I have arthritis in my right ankle now and walking more than a mile leads to swelling, pain, and random sharp pinching during some strides. Running sets it off sooner than that. The ankle always is visibly swollen, it's obvious there's something wrong, and after more acute symptoms developed about eight months ago after my first soccer action in about a year I finally got it checked out and diagnosed two weeks ago. I'm lucky in that I can still cycle for an hour or two on fairly hilly roads in my North Carolina town, and I've been enjoying riding in the Phoenix desert a few times while visiting family this past week. I can still do some weight-bearing exercises too.
My biggest regret though is that I may never manage to play more than a few minutes of soccer at a time again. I got back to Latin America in early adolescence having missed some crucial soccer years. I was soon a couple of years younger than everyone else in my grade, and P.E. classes were not very fun, it was hard to compete and I rarely got to participate in real action on the soccer or rugby field. In my late teens I started to actually develop some soccer sense and got a bit better. But student/teacher political strikes during the dying years of a dictatorship and upcoming return of my family to the USA brought me to the USA for studies, and I didn't play much in college.
After a few years in SF Bay Area I started playing pickup soccer and eventually got to play quite well , especially during a particular two year stretch. Then marriage, busy jobs, having a kid meant I laid off the regular soccer for a while.
And now, with a bit more extra time I could maybe spend playing I no longer can. I've never been on a team, never been a specialist at a position, never trained regularly. The doctor said maybe with physical therapy and pain killers I could do it. I'll work toward that.
One of my complications was severe osteoarthritis.
The injury basically tried to twist my foot off, a "tri-malleolar fracture with dislocation". Even after doctors reduced the dislocation and used plates to put the broken bones back together, the cartilage suffered too much damage and just withered away to nothing.
Arthritis is a miserable, debilitating disease. My understanding is that usually once the cartilage reaches a certain level of loss, there is a positive feedback loop where the remaining cartilage is under too much pressure to regenerate and it continues to degrade. I hope yours gets better or at least maintains.
In my case, replacement or fusion were the only options and I went with replacement (since fusion tends to lead to more arthritis elsewhere in the foot). Replacement looks like it will give me back almost all of the activities I used to be able to do, including most sports, except running.
Medium / large companies won't take the risk on smaller operations selling a new focused tool unless it's a major pain point. They'll pay more for less risk, assuming the PE-managed company will go out of their way with account management to address all their concerns.
AVGO/Broadcom in some way acts like a big PE firm, rolling up other software companies, integrating them into their huge suite of offerings, ousting the new integrated offering's competing tools from the customers environments and selling the increment, and cutting off smaller customers not willing to subscribe to the huge suite.
The market for these kind of apps in Europe is very divided (just in the Nordics you have Swish, MobilePay and Vipps) but the dent in MC/Visas dominance is significant today. In 2 years, Klarna, Swish and Vipps will be more common both in e-commerce and POS that MC/Visa.
Do we need a pan-EU standard? I'm actually not so sure, but yes it would be nice when traveling.
Parallel construction like that is unambiguously fruit from the poison tree. It should never be allowed, and the fact that it is used routinely is one of the many ongoing travesties in the US.
My understanding is that it would be, if admitted to. That's where the parallel comes in: establish an evidentiary trail that's plausible enough to withstand defense scrutiny, and count on the court itself (ie, judge) not to dig any deeper.
That's the "parallel" part. They're using information that they aren't allowed to use but are constructing an alternate path to get to the same conclusion with information they could be allowed to use, even though they didn't.
reply