skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The original Prediction:

"This is a business I know well. Jukedeck is an example of how founders and investors do not conduct appropriate market research. There is a limited market demand for low-cost royalty-free music for videos. One could argue there is an oversupply* of royalty-free music relative to buyers. The quality is not good enough to disrupt the billion dollar Production music industry that is top heavy, a relative small amount of creators at the top get the majority of the money, the rest compete for the little that is left. Jukedeck has raised enough money ($3million #) to be around for a few years if they control their burn rate. But Jukedeck in its current form, is just another music startup destined for the Deadpool."
-rockarage
see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10706203

Jukedeck now:

"Our state-of-the-art technology uses artificial intelligence to dynamically shape music to different situations."
https://www.jukedeck.com/

if it sounds familiar see:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10707389

Why is this important to note?

"While it's not easy to hear, I got one such advice once on a company I started, and in true entrepreneurial spirit ignored it and kept iterating away. It was 100% spot on.
I wish people were more frank about what they think of start-ups, and I wish there was an acceptable way of doing that without insulting people."
-dvirsky

-https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10709835

This is an on going problem, founders and investors do not conduct appropriate market research or investigate constructive criticism. Therefore their business and business models will continue to fail until there is a change.
I found the quote below from Surviving the 21st Century by Julian Cribb similar to many attitudes I've encountered on the other end of the interest spectrum. The warnings are worth heeding, yet how can we ignore such tech, just as we pursue nanotechnology that has similar dangers, when such scientific pursuits may be what allows the human race to persist long after the Earth ceases to be habitable.

"All biowarfare laboratories - and indeed, many ordinary biotech labs – thus represent an ongoing existential threat to humanity whose safety, like that of nuclear materials, cannot ever be guaranteed.

"This was highlighted in early 2016 when James Clapper, U.S. director of national intelligence, issued a warning that even gene editing (such as by the technology known as CRISPR) should be added to the list of weapons of mass destruction, adding that it 'increases the risk of the creation of potentially harmful biological agents or products'. (Regalado 2016). Other scientists warned that genetically modified lifeforms could be used to target specific groups of humans carrying certain genes, or if released in agricultural ‘designer crops’ might result in uncontrollable plagues. They cautioned that gene editing technology is far cheaper and easier to access than nuclear or chemical weapons."

- Surviving the 21st Century, Julian Cribb, Chapter 8 "The Urbanite (Homo urbanus)"
The heart surgery is now considered a preexisting condition when the individual tries to buy their own insurance. That's why it is mentioned, it is very likely it was covered by their family insurance.
Providers? Thats doctors and hospitals. Im not aware of anything but natural monopolies. Insurance company competition is rather low in my opinion. They are exempt from antitrust law[0] and can virtually collude to set prices.

[0]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarran–Ferguson_Act
1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/donald-trump-is-actu...

2. https://www.salon.com/2016/12/20/14-signs-show-trumps-politi...

3. https://newrepublic.com/minutes/124205/yes-donald-trump-fasc...

4. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2016/11/foul-stenc...

5. http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbe...

6. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/america...
There is also the mantra that Republicans are the party of small government and fiscal responsibility. Nope, the difference between Democrats and Republicans is what they want to spend the money on. This is just a fact, easily verified by looking at the debt across decades of various administrations and congressional alignments.

A few years ago Ted Cruz and company very nearly shut down the government and defaulted on the national debt, insisting that raising it was irresponsible and laying it at the feet of President Obama. They insisted any increase in spending had to be offset by a cut somewhere else. Sounds like a really bold, principled stand. Then this:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2017/01/11/republica...

Now that Republicans are fully in charge, they just authorized an escalating increase of the debt limit, running from $580B/year (2017) to $946B/year (2026), or a $10T increase over the next 10 years. There was no dissent, it was just quietly passed. I'm not saying it was wrong or irresponsible to do -- I'm just saying the politics are transparent, if they weren't already.
Not in this context.
They are for free market radicalism. It can hardly be considered "conservative" but it is certainly for something.
Wrt to your first link[1], the very first sentence in the overview tab states, "US Health Care Inflation Rate is at 3.98%, compared to 4.26% last month and 2.95% last year. This is lower than the long term average of 5.40%."

I don't intend any snarkiness, but am I somehow misreading those numbers? I'm reading that statement as "an inflation rate of 2.95% for the last year compared to the long term average of 5.40% could be equated with 'more affordable'".

[1] https://ycharts.com/indicators/us_health_care_inflation_rate
Scientists Use Lasers to Trigger Predatory Killer Instinct in Mice
This comment captures a feature of a lot of discussions I've read: somebody's got an axe to grind.

It's unfortunate that we're not able to get these conversations going in a way that's ... what? "unbiased"? I don't know what I'm asking for, but I think it's some variant of honesty and openness. And I think that we're missing a lot of the truth, for ourselves and others, by having to couch our statements in ways that aren't entirely forthcoming.

That said... I'm still glad that medicaid covered my uninsured ass when I broke myself trying something I'm not good at (skiing). I remember thinking (as I was bundled up in the medic's sled) that I was not too different from some New Zealander with a busted body part... about to be carted off to free medical care, to get me back on my feet and working as quickly as possible.

Thanks, Obama.
I don't think we need any partisan bickering to address your point:

It seems they should have named it something more appropriate, like the Universal Health Insurance Act.

The name of the bill is a lot less important to most people than the substance. If you read Sam's post, there is a man in there with a heart condition who is essentially uninsurable without the ACA. For him, the word "Affordable" definitely applies, but he doesn't care what the bill's title is. In my opinion, you shouldn't either, because the bill's substance is what is important.
I like this idea.

However, it seems to me that it keeps _individuals_ churning through the powerful offices of state yet ensures that those individuals are only only drawn from a particular _restricted group_.

That's the reason for the animosity to Trump. Within that restricted group he wields more power with fewer ties than other group members.

If he were one of the usual oligarchs who has to compromise with the investment banks and lobbyists for powerful special interests he would be more controllable. But who knows what someone with their own resources might get up to.
I mean reducing the negative impacts of being out of control is great, but the technology didn't make the author out of control. The author was out of control before the technology got there, and the technology merely empowered him in a way that aggravated his pre-existing condition.

The solution is to develop awareness.
You are reading too much into the word "virtually" — he means that once he was kicked off his parents' health insurance, no insurer would accept him because of the preexisting condition.
Trump's tweets/statements are an order of magnitude more extreme and more frequent than anything we've ever seen. He's also a grown man who's responsible for his own actions, so blaming the media and blaming Obama seems quite partisan. Nobody is making him do anything.
Having health insurance be offered by employers/ tied to employment is one of the biggest mistakes in American healthcare policy. It encourages a "consume as much as possible" mindset for employees and disguises the true cost of care. Creating clarity of price and cost in healthcare would be one of the most beneficial shifts.
Wayland isn't the default on Arch, it has no default by default.
Distributing cost will improve economic vitality if it removes critical obstacles for others while not substantially impacting the opportunities available to the rest.

Without ACA, a software engineer with a chronic illness wouldn't be able to start a business. Meanwhile, a healthy software engineer will start a business regardless of ACA because a minor difference in healthcare premiums is not material to that decision.
Facebook 100% reads your "encrypted" WhatsApp messages. I had a conversation with someone about a very unique topic on WhatsApp, 5 minutes later I see remarketing ads on Facebook about the same topic.
I'm confused, is Colorado Care actually working in CO right now? Quick search seems to indicate that Amendment 69 has failed:

http://www.denverpost.com/2016/11/08/coloradocare-amendment-...
You're probably right! It just states "12 particpants over a period of 20 days" on their site - hard to tell what that means.
I think I misunderstood what you were calling "unrealistic". It doesn't matter whether Trump is really like Hitler. People really did make that comparison, and now the people who were convinced by those arguments are stuck on high alert. As Pigo said, it's going to be very hard to talk those people down to a point that we can have a productive political conversation.
All my comments are auto killed they aren't even posted and killed they don't make it past your fascist filtersCan't be too classy when you're complicit in torture by refusing to enforce it's prosecution, be on watch while your military commits war crimes or hell, be at war every day of your 8 year watch. Real classy for a warmongering mass murderer. Oh and kill lists, super classy stuff.

People who call Obama classy are clueless.
49 + 399 = 448
448 mod 512 = 448, because 512 goes into 448 zero times with a remainder of 448.
Pre ACA, many health insurance plans literally refused to sell you individual insurance at any price if they judged you to be too risky.

A friend was virtually uninsurable for having once been diagnosed as clinically depressed. Flat out denied coverage.
> Hash functions strive for uniqueness

No hash function strives for uniqueness. As long as the digest length is shorter than the input length, you can logically guarantee that there will be collisions. And since all general purpose hash functions allow arbitrary length input data, this is always the case. But what cryptographic hash functions strive for is the difficulty in finding a collision. It's mathematically guaranteed to be there, but finding it should cost a prohibitively large amount of time and computing resources. There are also non-cryptographic hashes that only strive for the unlikelihood of accidentally getting a collision and don't protect against heavily contrived input data.
Labor unions as well, who picked up on negotiating health care benefits for their workers. It's an interesting bit of history.

Still, we all know what it's like to have a major design flaw in the legacy codebase.
It's at least correlated. Within 1 month's time, the plan cost doubled. The ACA required insurance to cover things like mental health care. As a result, the plans had to be more expensive since they needed to cover more.
So basically, your argument is to do nothing to help anybody unless you have a magical fix-everything-in-one-go plan?

Good luck trying to get political support for anything that hurts the insurance companies.
What are other accounts you've used in the past? Given the language of your other comment[0], I suspect you've been banned for being uncivil and perhaps only discussing politics, which is not the intent of HN.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13392911

You can also contact the mods directly via email using the Contact link in the footer. That would likely be more effective than posting comments like this.
It's a classic in economics that explains why health care doesn't fit the free market ideal. The basic problem is that, unless you know as much about medicine as your doctor, you can't evaluate the quality of advice you're getting.

It's heavy reading, I don't know why it's getting upvoted here.
Agree - I think there is a big difference, in case this helps the terminology tips your hand - "remote-friendly" is a meaningless term in my experience.
Remote-first or Distributed are the "get on a plane to smell each other" terms of a truly remote team:
http://blog.davidtate.org/2016/12/remote-work-terminology/
Does anyone know the current average salary listed by the biggest H1B "mills"? The data is public so should be easily calculable.
Exactly. Along the way we accepted the premise without even realizing it -- "everyone should be able to afford health insurance [implicit: no matter what it costs]". Sounds great, but only really serves to put money in the pockets of rich hospitals, nurses' unions, big pharma, etc.

Making healthcare actually affordable -- as in, reining in costs -- is where we should be looking.
From Germany:

Freenom: ~34ms
Google: ~8ms
Local ISP: ~11ms
Hear, hear! Moreover, if we somehow create a law to limit people's age so that they die at 40 (obviously without any kind of pain), the premiums would be really affordable for those who really deserve it because at 40 is when health costs for even healthy people begin to ramp up.
How I went from 0 design experience to Facebook in 1 year
I'm excited for the switch. I hope the Joy-Cons are comfortable. If it is, I have to admit it looks like a very versatile controller. Only downside is how expensive they are. The accessories really cost too much.

It was interesting to see how all previous Nintendo consoles made controller improvements. Reminded me why Nintendo won so many generations. It seems they're trying the same with the Switch.

Arms looks pretty cool. I'm looking forward to more games that smartly use the controller's features.
> As much as people like to rag on the Republicans, and they deserve it, I don't think they will throw out the good parts.

It would politically unpopular to "throw out" the parts you spoke of. But the question is can we keep those parts and not keep the insurance mandate?
It's after the surgery that he would be un-insurable. Before the ACA, when he turned 19, the only possible way for him to get insurance would have been to get a job that offered health insurance because he wasn't allowed on his parents plan and he had a pre-exsiting condition so he wouldn't have been approved for private insurance. After the ACA, at 19, he could have stayed on his parent's plan, bought private insurance because the insurers couldn't discriminate based on the pre-existing condition or get a job that offered health insurance.
If you're looking for something directly in the law, you're not going to find the government saying that prices should be raised.

It's a second-order effect; there was minimal cost control in the ACA, and plenty of room for companies to raise their prices. In a lot of ways, it was a sweetheart deal to insurance companies: they had essentially a mandate for people to buy their insurance, demand was through the roof, so they could charge more.
Same. Probably a similar economic outcomes to what would happen if we didn't provide sanitation / water services to the general population.
A serious heart condition in one's youth (infancy, even), regardless of insurance coverage at the time, could exclude one from all future private insurance (as in: there are zero options, they will not do business with you) leaving only incredibly-expensive state-provided (but privately administered, of course—profit over all) insurance as an "option", i.e. leaving the only actual options as being employed with a large company, going without insurance at all, or being poor enough to qualify for medicaid (so, avoiding employment).

Source: I know someone for whom this was the case pre-ACA.
Seeing these block pages come up in Australia, a free country, is awfully troubling. I shudder everytime I had to see this: https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-3G10OAwNPgw/VD-Kzl_coHI/AAAAAAAAA...
If you look at that chart for a longer period you'll see the rate under the ACA was less than most other periods

http://imgur.com/a/ShbpW

The ACA wasn't a bad attempt given the constant efforts of the opposition to sabbotage it.
Here's a counter-point, Mr. Altman:

I have a pre-existing condition that prevented me from getting non-employer sponsored insurance. When the exchanges came online in my state I decided to leave my job and get an ACA plan for my family, while trying to bootstrap my company. That lasted all of a single year because of 30% premium hikes and 290% deductible hikes made ramen bootstrapping no longer possible.

I'm still working in startup space because of connections I made, but I'm now tied to employment and could never again be a founder, unless one of my current bets pays off.

Yay for elimination of pre-existing condition restrictions. But what good is insurance if you can't afford it?
> Taxes go up, but they go up less than health insurance premiums would. Remove insurance companies as an industry.

From the international perspective, I get the impression that Americans are against this because then you are "paying for other people" (as though insurance doesn't count, but through a private company is somehow 'better').
The average might have gone up, but the it's the high-end that's supposed to have come down. Health care costs are the #1 cause of bankruptcy in the country.
> What evidence is there that the government itself doubled the price of the plan? The government doesn't collect the money, and it certainly goes somewhere.

My evidence is that the premiums for my insurance went up even before ACA passed just in anticipation. That is exactly what the health insurance representative told us.

It was pretty clear why it happened. After ACA passed it kept going up a higher rate for us than in previous years (I have data for 3 years before).

> What evidence is there that the government itself doubled the price of the plan? The government doesn't collect the money, and it certainly goes somewhere...

Isn't it a bit disingenuous to suggest that the increase in health insurance is unrelated to legislation regulating health insurance. Or to put it another way is there evidence that government regulation didn't affect the prices and something else did?
The anecdotes illustrate that there were two main benefactors: young people without formal full-time employment and those with pre-existing conditions that had allowed insurance coverage to lapse.

From someone too old to be on their parent's insurance, while I'm 100% behind the reform that disallows previous conditions from affecting ability to get coverage, the ACA was effectively a shake-down that made me delay taking the risk to go full time on my startup -- the options for coverage in my state were expensive and very low-quality, and the penalty for opting-out would have been $4000 for my domestic partner and I (on top of the additional taxes we paid to support ACA).
Those price increases are not from the ACA, they're the result of Medicare Part D, which took effect in 2006.

From the wiki[1]:

By the design of the program, the federal government is not permitted to negotiate prices of drugs with the drug companies, as federal agencies do in other programs

The bill forces the government to pay whatever the pharma manufacturers will charge. If you were selling a product and there were a law preventing your largest customer from negotiating the prices which you set, why wouldn't you heavily inflate your prices?

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_Part_D
And the fund raiser was the Blender Foundation - I was number #884, yay!
https://fossies.org/linux/blender/doc/license/bf-members.txt
Epic Hack! Someday, if I work real hard, I hope to be someone like you showing people my projects.
ACA raised the bar on the minimum level of coverage for private plans. This means that the shitty door-to-door private plans you make movies like The Rainmaker about had to increase costs to start providing actual coverage for healthcare.

You can tell because while some premiums have increased, the overall healthcare costs (including premiums) for all Americans has been reduced.
Only now I understand why people use (sic)
> All I can see there is that you asked for the source code of the QR generator and he delivered.

Eh, I kind of agree with geocar's point in the original thread. Moxie shared source code to "a" QR generator. Is there any way to verify that this code is what's running inside of WhatsApp?
I can't believe the claim, since telepathy has never been demonstrated- however! I think I have to admit that there isn't any law of physics that says telepathy is impossible, theoretically. It would certainly be possible over short distances if humans had specialized organs for transmitting and receiving electrical signals, like an electric eel does. Since we don't have that organ, the signals a human brain can produce are very weak, which is why they put electrodes right on your scalp and not a few inches away. If telepathy could occur, it would have to be in a very electrically quiet place like the Amazon. It could be that telepathy is real but just never tested in an electrically quiet enough environment. The modern world is shockingly noisy- cell phones, radio towers, the power grid, and wifi hubs all produce constant electrical noise. Even in the Amazon I'd say the probability that this is real is very very low, but hey, who knows.
$250M to Support Advanced Robotics Venture Led by CMU
Fun fact: the US Social Security Administration still maintains and distributes a Mac PowerPlant app, built with CodeWarrior as a PPC binary (which of course doesn't work on 10.7+)!

https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/anypia/anypia.html

I ported it to Xcode, keep the code on GitHub, and maintain an Intel build. Haven't been able to get the attention of anyone at the SSA though.

http://bslabs.net/2015/07/18/porting-anypia-to-xcodeintel/
I don't know about "reframing". I've been laid off twice, both due to company politics/direction issues that had nothing to do with me. It's not "reframing", it's recognizing the reality of the situation, rather than ascribing reality to how I felt about the situation. In my case, I permitted myself to cry and moan about it, for about 15 minutes. Then it was time to put that behind me.

You got four weeks pay? Then don't work 30% on 2 and 70% on 3. Work at least 30% on 2, and as much more than that as you can usefully do in any given day. Treat it like a job. Don't stop unless there's really nothing more you can do that day. Fill up the remaining time with 3 (don't do make-work on 2).
It's odd that you expect the people, who fought to prevent ACA from happening and have tried to repeal it weekly since it's inception, are now going to fix it.
In the end, I think [put president name here] didn't end up being too different from any other politician.

The next one might be one to break the above pattern, by being so much worse!