skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It depends on how much the people that know how to treat your cancer want to charge and if the hypothetical person with cancer can afford it. Nowhere else in the world do we say "This person can't afford this? Oh well we'll ignore it then. cortesoft finds it repugnant!"

I wouldn't call cancer treatments "basic" by any stretch of the imagination.
Cleverly leaves out the part where Google siphons your traffic. AMP is the trojan horse and I don't "get" those welcoming it into the gates.
Parent claims that women would divorce their partners on a scale large enough to be a threat to civilization if women were to receive UBI, because they would no longer need male providers.

Do you have some explanation for why this might be the case, other than "the need for a male provider" being (in parent's view) the only thing holding those at-risk relationships together?

>Many women, if their partners lose their jobs, will divorce them.

Preferring to be in a relationship with a well-employed men is very different from needing a male provider as a condition of well-being or survival.

>Turning an interesting question based on trends into a moral outrage

Fear and dismay at the proposition that women might stop needing male providers is morally outrageous, particularly when you consider that people who believe women receiving income threatens civilization are likely in a position to influence the hire/no hire decision on female candidates in our industry.
Life of a drone owner
I'm getting an application error from heroku when I try to enter in a Twitter handle (@dronezone) from 2000-12-12 to 2017-01-01
The difficulty here is making health care a profitable business, which is at odds with providing good health care. American health care, even for the wealthy, is a miserable affair when someone really needs major care (such as following a traumatic accident). The patient becomes a liability for the insurance company and a profit center for the hospital, all of which is more important than the patient's long term recovery. That is not the only way American health care fails.

I would definitely welcome a unitified health care system in California.
Thanks for sharing. Consider breaking it up into a few paragraphs to make it easier to parse.

The most interesting tool I found in the leaks was the bug that jumps airgap to make Nero burn trojaned binaries. If we see more tools like this come out of the woodwork, it shows that the CIA is at least in some ways keeping their teeth sharp.

I believe that the FBI and Obama both played politics for a few reasons, namely:

- Obama and the FBI probably withheld a reasonable amount of information from each other regarding the case

- This was all a charade to bring the topic into the public sphere. It backfired, but the aim was to allow future high-profile cases on which concurrent evidence trails are harder to establish. Once it backfired, Comey came out with a public letter admonishing the American people, comparing us to children. He stated that with Rule 41 coming into effect, the FBI would use its expanded powers to collect information for the following year. They would then use that information in an upcoming "adult conversation" the FBI wishes to have with the public about the future of open, libre encryption.

We should be expecting that "conversation" to take place this year. And I don't expect it to be much of a dialogue so much as a monologue. I expect the FBI to either directly or indirectly (thru Wikileaks, etc) release information that "proves" that backdoored encryption and its inherent reduced security is necessary for public safety. There is a saying we all know and love about the merits of this particular trade-off

I'm certain the FBI always had that contact on standby. They probably received multiple unprompted bids from various hacking companies during the public run of the case. They wanted to flex how much pull they had over a giant like Apple. Even though they seemingly failed, they came out with a huge data point: The American people need further brainwashing and ideological shifting before attempting a full coup over libre encryption in America.

I hope that things make a little more sense now.
I have long believed, due entirely to anecdotal evidence, that restricting calories and eating less is one of the best ways to add years to your life. It seems that eating is inherently stressful for the body. Though obviously necessary, eating is something that we should strive to minimize. Any more than necessary, and the stress induced from digestion, and inflammatory molecules, damages the body and undermines our ability to fight infection.
Yes they would be more likely, but they wouldn't need to.
It's not a commodity good (in part bc of drug patents). An iPhone may cost more in Asia, but drug treatments are way cheaper. The comparison doesn't really work.
There are many bad things about Prop 13. Indeed I'm straining to think of anything good about it. But the worst is that it applies to commercial property as well.
As [1] points out, overall costs are less with single payer healthcare. Taxes go up, but insurance premiums go down more and people end up paying less overall. It's a no brainer...
Serious question: what do you propose we do with the people dying in the street?
yellow line on road seems to perfectly align with the yellow barrier. camera didn't identify the wall. I don't think they have radar to identify solid objects, do they? Isn't it just camera? I can't remember right now and too lazy to look it up.
I wouldn't know. It seems reasonable.

All the academic studies I have seen either adjust for it explicitly or put forward a strong case on why it isn't being included.
I'm arguing that it's a more sophisticated and on the whole more humane system of suppressing dissent, but we shouldn't deny that it exists and serves the same functions.
>Drug prices are unregulated. The cost of developing drugs is high and has been getting higher.

What do drug prices have to do with the cost of an office consultation?
If you'd like to see what people actually would do with money provided by a basic income program, here are the results of a survery conducted by GiveDirectly, a company piloting the idea in Kenya.

It seems that despite your conjecture, there are a number of people investing the income into education, fishing nets, seeds for crops/livestock, fishing nets, beauty salon's, etc.

In my experience, poor people are the world's greatest entrepreneurs. Every day, they must innovate in order to survive. They remain poor because they do not have the opportunities to turn their creativity into sustainable income.
My diet:

- Eggs (WIC)
- Bacon (WIC)
- Bananas (WIC) – a case of 100 is ~$20
- Yogurt (WIC?)
- Almond Milk (justifiably more expensive, so swap with milk)
- Salmon (justifiably more expensive, swap with chicken or another protein)
- Cous Cous (justifiably more expensive, swap with another carb/fiber).

I'd argue that, yes, if you take the steps to build up the motivation, you can. I was a shell of a man before I started on my current path. It just takes time. I didn't start out where I am and I don't expect others to, either.
Keto is great but there's still a willpower component, it can be more or less difficult depending on the person. I don't really like cooking a lot, but I don't mind eating the same things most of the time. It would be a lot harder for someone who hates cooking and hates eating the same thing all the time. While raw hunger never bothered me I did find cravings an occasional issue (never constant, but even after months never quite disappearing) and sometimes they'd be for things I haven't had in years. Eventually it might be something easy to satisfy like a pizza and when you give in once it's easy to say "screw it", though some people can only continue if they have an occasional cheat day.

I'm an on-and-off-again keto dieter (I appreciate that for me it seems to take at least 2-3x as long to put the weight back on as it takes to take off as I inevitably revert to former diet choices...) and I never find the transition period difficult, but there's a consistent point where I hit "eh, still fat, but don't feel super fat anymore" and that's when the cravings or the pressures of eating non-keto with company have the highest chance of getting to me. There are also unforeseen stressors that can make things difficult (in my case a forced house move) but I'm ok with the state of flux. I don't want a six-pack physique enough, not really, and that's the last willpower component -- how long can you stick with it (and introduce more exercise), even with bumps and setbacks? My friend who introduced me to the diet lost 100 lbs by forcing himself to do keto for about 5 months, but he was fat enough at the start that he could stand to lose another 50 lbs but it's not as easy now. Still, he's much happier and healthier now than before. One's level of willpower is still involved even with how great keto is and is the difference between losing 50 lbs (not bad), 100 lbs (pretty awesome), and 150 lbs (your ideal).
Thanks for sharing all these insights, it's definitely an eye opener, both regarding APL as well as conventional wisdom.
Another new account making a trolling comment which adds no knowledge to the conversation.

> all I ever hear is people complaining about it

Government funded healthcare is widely supported in the U.S., including Medicare, Medicaid, and the Affordable Care Act.
HPE to buy Nimble Storage for $1B
> This coding style is standard practice for Win32 API development.

Do you have a public style guide that indicates this?

I worked at Microsoft, and while there are teams that (very unfortunately) went with this "diamond" style of error handling, code written in the CNF (Cutler Normal Form) style, such as the kernel code, use gotos and a central cleanup point at the end of the function, which is also the same style used by the Linux kernel: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/Documentation/...

The "diamond" style hinders readability, especially when you have many levels of indentation). While it may be a practice adopted by many people, that is does not necessarily mean that it is good style. Even Steve McConnell's Code Complete, a book published by Microsoft Press, recommends early returns over deeply nested if statements for error handling: https://books.google.com/books?id=LpVCAwAAQBAJ&lpg=PA764&ots...

Unfortunately, the Win32 API is full of technical debt, many of which cannot be repaid due to backwards compatibility reasons. Given it is likely most application code written against Win32 is in C++, the ideal approach would be to follow an object-oriented style and use destructors and RAII rather than cleanup functions, but that is not the world we live in.

The design of the Win32 API should not be used as guidelines for good coding practices or even API design. If you haven't already, I highly recommend reading "The Worst API Ever Made": https://mollyrocket.com/casey/stream_0029.html.
From their front page: "allow for perfect scale-up linear performance of up to 1,000,000 read/write operations per node."

What happens after 1M operations? The nodes catch on fire?
This is the point where America discovers European liberal political theory and praxis! This is one of their key points; universal healthcare is a hard-L liberal position because only the state can insure certain classes of catastrophic risk, and by doing so you increase individual freedom of action.

(European liberalism is clearly culturally distinct from social democratic thought; where it comes to the same positions it's typically by other means – not that there's anything wrong with social democracy or democratic Socialism, for that matter.)

A good starting point would be, at pan-Europe level, the ALDE; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliance_of_Liberals_and_Democ.... National-level parties you might have heard of are the Liberal Democrats (UK) and Democraten 66 (Netherlands).
> The thing I find fascinating about this solution is that it doesn't even require the rule that you can't place larger discs on smaller discs

It had better. If you're allowed to put larger disks on smaller disks, you can solve towers of Hanoi in linear time. Call the rods A, B, and C: the goal is to move the stack from A to C. First flip the stack upside down, one disk at a time, from A to B. Then do that again, from B to C. The stack is now upright on C, after 2n moves.

(In contrast, the real problem requires O(2^n) moves.)
Wow, fantastic insight. Thanks for sharing.
The problems with your last argument are that almost nobody is actually a utilitarian, and utilitarianism is wrong.[1][2][3]

edit: full disclosure; I am an ethical intuitionist.[4]

[1] http://degreesofclarity.com/writing/utilitarianism/

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism#Criticisms

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_intuitionism
As a Canadian as well, I appreciate you being up front about the drawbacks of our system as well. I've heard so many American's say "oh, the Canadian system is so much better". Is it better in coverage? Obviously!

However, when I ask if they'd be ok waiting over a year for joint replacement surgery, they get a weird look on their face. Or, if they have cancer, they aren't going to get to go to the best cancer center in Canada, you go to your local hospital. And if you want the latest and greatest cancer treatment? Well, you'll need to pay for that yourself since the gov't hasn't yet approved it for reimbursement.

There are benefits to both systems, but it's disingenuous to say that a single payer system solves all problems.
There are many tasks that are easy to solve with a human brain and very hard to solve with a computer. Anyone except a programmer will see them as sane and generally understood and will be satisfied with a description of the problem that would be sufficient for a human being. These are the kinds of problems where a programmer has to be very careful about the perception of his or her work.

The naive programmer sees that all of the difficulty has been introduced by the decision to solve the problem with a computer system. Therefore it is the programmer's responsibility to solve the difficult problem and justify the difficulty to others. Concurrency is not a problem for human beings, so if concurrency is a difficulty, the programmer must take the time to solve it, and if a non-programmer asks why he is taking so long, he must do his best to explain why concurrency is hard for computer programs.

The wise programmer shields himself by exposing as much of the difficulty as possible onto non-programmers without every mentioning the computer. Never mind that the task is well enough specified for a $15 an hour temp worker to carry out -- it is ridden with underspecified "business logic!" The naive programmer assumes that the system must operate under any reasonable ordering of events or failures. The wise programmer brings obscures scenarios up in meetings, suggests that such-and-such a scenario isn't valid, furrows his brow worriedly at the answer, and then proclaims that the "business rules" need to be "more completely specified" to handle these "previously out of scope cases."

Again, never mind that in the past a dozen different human beings with no special training performed the task reliably without needing to call meetings to find out how to do their job. Never mind that no difficulty existed until the introduction of a computer that needed to be programmed. The wise programmer understands that the task is difficult and he needs to make everyone else feel that difficulty so that he doesn't appear to be struggling with an easy assignment. Therefore a task that the business has been performing successfully since its inception must be found to be ridden with previously undiscovered "business challenges."
> In the US there are a great many physicians who simply won't accept Medicare rates (they're viewed as too low by most)

Right there is the big problem, though: Medicare reimbursement rates are already below sustainable levels for providers, which actually results in providers charging private insurers for the difference.

If Medicare were expanded to everyone, either Medicare would have to increase its reimbursement rates, or you'd see providers close up their practices (which is already happening, and which is one of the current problems with providing affordable care outside urban areas).

> Medical care, unlike most goods and services, is stunningly inelastic in demand

That's actually not true at all - medical care is highly elastic, as evidenced by the utilization differences for people who have plans with high copays and deductibles compared to those who don't.

> As far as private vs. public, the issue here is the same as for schools, a private insurer or school can choose not to insure or educate a "customer", the government by law cannot. In the handful of cross-over studies of charter schools or vouchers, after controlling for subject-specific effects, the children who switched from public to charter or private tended to do slightly worse than expected based on their test scores from public schools. (It is a difficult experiment to run for numerous reasons.)

But we actually do have a point of comparison here, because Medicare does have both privately managed and publicly-managed plans (as does Medicaid). Consistently, the privately-managed plans come in under budget while delivering superior medical outcome metrics and patient satisfaction scores compared to Original Medicare (or the publicly-administered Medicaid plans).
Does anyone have experience with this? I can't imagine eating a "similar amount" with one day being healthy, low-calorie foods and the other day being junk food can be good for your health.
But it sounds good to sell it to the "fiscal conservatives". I am not a utilitarian, but nobody likes to be hectored into doing things -- and it's easy for an argument from, e.g., personal morality to sound that way.
That's only a secondary reason, the main reason for this is to avoid having to deal with CSS' "everything is global" flaw.

CSS Modules [1] and other tools allow you to require CSS like you would with any other dependency, and replace named classes by unique hashes at build time. This prevents your CSS from leaking to elements that do not explicitly require it.

[1] https://github.com/css-modules/css-modules
of course welfare is limiting choices, it's the globalist's way of making people lazy and weak. basic income would be better than welfare. and no taxes and less regulations would be better than basic income. <infowars.com>
> Right now the working people of America are already subsidizing healthcare for the masses and all I ever hear is people complaining about it.

We do pay for the roads in Los Angeles and EVERYONE complains about the traffic. People bitch about everything
Internet Brands │ Web Developer │ LA │ Onsite │ Full-time │ VISA │ http://www.internetbrands.com/

What we do: Software-as-a-Service, web applications
Since launching in 1998 as CarsDirect.com, Internet Brands has grown to become a fully integrated online media and client services organization focused on four high-value vertical categories: Automotive, Health, Legal and Home / Travel.

The company’s award-winning consumer websites lead their categories and serve more than 100 million monthly visitors, while a full range of web presence offerings has established deep, long-term relationships with SMB and enterprise clients. Internet Brands’ powerful, propriety operating platform provides the flexibility and scalability to fuel the company’s continued growth. Role: We are looking for a Senior Web Developer (PHP) to join our Legal division. We are looking for someone committed to working on high quality code in a dynamic PHP environment. You would be part of a top-shelf engineering team working in rapid development cycles and naturally mentoring team members.

Tech: Product is PHP (Laravel, Yii) with Angular.js on the front-end.

Apply: http://www.internetbrands.com/work-with-us/ or email: colin.tew@internetbrands.com
the major advantage of single-payer is massively reducing the costs of health care

It's cheaper because less is offered. Of course one can argue the extra you get under the US system doesn't really add value.

Keep in mind that single payer systems are struggling with costs as well. It's just easier for them to say "no one gets this new treatment".
I had an interesting thread here with somebody who wrote a pretty complete Ruby parser in Ruby:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13041646

The "canonical" documentation of the Ruby parser is basically a 6000+ line Bison file where most of the linecount is taken up with handling exceptions... It's awful.

That sounds very like much like bash, where parse.y is 6227 lines. Almost of all of it is C code, it's not actually using very much of yacc...
Government is "forcing" very few people. Most people participate in society voluntarily.

For example, government doesn't force me to obey the law; I do it voluntarily. They don't force me to pay my bills, not shoot my neighbor, and pay my taxes. I do all that voluntarily.

EDIT: I don't follow Hacker News' rules and norms because I'm afraid of being banned, but because I respect the other people here, respect that there need to be rules, and respect our hosts' authority and need to make them. It's something (almost) all learn as children; it's healthy social interaction.

Most people are responsible members of their communities. The concept of force applies only to a very few.
I've had a similar experience. There's some ratio of "really good gear" to " ehhhh fashion crap" for every company, and ideally it's above 3/4 or so.

the only thing the north face makes that's really truly excellent any more are their duffel bags, which are absolutely indestructible.
And (per previous discussion [1]) that doesn't explain it. 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.

The argument is like saying that Hamilton showings are limited by how much the government will pay in subsidies for the tickets. No. The demand is enough to cover expansion.

And even if it weren't there's still the issue of how much training is actually required to fill the functional role of a doctor. I'm pretty sure that there's some fat to cut out when you're making someone go all the way through a bachelors before they can even start.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13593944
Docker security team here :)

Thanks for this post, we are currently looking into this issue and a solution in order to have the most secure behavior by default.
You must not be familiar with market failures
If the proposals on the table were to simply allow private companies to offer competing options, I would have few concerns that I could back up with factual analysis.

I suspect it would be highly case-by-case, which is fine and how a deliberative legislative body should function. I'd still be extremely leery of private police, military, fire, or infrastructure, it just seems like a transparently bad idea.

Like our security contractors paid by the military, who cost vastly more than public employees and have far less oversight. And who (possibly coincidentally, but come on) are to blame for the worst abuses by our forces overseas.

But for some specific, narrow market (like space travel or health care or even retirement funds) I'd be absolutely willing to give them a chance as long as it didn't break the existing government system.

Charter schools seem like a good case study in that, which I say not because the data completely backs up the idea that government run is always better, but because it's a very complex system with many examples that provide insight in both directions.
blogspam of

http://www.adelaide.edu.au/news/news91022.html
> Using force / aggression (aka the government forcing you to do something) is a violation of your most fundamental rights, and strips you of your agency and dignity as a human being.

This premise is not as self evident as you believe.