skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Several of those countries implement universal coverage using a private insurance model.
Having tried implementing calorie counting... how exactly do you do it?

You either cook everything yourself and weigh every ingredient. Or you buy totally packaged meals (Lite 'n Easy, etc), or you buy fast food (And even then, the calorie counts in fast food are... inaccurate at best).

If I go to the corner shop and get a sandwich I have no idea what's in it and there is no accurate way to estimate.

While it's good to be aware just how energy dense foods are (like muffins... aka breakfast cakes) there is no method that I'd consider both achievable for the average person to consistently do AND accurate enough to be considered 'counting' as opposed to washy estimates.
What do you call by "queue depth". Is it the number of concurrent clients?

If it's true then it looks very suspicious that avg. latency decreases as the number of concurrent clients goes up. How do you measure avg. latency?

Let me illustrate what the avg. latency usually means.

Imagine that we have two concurrent users: Alice and Bob. During the testing lasting one second, Alice managed to send 3 requests per second, the first request took 0.5 seconds while the rest were executed in a quarter of a second each. In the same time, Bob did only 2 requests, each of them took 0.5 seconds.

So the average latency is the sum of execution time taken by each request divided by the number of all requests, in our case it's (0.5+0.25+0.25+0.5+0.5) / 5 = 0.4

Did you use the same definition?
Or SuperCollider or any demo of a standard synth plugin dropped into a free VST host (like dropping a demo version of Massive [0] into Reaper [1]... though Reaper technically not free).

[0] https://www.native-instruments.com/en/products/komplete/synt...
[1] http://www.reaper.fm/
>The researchers expect that some e-cigarette advocates will deny the importance of their work by saying “no one vapes at such high powers”

And how do they address these concerns? The burning process that creates benzene and formaldehyde also creates a terrible taste. It's like warning users to be careful with frying pans because food and oil that is burnt to a blackened husk has carcinogens.

Additionally, only one of the devices had benzene formation within stock power levels.

The 2015 study mentioned has similar flaws.
You may be able to grow potatoes on Mars, but growing them in the Andes doesn't really get you that much closer to Martian conditions.

Average pressure on Mars is about 0.6 kpa which is a trifle less than the pressure at Cusco which is approx 65 kpa pascals. Mt Everest is still about 37 kpa.

I believe you'd have to go about 50km above sea level to hit the average pressure of Mars.
Your conflating cost based pricing and market based pricing.

None of the players above (including apple) engage in cost based pricing. They all charge the price that maximizes their profits, not the price that sells the most units while breaking even.
When I worked a minimum wage job after high school full time I paid zero in taxes, and I'm a citizen.
Uhh, no thanks. I'd rather be able to decide for myself what healthcare I buy, instead of being forced into a substandard single payer system.

Ok, fine, create a public option. But don't force me to buy it. Let me buy my own healthcare.
Just going by my experience in Canada, most people don't buy too much extra. You still have to get dental & vision although, but the costs for that are minor. Many don't buy any health insurance at all.
Just replace/recycle it regularly.
If you could share with me what mobile phone / web browser you used that produced the styling issue, I'll be sure to pass it on to the relavent people within google so that it gets resolved.

Also if you send me an email at bookman@google.com I'll be sure to update you as to when the styling errors are resolved.

(Disclaimer, I work for google cloud)
> the truth is that nobody is in a better position to determine how your income should be spent than you

This may be unpopular to say, but this is pretty demonstrably false.

Perhaps you've not heard of the free rider problem?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_rider_problem
> ver many decades, the insurance companies have negotiated payments much less than the quoted payment. In turn, the healthcare providers raise their rates in order to make sure they can still make money even with the discount they give insurance. When the time comes for the insurance companies to renegotiate, the same thing happens, and the healthcare providers raise their rates. This works fine for those of us who have insurance, but for non insured individuals, they have to pay the "actual" rate - which has been inflated because of the insurance company discount! This has been going on for many decades

This is close to correct, but a subtle correction:

Medicare and Medicaid set their reimbursement rates by fiat, and providers have essentially no ability to negotiate those. Except in critical access areas, Medicare actually reimburses much less than the marginal costs of care for its patients (7% in the aggregate). As a result, providers present very large bills to everyone else (privately insured and uninsured patients) to make up for this loss - you can't stay in business if you're literally making a loss on every patient! Uninsured patients see the large bill and assume they have to pay the entire amount (they don't!), and private insurers end up negotiating that down to some multiple of what Medicare pays.

A typical insurer will negotiate an agreement like, "we'll pay 350% of what Medicare pays for this category of services".
They will either have to increase contributions or cut payments to future retirees.
>I'm sure as shit happy to pay more in taxes for a universal single single-payer.

As someone who just climbed out of being a contractor and into a full time position, I concur. Raise my taxes for this. Please do it, and do it soon.
Can you provide us a list of those 12 other irreversible life choices that you can count? I am genuinely cuious to know what other such life choices are there that I need to be careful about.
How to Set Goals Like Larry Page
Have you ever convinced someone of something by using a utilitarian argument? I haven't.

I have become completely convinced that either nobody is a utilitarian (i.e. 'utilitarians' just frame their preferences as the utility-maximizing solution), or that there is no consistent way to evaluate utility.
Maybe the time to begin such an initiative is now. And maybe the tech industry, which has long suffered from the related housing crisis, should back such an initiative.
After all, it was them that gave us Enron, Deepwater Horizon, and most recently, the subprime mortgage crisis, which brought the entire world economy to its knees.

That's a pretty poor argument if you line it up against gov't waste, incompetence and corruption.
The grandstanding is corny at best. Take the first example:

> Despite continued assaults on the credibility of her contributions to modern computer science as the world’s first computer programmer, Ada Lovelace coded.

Yet in reality she was very much respected in her day, and despite her challenges received widespread support. The first "assaults" on her scope of her contributions came over 100 after her death, and not some sexism she had to fight and overcome.
The Trolley problem isn't really an example of utilitarianism being wrong. Quite the opposite, I use that example to convince people of how awesome Utilitarianism is, not as a contradiction.

What, would you chose to kill 5 people, instead of one?
In almost all European countries, its provided by the government and funded by taxation. My point stands.
Yeah well i have tried both.
I don't think anyone disagrees that single payer requires higher taxes than we currently pay. so given that, you're trying to tell me that a state with the highest taxes (much much higher than #2) in the nation, with the lowest housing affordability will attract more entrepreneurs than before?

why? because the young and invincible will be choose cheaper healthcare over being able to live comfortably? I highly doubt it. this has nothing to do with whether or not single payer is a good idea. I just did the idea that people will choose CA over cheaper states just for that reason
Assuming this is implemented, how does it work in case of Californians traveling in other states/countries? Will it work like the current out-of-network case, that the government reimburse you some percentage, with some restrictions (ER only, for example)? Or will the Californians need to buy a separated insurance before they travel?

How does this work for single-payer countries, like Canada?
You've described the reason that I doubt I'll ever do much with functional programming. Using it to solve a non-trivial problem reminds me unpleasantly of math, rather than lists of instructions.
> Medicaid is run at the state level, but the same applies there as well - privately managed Medicaid plans are gaining popularity because they deliver better medical results at lower prices.

This is disputable. Private companies are also motivated by greed which means they'll cut corners to save penies.
Remaining a goofball all the time despite his talent and success is the great thing he's done.
This seems flaky:

"Since May 2003 we have experimented with alternate day calorie restriction, one day consuming 20-50% of estimated daily caloric requirement and the next day ad lib eating, and have observed health benefits starting in as little as two weeks, in insulin resistance, asthma, seasonal allergies, infectious diseases of viral, bacterial and fungal origin (viral URI, recurrent bacterial tonsillitis, chronic sinusitis, periodontal disease), autoimmune disorder (rheumatoid arthritis), osteoarthritis, symptoms due to CNS inflammatory lesions (Tourette's, Meniere's) cardiac arrhythmias (PVCs, atrial fibrillation), menopause related hot flashes." (Emphasis mine.)

Are they still talking about mice? Or experiments on people?
Take a close look at physician salaries in US vs. Canada.

If you're going to cut costs, you're going to have to convince physicians to take a pay cut.
Australia did it. It won't happen overnight, but the planning has to start somewhere.
SS has a couple of trillion dollars saved. The US federal government controls the currency it uses to borrow, so its debt is qualitatively different from an entity like Puerto Rico.
To add to that point, if you manage to get screenshots you can do an image comparison using perceptual hashing [0]. The idea is to compute hashes of images and compare those, rather than scanning through each pixel.

Note that perceptual hashes should not obey the avalanche effect, so a minor difference in the two images should yield a small change in the hashes (desirable in this case). Then accept results that are within some small % error margin.

An example of a library that does this is jimp [1].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptual_hashing
[1] https://github.com/oliver-moran/jimp#comparing-images
Rollout.io Respond to apple's ban
He is arguing that they are not entitled to his money, but others should be entitled to others (home owners) money. Or as Pink Floyd might say "share it fairly but don't take a slice of my pie"
Stumbling upon Jelly gave me the same excitement as when I first discovered Ask Jeeves. And like Ask, the product fell short of expectations - it couldn't answer my basic questions.

Seems like an acquihire.
* It's a terrible feedback loop caused by treating health care (which is ultimately a cost center) as a for-profit enterprise.*

Ummm... you do realize that many other countries with universal coverage rely on private insurance, right?
Thanks for your kind words.

I'm not really sure how I got from A to B except age, pain, and a low tolerance for bullshit (especially my own). My sister believes we are exceptionally analytical and that it has helped us to develop because we are able to be self-critical (not in a pejorative sense). (She's a detective, so maybe she's onto something.) I know that at some point I realized the fear of pain was worse than pain and suddenly it was easy to be emotionally honest with myself and others.

I'm not sure if that helps.
I gave that as an example of a controversial subject; many people prefer to let things be rather than interfere and kill one or more people. The organ donor example is much tougher.
"Any amount is too much" is never true, even for cyanide, asbestos, ...

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzene#Benzene_exposure_limit...

> The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has set a permissible exposure limit of 1 part of benzene per million parts of air (1 ppm) in the workplace during an 8-hour workday, 40-hour workweek. The short term exposure limit for airborne benzene is 5 ppm for 15 minutes. [...]

> The U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) revised the Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health (IDLH) concentration for benzene to 500 ppm.[...]

If someone is going to smoke all day, I think that it's more appropriate to use a threshold similar to the one for workers (1ppm) or perhaps a smaller one like .1ppm.

> This estimate assumes no threshold for benzene's carcinogenic effects.

This is probably not true, but it's better to err in the side of caution, without being alarmist.
So in the US, it's legal to drive a car without having insurance?

No, of course not.[1] The exact details by state. But there are many problems. Here are some off the top of my head:

1) maximum penalties for allowing insurance to lapse might be light, and if you're a bad driver insurance might be expensive to purchase. Even for much worse than a simple accident, the penalties might be light. For example, for quite a while a nearby city, Portland Oregon, was doing "catch and release" for actual car thieves (I neither know nor care if they still do it). What that meant is if they caught you driving a stolen car the police would write you a citation on the spot and then let you go. You would "promise" to appear in court some number of months later! The argument was that they didn't have enough jail space for such petty criminals.

2) you might be "judgement proof". If you have no assets, even if you are sued, then you just don't pay. People rarely if ever get put in jail if they can't pay a civil judgement. So why bother to continue to pay for insurance if you're driving a crappy car and you don't care what happens to anyone you hit?

3) You might not even have a license, or it might have been suspended for previous bad behavior. (And it's probably difficult to purchase insurance under those circumstances). So, what can the government do, suspend your already suspended license? That probably works about as well as "double secret probation" worked in Animal House.

4) I can think of many similar scenarios, but you get the point

In short, the USA is not at all as homogeneous a country as Switzerland. There are plenty of lowlifes around who just don't give a shit. And very little is ever done by the government to persuade them to change their behavior.

To protect themselves from such situations, many people add "uninsured motorist" coverage to their insurance policy. This means your insurer pays you even if the other guy doesn't have insurance.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_insurance_in_the_Unite...
Yeah it's interesting, I find myself choosing a potentially less healthy food option simply because it's nutrition information is more readily available and easily quantifiable.
In my opinion, typical PoC academic work tends to underestimate the actual effort required to execute an exploit, and sometimes even describes exploits that can only ever occur under very stringent conditions.

Didn't Stuxnet involve backdooring Siemens PLCs? I find that pretty remarkable. In general, extremely sophisticated exploits that target critical infrastructure require attacks that haven't already been considered, be it for delivery or execution.
It's certainly reasonable for a studies across fields with hourly pay or, e.g., including both part-time and full-time (such as the BLS survey cited by the Forbes article), but I'm not sure we can make that assumption for software development - programmer productivity in a given time period is, on its own, somewhat mythically considered to vary by orders of magnitude.
This is what Australia does, I think. Single payer public option, but you can choose to buy private health care as well (though you still pay taxes for the public option regardless). I'm curious to hear from any Australians about how this system works for them.
"IT...COULD...WORK!!!"
- Dr. Frederick Frankenstein

Cool idea. Especially not reinventing wheels but chaining them together instead. Good work.
OK, so when this is rolled out and healthcare costs don't come down, but rather increase at the same rate, will you be happy to pay another 10-20% in taxes knowing the problem isn't solved?
I read from somewhere that even 16 hours is enough for the benefits of Intermittent fasting.

Has anyone done studies with Buddhist monks in Vipassana tradition? They have rule not to eat after midday. Obviously many of them cheat different ways but if you can find the hardcorce monks and monasteries, you would have several thousands (possibly tens of thousands) subjects who have already been following the regime for several decades.
To be blithe, it goes into the same ultimate goal of social welfare: to keep the not-well-off contented enough to prevent revolution. So he can either pay for programs to improve medical care in general, or he can pay for a militia to protect him should there be a class-based insurrection. That is the pragmatic principle behind taxation.
> #2: Tight coupling is good.

Only between a test and the specific code for the behavior under test. It's not good between test suites, abstraction layers, APIs, etc.

> #3: It’s good when something is known to be broken.

When compared to it being broken unknowingly, but not really otherwise.

> #15: The same bug almost never “reoccurs” so most “regression testing” is pure waste.

> #48: Writing tests for bugs that are fixed does NOT correlate with catching new bugs when they arise.

What about a situation where you have untested behavior (perhaps incomplete test coverage to begin with), then you find a problem in that code and write a test to prevent regression. When you later refactor the code under test there's a definite possibility of "regression" of sorts, especially if the refactoring is comprehensive.

> #20: “Black box” is a political designation and has no technical meaning.

A black box is a system where you can observe inputs and outputs but not the system performing the transmutation.

> #31: On a Web site with 1 million visits per week,a one-in-a-million event can occur once a week.

Quoted for thought-fodder, this one is awesome.

> #51: Granular and/or comprehensive documentation of a nontrivial Web site is demonstrably impossible.

It certainly feels this way, but what's the solution? Have no docs, write docs knowing they won't be comprehensive, or expect to chase an impossible goal?

> #66: If no one ever finds out about the bug then the bug never existed in the first place.

wink wink ... this simply isn't true!

> #83: Bugs cluster at the interfaces, bugs are not distributed randomly.

Isn't this only true if there's more unit-level testing than integration/functional testing?

> #84: There’s more time grains in 1 year of compute time than there are seconds in the age of the universe.

1 year of compute time for what? All of the computers in the world? A datacenter? A computer with a 1μ grain size has roughly 3.15E+13 grains per year but there are over 4E+17 seconds in the age of the universe.

> #93: More testing doesn’t correlate with better quality, less testing doesn’t correlate with worse quality.

I don't have any specific data but my experience has been that testing (manual or automated) does correlate with quality. Testing might be the developer pressing F5 a lot, writing automated tests, or a stakeholder manually end-user testing. Think about the state of software which was developed but never run. Software rarely executes flawlessly first-run, and every time a developer runs it, it's testing.
> If there is still excess demand for MD degrees, then there is still room for potential MDs to borrow any shortfall that residency subsidies won't cover.

Because the amount of loan debt physicians have to take on is already massive, and very few want to increase that by an additional $112,000 (which is the amount Medicare provides). There are some, but empirically, not many.

The term of that loan is comparable to many mortgages, and there's enough uncertainty at this point in the expected payout that many qualified would-be doctors are incentivized to choose other professions instead, where they can make a pretty good living (and, possibly, a better one) much sooner and without the risk of taking out an additional series of six-figure loans on top of whatever may be outstanding from undergraduate education.

> The argument is like saying that Hamilton showings are limited by how much the government will subsidize ticket prices by.

Broadway ticket prices are a really bad analogy, because prices are intentionally sold below market-clearing rate for a whole slew of reasons that aren't directly comparable to the medical profession.
And yet. We have a system where the rich are OK and the poor can be destroyed by an encounter with the health care system.

A system where almost everyone is OK and the rich can pay for the best care available is far, far preferable.
Some people will never have the means to pay for their own health care. Some jobs that have social value do not pay enough money to care for people. In your worldview, those people don't deserve to have health.

I'll stick with civilized societies thankyouverymuch.
Nice project.

IIRC, doesn't github have some trademarks on their designs or something? If so, please be weary of this (and their lawyers) OP
I calorie counted for years.

You take things apart and weigh them, or make good estimates based on total weight. You don't need to be very accurate, anything within ~25% error is fine. You just need to be very consistent.

The USDA has a great database that provides you all the raw materials (and many of the packaged composite items) to use, and once you've eaten a thing and recorded the values, you can simply reuse them infinitely. One ham sandwich, if you're consistent about it, is a given calorie intake.

The key is what that lets you do: It lets you analyze your intake versus body composition and weight, determine whether you're eating too much, too little, or a bad ratio, and then make slow changes over time to fix that problem.

If you're like me right now, you're overweight. Okay, look at your calorie count, reduce it by say 5% or 10%, wait a month, see how your body composition changes, and reanalyze.

With this method you don't need to be dead-on-balls-accurate with your calorie counting, only consistent and reasonable.
That has nothing to do with temperature.

You can keep metric and use Fahrenheit with very little change.

And you got your units wrong anyway: "To heat one cubic centimetre of water up 1°C takes 1 Joule" - you mean 1 calorie, not 1 Joule.

Change Celsius to Fahrenheit and only calorie changes, and since it's anyway not part of SI it makes little difference.

Joule is the main energy unit, and it's not tied to Celsius at all.

I totally get the arguments for metric - except for temperature. For temperature Fahrenheit is the better scale.

Look here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_System_of_Units#...

And notice how Kelvin stands alone - it's not tied to any other unit. It can be replaced with almost no impact.