skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In the case of this particular article, it looks like most of the denial posts are a single account (sameoldsameold, 2 hours old currently). Since all the posts by that account are now marked flagged/dead, and the account climatedenier is less than ten minutes old and is already posting along the same lines, I'd guess its the same person.

Unless this person is tremendously emotionally involved in the idea of climate change, I don't see why an average HN reader would spend this much time on a single thread or create new accounts to post.

It leaves me feeling like this is the efforts of a publicity firm or something similar - I remember reading some years back (well before the recent drama) about Russian government-run media control orgs that hired people to post comments to promote their view or damage opposing ones with bad arguments. Years before that, there was similar material from SF-based firms doing manipulation on reddit and digg. No reason to assume this no longer exists imo.
Awesome changes.

One suggestion: In the Control Center™, I would recommend using the past-tense for the current state. E.g.,

Receive Notifications Allowed X
Access Your Location Allowed X
Maintain Offline Storage Allowed X

As it exists in the screenshots, the present tense is used, and the X button seems to be associated with the word "Allow." Further clarification could be achieved by making the X button actually say "Disallow" and giving it a border separate from the word "Allowed." E.g.,

Receive Notifications Allowed [Disallow]
Seems like there is a consensus among economists who do research on gun violence, and they agree that guns make people safer.[1] I am certain that you have now been persuaded by this evidence, and believe concealed carry should be permitted worldwide...

Or maybe you dismissed the result because you dislike the conclusions and conveniently believe John Lott is untrustworthy?

I picked this example because I suspect it's an issue you will be extremely reluctant to change your mind on.

[1] http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Survey-o...
The article makes the assumption that this device uses a brand new OS but I suspect it's just android with some additions.

A team of 40 cannot create anything that competes with the android of today. Not even Andy can do that.
You're right, it's not because of the ACA.

The ACA introduced no cost controls and just shifted the costs around from 1 demographic to another (mostly to the lower-middle and middle class healthy people, who don't actually use much health care).

So obviously for every sob story of a saved life, there's at least 2-3 stories of relatively young (26-30) healthy people whose deductibles and premiums have gone through the roof.

That's why people on the internet can't ever agree whether the ACA was a good thing, because there's plenty of anecdata from both sides.

I think we, as a population have to accept that Americans, in general, are very unhealthy people. It's quite obvious with ~35% obesity and the #1 killer being heart disease. Naturally, mitigation health care is an order of magnitude more expensive than preventive care. Hence the rising costs of health care (for everyone, even though some people don't feel the pain of costs, whether by being subsidized or being rich)
I am not sure what you mean by "happen" but as far as I am concerned, it is already happening. In 10-15 years, it will probably be as pervasive as a smart phone.
ResEdit was an incredibly cool tool, with a surprisingly good (and intuitive!) interface for what was clearly a developer tool. I started using it to poke around in games when I was around 9 years old -- admittedly I didn't understand everything I saw, but there was still a lot of interesting stuff to see.
I haven't had a problem with fogging at all, I wasn't aware that was an issue with Vive/Rift.
This is false.

1) They are repealing ACA as we speak - the legislative process has been introduced. They are voting today. This is fact.

2) There is no alternative. Neither Republicans nor Trump have offered any plan. There are no white papers, working groups, coordinated policy plans, and certainly no legislation. This is also a fact.

So what you're dismissing as 'fear mongering' is reality.

I don't have a problem with a total re-factor of ACA - but it needs to be done responsibly, thoughtfully, with diligence and transparency.

They're screwing it up on a day one: rolling back legislation that affects 100% of Americans and 100% of business - without a plan. It's totally irresponsible. They are doing it quickly (and recklessly) for political reasons, instead of an underlying impetus of 'good governance'.

Which is too bad, because it's a complex issue and there's work to be done.
States have granted themselves their own taxing authority, and have autonomy in doing so.

You wouldn't just copy and paste "IRS" into the state law that a state might decide to create. You would use the state's taxing authority.

Yes, state sanctions don't generally sting as much.

But each state would have to independently decide, with its own constituents, if it could economically offer subsidized health care for all of its residents.

Many states already have some form of parallel subsidized/free health care system for certain segments of the population. Like their school teachers and their children as an example.

Anyway, hope that helps.
Agree - this was the first thought I had and came here to comment on it.

When using the UI it's a bit more clear: you can't click "Allow". But just looking at the screenshot, I had the impression this was a request dialog somehow. I thought Allow was clickable to give permission, and the X was to dismiss being told the site wanted to know about the permission request.

The little X doesn't seem like a common UI element to indicate "block", but it's probably ugly to say "Allowed - [Block]".

Another idea might be to write "Currently allowed" or "This site has access to" under the word "Permissions".
The vulnerability was found, published and reported without source and before your previous comment.
RP1 does a decent job at this, but it feels sort of cotton candy compared to Snowcrash.
> What I get from this is you and your wife are healthy and didn't go to the doctor and after the ACA your premium went up $20 a month.

My taxes, and everyone else's taxes go to pay this $500 dollar difference. The Federal government didn't some how magically create the gap funds. They have to increase taxes through fines and other sources to pay this.

They've effectively hidden these costs for the subsidized individuals. I'm not paying $780 per month with a large refund at the end of the year. I'm paying a few hundred. Most people don't think about the revenue impact this has on the country. We now have to fund these subsidies. We now remove even more money from people that could have go into stocks, local economies, or services.

The plan should be $280. That's it. Not $280 + subsidies. Just $280.
7 Tips to Drink More Water
i see no reason why AR cant be merged with VR, although maybe that is because i dont have a clue about how either works
The healthcare and health insurance system in the United States is a complete mess. There are multiple distinct problems, but politicians like to group them all together into one single problem. The way I see it, all the problems fall into one of two major categories: (1) Healthcare costs are out of control, and (2) Health insurance costs are out of control.

1) Healthcare costs are out of control.

In the US, healthcare spending is 17% of GDP, the highest of any country in the world; the next highest is France, at 11% GDP. [0] The reasons for this are very complex and intertwined, but there are a few major issues:

(1a) Intellectual Property protections: When only one company can sell a drug for the first 10 years of its existence, they effectively have a monopoly and can set the price to whatever they want.

(1b) R&D costs: If it costs $10mm to develop a new drug to treat a deadly disease that affects less than 1% of the population, then naturally the company must set a high price for the drug to cover costs of R&D; this is related to (1a).

(1c) Primary care providers and pharmaceutical companies are accountable to nobody when setting their prices. Because the majority of people pay for healthcare via insurance, they are price insensitive. After all, if insurance is paying for your healthcare, what do you care if the cost is $100k or $1k? (As an example: A family friend of mine ran a "compounding pharmacy," where he compounded multiple drugs into a single pill, so people who are prescribed 15+ pills to only need to take one. The insurance companies considered the resulting compound to be a "new drug" and therefore he was able to set its price to literally whatever he wanted.)

2) Health insurance costs are out of control.

This is a complex issue but it comes down to a few major factors:

(2a) Risk pools cannot cross state lines. As far as I can see there is literally no reason for this.

(2b) The requirement to cover pre-existing conditions increases insurance costs for everyone. As many have mentioned in this thread, it makes no sense to call coverage for pre-existing conditions "insurance." If you already have a disease, you aren't insuring against it; you're just paying for it. I do think that people have a right to healthcare, and even as a republican I think that taxpayers have a duty to subsidize those with pre-existing conditions. But I don't think we should be including this obligation in the cost of insurance from private companies. It should be a separate budget item, like social security or medicare or medicaid (or better yet, take it out of the defense budget...). If private companies need to insure (read: pay for) pre-existing conditions, then they effectively become the gatekeepers for this tax, and they have every incentive to make it as high as possible.

[0] http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/20...
Oh, yeah, definitely.

I'd actually compare the cost to the cost of hiring a personal trainer. Both solve two problems: exercising, and the motivation to exercise.

Looked at in that light, the Vive's way cheaper.
Oh nice, this looks like a nice tweak on the AudioShield formula - appreciate the rec!
>> If it's plugged in, charge it and the Macbook

The thing is there's only one USB-C port (based on the marketing photos, which is all I have to go by), so it can't be "plugged in" except when the bridge is unplugged.
I'm envisioning some kind of caching forward proxy for git. Point your clones/fetches at it and it will proxy the connection to the source fork. If the source fork is down, it will serve its cached copy of the fork.

I found this[0] but it's prerelease and looks like it hasn't been touched in five years. Anyone know of any other solutions like this? Good idea? Bad idea?

0. https://github.com/rohanpm/ngitcached
We've applied to YC a few months back with a real estate app based exactly on this premise. The goal was saving people's time and money in the inefficient home-search process.

Turned down, though.
> we didn't start any new wars

I think you need to re-examine that one. I'd agree we didn't start any wars on the scale of Iraq, but we did continue with unnecessary and unsuccessful foreign interventions that have only served to further destabilize the Middle East (and bleeding into Europe...)
> The program is open to city residents, ages 18 and up, whose incomes and net worth are low but who do not qualify for other public coverage, and who have had no insurance for at least 90 days.

Ah the classic "if you are middle class F U" program
Thanks! Notice the error in their second example?
I found the initial experience very compelling, too. Unfortunately, that initial thrill wears off fast. I challenge you to buy a Vive and report back in a few months with your daily usage level.
I want VR. And judging from user reaction to the VR experiences I've created, quite a few other people do too.

The market's there. You can argue about the size of it, fine. But it's definitely there.
Why does your faith trump someone else's personal belief? That is, why does faith, which is a belief without any proof, often with proof to the contrary, trump a belief that might actually be grounded in some form of reasoning? In both cases it's simply what you believe vs what someone else believes.
This same comment has showed up a half dozen times and it's a false characterization of the actual vote last night.

From the NYT: "Senate Republicans took their first major step toward repealing the Affordable Care Act on Thursday, approving a budget blueprint that would allow them to (gut the health care law) without the threat of a Democratic filibuster."

So take out the editorial "gut the healthcare law" and replace with "repeal and replace" and you have a clear reporting of what actually happened.

Two paragraphs down the actual non-editorialized reporting states the real truth; "The action by the Senate is essentially procedural"
sam, i'd like the choice to buy or not buy health insurance. thats a little thing called freedom
Some states don't tax income, like my state of Florida. They don't much care about universal healthcare, because most of their residents are already on a sort of universal healthcare if you're the right age: Medicare. I'm unsure if there's a political will to enact taxes in this state to pay for healthcare when there's only a sales tax in existence (for citizens).
I totally agree! The immersive experience not only makes you forget that you are working out but also makes you want to be better at moving around so you can perform better in the game.
I think expanding risk pools across states is a very tricky problem. It would imply overriding states' self-determination regarding regulation of insurance companies which is a big no-no for Republicans.
Nobody wants VR _as it is currently implemented_. With goggles the size of glasses, no tether, and the ability to see around you at the flick of a switch, it would take over the planet. That could be a while off though.
So? Skin colour and body shape are determined by environment as well as by genes, and race is determined by social factors as well as by skin colour and body shape. It's at least as convoluted a process to get from genes to race as it is to get from genes to wealth.

You're accusing me of politicizing facts, but seeing race in and around normal human variation is itself a political act, even if it is an innate prejudice.
Design Co-Op Program Connecting Designers and Startups
Of course it's a dog...if you know up front that it's a dog. I take it as a dig about the "dogginess" of the icon. At the resolution of the time, hell, could be a koala for all I know.
Ouch, that's pretty harsh. I really don't. And I would agree your examples fit medical care and are excellent points. I just wanted to people to consider, is artificial hormones really more healthy? Is healthcare an accurate term?
I agree it doesn't have to be utilitarian to be admirable. That's called art. But you seem to be saying it's particularly admirable because it's for its own sake? That is a weird POV to me.
From the FAQ: "No, really, what's Tox? It's a VERY secure Instant Messenger ...."

So they acknowledged this is not true in their issue tracker, but not publicly? Further, they internally claim they don't know what threats it faces, don't understand what those threats are, and don't want to worry at this time about what insecurity they have?

Also: "a largely undocumented, untested, and not well-understood code base of about 19 ksloc (C)" from one of their own developers.

This is quite disappointing.
I'll trade your anecdote for mine: I have been working for Decent Companies for 15 years. Every year my payments went up, the company's prices went up, my copayments went up, and my coverage went down.

The real nadir for coverage was in the end of the Bush years: I worked at Home Depot as a developer. That means that the plan covers a lot of badly paid people, and a lot of old people. I was paying hundreds a month, my doctor visits were $75, 20% coinsurance in hospital visits up to 10K, and a maximum lifetime benefit of 1 million: So if something really bad happened, like a stroke, they'd stop covering before it was all said and done!

Since, my payments kept going up at similar rates, but at least things like maximum lifetime coverage has gone away.

The one and only time things have dropped in price was last year, now that I work at a place where the average employee's age is 26. The company still pays $1600/mo for their side of the coverage, but since it's mostly developers, they can afford it. No company in their right mind will pay that when the employees are making $15/hr

Healthcare has been less and less affordable since the Clinton years, it's just that it started very affordable. the ACA didn't make things noticeably different for the good plans overall: It's all still very expensive, and picking an employer that either has a young, healthy workforce, or has so much money they can pay for expensive plans, is the big difference between having good health coverage or not.

So I guess that what I am trying to say is that if you had the insurance you claim to have had in the bush years, you were incredibly fortunate, and your situation was not common.
In my opinion, this idea that someone may only need "catastrophic" insurance because they "work hard to stay healthy" seldom works out without costing everyone a lot of money. Often these plans don't cover enough, and people end up with no real insurance at all. Perhaps a stroke or heart attack would be covered in the immediate sense (ambulance and initial hospital stay) but does it cover physical and occupational therapy?

These are the situations the ACA is trying to avoid and it was clear from the beginning that these types of plans (a nominal fee for virtually no care) would not be allowed.

Even if plans like this were allowed, we'd be in a situation where the healthy essential chose the equivalent of no insurance for the smallest amount possible. That's nearly the same as not having insurance at all.
If you're finding getting a raise hard, good luck with that.
I think you nailed it: you have to relax a certain amount and let your brain do it's own thing—like falling asleep. Some people have more of a tendency to latch on to the fact they're looking through a device and don't 'let go' and the magic doesn't happen. It's also probably situation dependent; your mind is less likely to let go of your actual environment and focus on the virtual if there are distractions or anything you're concerned about in your surroundings (e.g. it will be less likely for some people while in stores and at conferences etc.).
Were they in VR headsets (or glasses), or were they the desktop bars?

(Last time I tried a bunch of eye tracking, the desk-mounted was amazing and the head-mounted wasn't)
Is Wayland actually that much nicer than X11? Like, I know the architecture and code and nicer, but as the end user, do you actually experience anything different?
lol - great point - a squat rack is a pretty bulky piece of equipment too!
I hope that you realize that 8k/eye at 120Hz is in the 100Gb/s range with compression, that you won't see because it's already a retina display (60ppd) at 130deg view angle.
Also there are NO GPUs that could come close to rendering a single eye today at even 60Hz (even 30Hz would be absolutely top end).

So, I think your requirements are completely unrealistic, but I agree that the current VR (1k/eye at <90Hz with 20-30ms latency) is unusable and gives me a headache. I suspect that around 2-3k/eye at 90-120Hz with 10-20ms latency will be sufficient to be usable.

Unfortunately, that almost certainly means Foveal rendering (since UHD at 60Hz is too hard and 120 is right out), which will take some time. However, it probably also means that the bandwidths might be possible to untethered mulit-Gig wireless. Having an unteathered system that used a high powered GPU would be really nice.
<edited to add>
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/johnsny/papers...
I think VR is just a stepping stone for true mixed reality, which most people confuse with AR but is really a mixture of the two. I doubt we will see VR-only games 10 years from now outside of dedicated arcade-like settings ala The Void, where you go and don the equipment necessary to to do this in a large space with convincing realism and with a group of people. The benefits of room scale pure VR are only properly realized in relatively carefully controlled settings. Mixed reality on the other hand can allow for a much wider range of experiences in a wider range of settings.
I think you've answered a question you'd like to answer instead of one you don't: WHY is healthcare in this country SO EXPENSIVE?

The way to make care available is to drive down costs. We haven't done a single thing with the ACA to improve the affordability of care, we've just made the un-affordability a problem borne by the people who were already doing a good job of taking care of themselves. That's not a scalable solution.

The ACA got us a lot of short-term benefit for a small group of people but set in motion a chain of events that will only drive UP costs while driving affordability down.

And I'd like to argue that until we do something to improve the market dynamics of healthcare we are very likely to see this sort of thing continue to get worse until it's so unsustainable that it's like trying to legislate away the force of gravity.

One thing I'd like to see in any future version of ACA reform is RIGOROUS price transparency by healthcare providers. It should be absolutely illegal for any healthcare provider to conceal, obfuscate, or otherwise obstruct the price discovery mechanism of the market.

Even if you argue that consumers aren't the best people to decide what services are necessary or needed, they can rely on the advice of trusted advisors and popular understanding to shop for healthcare at providers known for offering good value.

SO MUCH of health care isn't of the "emergent" kind but the kind that is for chronic issues that are the result of unhealthy living or plain bad genetic luck. We need to redouble our efforts to drive those costs of care down and start paying for results and not treatment. Paying for treatment encourages overconsumption. Paying for outcomes encourages optimizing for cures.
>you probably haven't heard of burden of proof.

Seeing as ample evidence has been put forward for AGW, as opposed to the alternatives proposed, this seems unlikely.
I had the exact same thoughts after playing with a Vive. An amazing glimpse at the near future.
Our children are going to look back and laugh at existing headgear just like the transition from CRT to LCD ... hopefully direct brain/retinal input will happen in my lifetime :)
Your message reminds me of Steve Ballmer, 2007:

> "There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance," said Ballmer. "It's a $500 subsidized item. They may make a lot of money. But if you actually take a look at the 1.3 billion phones that get sold, I'd prefer to have our software in 60% or 70% or 80% of them, than I would to have 2% or 3%, which is what Apple might get."

But that's probably because I agree with the posted article, and think VR will have a very big future.