the case against him. Right now the case has gone from a felony to basically a parking ticket. All the articles talking about 'facing 20 years' are sensationalist nonsense. That is a theoretical maximum. He will most likely receive NO jail time and will probably just have to pay a small fee.Of course you will not get any of this context from all the sensationalist headlines out there like 'MARTIN SHKRELI FOUND GUILTY! FACING 20 YEARS PRISON SENTENCE!'

Rarely has a white-collar criminal defendant evoked hatred and scorn from public in the way Shkreli has. Shkrelis willingness to lie, step on people, flaunt his wealth and look down on others made him a villain that many wanted to see go down in flames, said James Goodnow, an attorney with Fennemore Craig, a corporate defense firm. This attitude is just disgusting, and indicative of precisely what has gone wrong with our society. 'White collar' criminals who steal millions are deserving of leniency and mercy. But the 'thug' who stole $20 from a 7/11 deserves 20 years. I find it hard to believe that he got a fair trial this time around.

He was already tried and found guilty in a trial by media a few years back. This investigation & prosecution are a direct result of his legal actions that didn't play well politically.

BOTH presidential candidates condemned him. To me it's sad.

The sacrificial lambing of Shkreli instead of lawmakers addressing the underlying problem of costly pharma is probably the most Venezuela thing I've ever seen happen in the US. They made the system, he's just trying to prosper ffs.

FWIW, Shkreli has said several times on his YouTube channel that he predicted he was serve 2 years and be done. From what I've heard, he'll be sentenced 3-5 and and serve 80% with good behavior. He had an excellent defense and this was probably known from the beginning. Interestingly, I don't think he pretends that what he did was right - it just understood it was a means to an end: two years in white collar 'prison' for 30-70MM when he had less than $1,000 in the bank and owed creditors north of 1MM. I have no sympathy for him as he appears to have lied to his investors and moved money around, which seems to be outside the law.

Raising the price of a drug though, as long as he can get away with it, is no crime, no matter how big the increase. This makes me question though, did he raise the price of Daraprim so he could return money to the investors of his hedge fund??

If so, his entire defense (from his videos) of raising the price to meet his fiduciary duties to Turing's investors falls flat. I quite like Martin. I talked to him a few time on YouTube, whilst he was live streaming. He's whip-smart & knowledgeable. He does, however, have a couple of major flaws. 1) He trolls.

2) It seems he lies. Which I picked up from a previous news article. (He claimed to have $50mm under management @ his previous hedge fund. It was more like $1.6mm.

Something like that). I can forgive the trolling. It's over the top, IMO. But it is what it is. The lying is another kettle of fish. You can't go around bullshitting ppl. &, as he found out, you can't go around bullshitting investors.

I think he loves money too much. The thought of being poor may have pushed him to do something stupid (ultimately his call!). I hope he doesn't have too hard a time in jail.

Losing his fortune (I believe he loses his shares from Retrophin. That's already a punishment.

Edit: I don't know why I'm being downvoted. I'm being honest. Fuck you people, frankly. I've read a few articles but I feel like I'm missing something. What's with the sensational quotes like 'I had folks afraid that their own involvement in investigating WannaCry would get them arrested.' Everything I've read points that he created banking Malware 'Kronos' which was sold on various 'underground forums' (whatever that means). What's with the WannaCry conspiracies?

He wasn't arrested for being a security research, he was arrested for being a malware creator selling malware. Why is this 'sending a chill through the security community'? I feel like no one here remembers when Dmitry Sklyarov was arrested under similar circumstances. The US government has no obligation to seek out every potential arrestee no matter where they are in the world for every single crime that the US has laws for. But if the target of an investigation (whether they know it or not) sets foot in the US, then we shouldn't be surprised when they are arrested. And this is just another case with Def Con (so no, it's probably not moving out of the US, it didn't 15 years ago), I'm quite certain that these sorts of things happen frequently for other crimes of (relatively) low priority that are just outside our primary focus on this forum (technology). And is the US any worse for this than other nations?

Probably not. They just get more publicity when it happens. But every nation that has a legal system will do the same thing. If the Russians or the Brits or the Germans or the Swiss decide that Jtsummers is a suspect in a crime, and I visit and they realize it, I shouldn't be surprised to find myself arrested and barred from leaving the country. 0 - may not be the best article, it's the first one that came up on Google for me.

If your code is used in an exploit and that is now a punishable crime, maybe next the NSA will be in the hot seat since the code that was used in wanacry was their own. Or perhaps Israel for their effort in Stuxnet.I hope he takes it to trial and we find out what is really happening here.

Pretty suspicious that this happens years after the fact and only weeks after he helped prevent the further spread of wannaCry. WannaCry being created on top of the leaked NSA exploits they held on to instead of responsibly disclosing to Microsoft. As someone who's not sure where I stand on this, I feel like Hutchins supporters are doing themselves a disservice by overly-conflating this with WannaCry. I think there's potentially a good argument to be made along the lines of 'Hutchins good work w.r.t. WannaCry is the only reason that anyone (including law enforcement) is aware of semi-historical Kronos, so going after him for Kronos is equivalent to going after him for WannaCry.' Additionally, there may well be other arguments in his favor that I'm not even thinking of. But those arguments need to be made (and the one I outlined would need decent factual details).

That said.maybe glossing over (or even totally ignoring) Kronos is the best way for Hutchins supporters to go.but if it is, that seems an unfortunate reflection on society. Why didn't the FBI ask for an extradition to the UK?

If the case was solid they should use the proper channel to deal with foreign (supposed) criminals. When you use this strategy, you deprive the arrested of the right he would have in his country and you add the crazy cost to defend yourself in a US court. So it's possible that the case is not that solid or need some Parallel construction.

It's pure speculation but it seems fishy to me. I can understand the use of shenanigans to arrest previous dictators or very powerful crime lords as a last resort for Justice but here it seems very unfair. I think we may see a drop of attendee to US conference and/or a drop in tourism. The lines between security researcher and malware creator is becoming increasingly murky.

When is it research, pretending to be a bad egg to get more info or actually being one? As long as its was fun and games no one really minded, but now malware is used to hold schools and hospitals to ransom.

Even criminals don't go after schools and hospitals. Extreme greed and criminality can't be minimized away as 'hacking'. The infosec community likes to be edgy but they need to clean up their act and not give airtime and cover to criminals, and its difficult to believe they don't know who these are. The author's arguments have been completely misrepresented.

He pointed out widely-believed and sometimes scientifically-established differences in the DISTRIBUTION OF traits in men and women. He said that those differences make attempts to achieve numerical parity misguided, discriminatory, and harmful. What is his conclusion about how we should behave? 'Treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group.' Wow, what a monster.

The reaction to the memo is really the most damning thing about the whole affair. Everyone is just rushing to virtue signal, to demonstrate their own purity of thought.

They've just proved the author's point. Honestly, Google might have even been rational to fire him, due to the toxic situation created by the mass outrage. How incredibly damning of our society. A particular brand of liberalism has reached the point of being a religion, and the establishment is running an inquisition against any who dare to question its points of dogma. This is the closing of the American mind.

I get that HN is not into this, but this employee stated, bluntly, that they don't believe many of their colleagues should be there because of their sex. Every peer review, every no-hire, every interaction, is and should be suspect. Happy where I am now, but future interviews will include me asking what management would do about this, and termination is the only correct answer. This is textbook hostile environment. Anyone saying otherwise should look hard at why they value this person's desire to speak without consequence over their colleague's right to a workplace where they're not judged by their sex, race, sexual orientation, or any other innate attribute irrelevant to their job performance. People can't seem to summarize his argument without getting much of it grossly wrong, because his manifesto was a haphazard collection of good points, bad points, good arguments, lousy arguments, misrepresentations of others' views, and unstated implications. A perfect recipe for people to argue past each other about it.

It's worth remembering that one of his conclusions was to end or replace gender-based diversity programs at Google. Given that, it's easy to understand why people would be upset. If gender-based diversity programs are responsible for qualified women getting jobs that they otherwise wouldn't have gotten due to bias, then the lack of that program means those women wouldn't have gotten those jobs.

This feels like the blue and black (white and gold) dress. It boggles my mind that people don't see the fundamental and toxic misogyny in this 'manifesto'.

Please have a woman you care about in your life, preferably one in tech, read this and then ask their opinion of the piece. The 'treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group' sentiment of the author is fine except that we have hundreds of years of doing just this in order to oppress and disenfranchise groups of people. Diversity programs are not about lowering the bar, they are about outreach and working against institutionalized racism and sexism which has created the distribution of wealth and education and work culture that we have today. Given the massive disparity we see in tech it's ridiculous that this individual felt the need to lambast the relatively minimal amount of work being done to foster a more diverse and inclusive culture across the industry. If one of the things you have to deal with as a woman in tech is seeing 10 page pseudo-intellectual manifestos about your inherent inferiority at performing in technical and leadership roles published at one of the premier tech companies in the world, and then see that piece supported on the most popular tech social sites then it's no wonder we have the gender gap we see today. When somebody's views are being attacked for being misogynistic and alienating to their female colleagues, it is not suppression of free speech and diverse political opinion it is common decency. Nobody is infringing on your free speech but they will respond.

All of these cries of 'authoritarian left-wing thought-police' makes me think We need a manifesto on White Male Persecution Complex Culture in Tech. disclaimer: I work at Google, my words are my own and not my employers.

Reading the letter, what surprised me was how political it was, framing everything as a 'left vs right' cultural fight. I think if it was up to me I'd probably fire anybody on either side of that debate who started circulating shit like this. As soon as you're on that level, nothing good is going to come of it and you're just going to make a lot of people angry, which is very bad for the business in a lot of different ways. The workplace is no place for politics like this. If you are going to strictly stick to narrow issues that are relevant to the job, then maybe, but as soon as you're writing a 10 page manifesto with phrases like 'the Left's affinity for those it sees as weak' or 'some on the Right deny science' or 'the Marxist intellectuals transitioned from class warfare to gender and race politics' you are way out of line. It doesn't matter if you are correct or not, politicising your workplace in that way shows a stunning lack of judgement.

I believe that equal opportunity among all persons is manifest. But I think the manner in which we encourage/enforce/promote it, especially in the workplace, demands debate. We must be able to disagree with the methods without any question of our belief of its purpose. The most disgusted I've ever felt at a workplace was when my boss, prior to me interviewing someone, said, 'and she gets an extra point because she's a woman.' The government punishes us on research tax breaks if we don't have enough diversity. So what am I supposed to say to this person when she asks what set her apart from the other candidates to be hired? 'No you weren't the best candidate, but you are a woman.'

That disgusts me and I refuse to do it. My job is not to balance an arbitrary math equation that x% of engineers are supposed to be women. That's an issue far larger and more systemic. It can't be fixed this way.

What I can do is remind myself that my job is to pick the best candidate, and my definition of 'best' may be fraught with bias, so I need to be exceptionally perceptive to question what capabilities each candidate might bring to the job that I don't naturally consider to be ideal. Apologies for the ranting nature of this comment. I feel frustrated when faced with the reality that what the establishment wants are at such odds with my morals and convictions. It's incredibly ironic that a company that apparently cares about diversity enough to have a 'Vice President for Diversity' fired an employee for presenting an opposing viewpoint - to their diversity policy of all things. Further evidence that Google and the other large institutions don't actually give a rat's ass about 'diversity'.

Diversity has absolutely nothing to do with diversity of thought, and is only concerned with normalizing racial/gender composition to present the illusion that discrimination and biological variation are non-existent (except for discrimination against males, whites, and Asians, because for some reason it's not considered discrimination if it affects them). It's not about doing the right thing, it's about PR - hence the decision to cave in to whatever the pitchforks are demanding.

It's a shame that honest criticism of diversity policies and gender issues is considered taboo enough to get someone fired. If we really cared about diversity, then we'd welcome opposing viewpoints and counter them with facts, not silencing. We have a culture of anti-intellectualism and dogmatism around certain topics that for whatever reason are considered sacred and not allowed to be challenged (ie. Political correctness), and its disgraceful. Relevant video: Peter Thiel: What is Multiculturalism Really About? It was a bit of a Jerry Maguire moment even if you agree with some of it.

At work you should be professional and not only work to make yourself and the company/product better, but the people around you better. It is mostly not healthy to get political or ideological at work unless you want to divide people. A company and employees really shouldn't get political if at all possible, to prevent a divided customer base. You should treat everyone at work like a client and not go all tribal or into cliques that end up in groups that are constantly complaining. If you don't like something you can work to change it but in a company the size of Google that is not always possible. If you don't like the ideology of a company then leave. Do a good job yourself, setup your own thing if you want to control everything, but don't bring down other individuals, encourage them and make them better, create respect internally.

Don't rock the boat, try to guide it, if you can't, hop on a new ship. In the end we live in a free country but work for companies that are more dictatorial/authoritarian where we are just sharecroppers on their feudal land. Companies are not democracies unless they are really small and even then they are not. Sometimes manifestos are needed 1 but for the most part it is like calling out an employer. Not only will it probably not change the company, it will follow you around for better or worse. Oh, theres one final lesson: you never know when something you write is going to unexpectedly be published in the Wall Street Journal. So watch those split infinitives.

The best explanation of why he was going to be fired and why that was the right thing to do (that I read) came from Yonatan Zunger, who had recently left a Human Resources position at Google; especially his third point, in the following post on Medium: In many way, it was not an unfamiliar sort of rant for the internet, and I was struck by the author's earnestness and apparent sincerity. It's possible that I make too many allowances for behaviour, and it's possible that I'm easily mislead. I thought his ideas were not in any way useful, or actionable, even had he been correct; That the ideas were poorly expressed, and full of such fringe 'truths' as are derived, insincerely, from cherry-picked science in order to be sold as snake-oil cures for the cognitive dissonance of the conservative and vulnerable; That the expression of these ideas was immensely foolish, especially appearing in the context of what I took to have been his initial intent, an appeal of tolerance of diverse viewpoints at Google. However, I'm always most disturbed by vitriol online when it's in service of beliefs that I share. It makes me deeply uneasy. The author of the memo is completely correct and, as others have said, his memo is drastically misrepresented in the coverage it has received. He simply points out that women could have less desire to go into fields such as cs because of their biological makeup.

He never says that women should leave google - he only says that trying to reach a perfectly equal distribution is misguided. Perhaps those who are red in the face while reading the memo failed to read between the lines and realize that under this logic, the women who do find themselves wanting to go into cs for passion and not just money should be welcomed. He never once called for anything other than the policy of acceptance and wide open doors that is currently in place. He is merely suggesting that maybe a perfect 50/50 distribution is not needed and, more importantly, liberal people in general need to snap out of the double think where we believe men and women are the same. Men and women are not the same. As a liberal i find that it is important to not shy away from controversy: women and men are biologically different. I am sorry, but they are.

You dont need to reject this fact in order to treat women with respect and equality. This is disappointing. I didn't really agree with his premise, and I think he was generally wrong honestly, but I don't think his views were so unrealistic or offensive that this was warranted.

I think this was probably done mainly because there was negative media about it. Which sort of demonstrates that Google is just another corporation that doesn't really value its employees that much. Maybe as a collective, but not on an individual basis. I think it's important not to let their moral posturing about social issues cloud our judgement about that. What I don't get in many of the left-leaning comments is that they're basically saying that 'patriarchy'/society is the only reason why women are underrepresented in tech.

In India/Russia, there are way more women represented in tech then in US. Do you think that these cultures are more welcoming/less sexist to women than US? It should be so in your world view. I suspect that the companies in these countries doesn't have a diversity program, and they hire everyone for purely business reasons. Why do you think that diversity problems solve anything on the long term? I live in Eastern EU and many people are actually sexist here ( men and women are favor of enforced gender roles ), unlike in Top 20 countries.

But I suspect the gender disparity in tech is better than in the us, or largely the same. Isn't this kind of disproves the notion that gender differences are caused by sexism? From the code of conduct of google 1: Equal Opportunity Employment Employment here is based solely upon individual merit and qualifications directly related to professional competence. How are you going to achieve 50/50 diversity in the company if the pool of candidates is far from that distribution? (unless you go and don't hire the best ones to balance the distribution) 1 EDIT: As kevingadd said, I might be wrong assuming the goal for diversity target for Google. It can be something more realistic and be close to the ratio of the pool of candidates. In that case I am wrong in my assumption.

This is also a good link he provided.

Ridzoman, Works with Mojave and 920c webcam if you follow this step! When I initially downloaded and installed this app, it did not work. I began to research other apps, all which cost money with no guarantee they would work with High Sierra or Mojave, the two newest OSs for Mac. I read a review that suggested the download and installation of Logitech Gaming Software from the Logitech website FIRST (see 'Support & Downloads' for the 920c webcam). I deleted my installation of the Logitech Camera Settings app, installed Gaming Software, then reinstalled the Camera Settings app, and now it works beautifully!

I'm using the Logitech 920c webcam fyi. Hope this is helpful. Ridzoman, Works with Mojave and 920c webcam if you follow this step! When I initially downloaded and installed this app, it did not work.

I began to research other apps, all which cost money with no guarantee they would work with High Sierra or Mojave, the two newest OSs for Mac. I read a review that suggested the download and installation of Logitech Gaming Software from the Logitech website FIRST (see 'Support & Downloads' for the 920c webcam). I deleted my installation of the Logitech Camera Settings app, installed Gaming Software, then reinstalled the Camera Settings app, and now it works beautifully! I'm using the Logitech 920c webcam fyi.

Hope this is helpful. Blinkinlight, Latest update fixes zoom & pan. Very excited to see the update for this. Can now zoom & pan. After months of using the built-in Apple cam, I can now use my C910 again with zoom and pan controls enabled. That said, the camera tends to overzoom on widescreen settings, making it difficult to frame myself, but works better on standard setting.

Not sure why that’s the case. But, being able to zoom & pan at least allows a much better shot than what I had before, and better than the built-in camera. Blinkinlight, Latest update fixes zoom & pan. Very excited to see the update for this. Can now zoom & pan.

After months of using the built-in Apple cam, I can now use my C910 again with zoom and pan controls enabled. That said, the camera tends to overzoom on widescreen settings, making it difficult to frame myself, but works better on standard setting.

Not sure why that’s the case. But, being able to zoom & pan at least allows a much better shot than what I had before, and better than the built-in camera. Mac Daddy Newbie, It DOES work with High Sierra and c920!

I just bought a c920 in spite of the ominous warnings about using it with High Sierra. I installed the Logitech Gaming Software from Logitech support webpage.

Not impressed, so I uninstalled it. Then I took a chance and installed this app. I guess there must be something left over from the gaming software install, but the Logitech Camera Settings app works just fine for me (tested with Photo Booth and Skype, all Camera Settings functions are working). I did this on two machines, a new iMac + my mid-2014 MBPro. Bottom line: install the Gaming Software first, then this app.

Worked for me! Mac Daddy Newbie, It DOES work with High Sierra and c920! I just bought a c920 in spite of the ominous warnings about using it with High Sierra. I installed the Logitech Gaming Software from Logitech support webpage.

Logicool Qvc-13ns Skype For Mac

Not impressed, so I uninstalled it. Then I took a chance and installed this app. I guess there must be something left over from the gaming software install, but the Logitech Camera Settings app works just fine for me (tested with Photo Booth and Skype, all Camera Settings functions are working).

Logicool Qvc-13 Skype For Mac Windows 10

I did this on two machines, a new iMac + my mid-2014 MBPro. Bottom line: install the Gaming Software first, then this app. Worked for me!