skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"And now to quote the original article... 'It is a bedrock economic principle that if we can find a way to do something more efficiently, it’s possible for everyone to come out ahead.'"

That's a really important "possible" though. It is a near certainty that if were to transition to single payer healthcare we would not do the transfers to hold everyone profiting from the current system harmless (e.g. health insurance employees). In any realistic scenario there would be winners and losers which is why you see fierce lobbying on both sides of the issue.

It's the difference between Pareto and Kaldor-Hicks (See this prior comment for the definitions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14605477 )
> By the time people go to high school it is to late

Just anecdotal evidence, I know, but for me it was the exact contrary that happened. As a 5-year old kid I had learn to read all by myself (my dad had taught me to recognize the letters and how to pronounce them), but I had huge conceptual difficulties in teaching myself things like subtraction (what do you mean you can take/subtract a thing from another thing? what happens when the thing which you're taking/subtracting is bigger than the thing from which you're subtracting? you cannot do that, it would result in a non-thing, a thing that is below 0, and all things below 0 technically do not exist).

In elementary and middle-school I was passable in maths, while very good in humanities, but all this changed in high-school, mostly because of my teacher, who taught me (and my colleagues) how to think about math. He's one of the reasons why I decided to pursue a STEM education and why I'm currently a programmer.
Not a stupid question at all. I clearly remember doing the colour blind test during my preliminary medical when I arrived at flying school to get my commercial licence.

The test consists of going through a book with images made up of different coloured dots, and within each image was a coloured number made up of similar dots. We simply had to flip through the book and identify the number within each image.

I was totally smug as I flipped through the book, calling out the numbers and watching the doctor tick off his chart. But towards the end of the booklet, I reached a page, and the image was just a jumble of dots to me. I couldn't see a number. I remember the panic and tightening in my chest as I thought to myself "Oh No, I can't see the number - I MUST be colour blind!! My dream of being a pilot is OVER".

I stared and stared at the page, but in the end had to concede defeat and I quietly told the doc that I couldn't see the number on that page. "Oh", he replied casually. "That's OK, there isn't one on that page!". And he grabbed the booklet and tossed it back on his desk saying "You passed."
Pragmatic Functional Programming
Word salad.

Our system (the USA) maximizes rent seeking, thru obfuscation, disjoint regulation, spotty oversight and enforcement.
If by "truly free market" you mean that healthy people can opt out of being insured, no, that would drive the costs up.

Risk selection is a very driver of prices in health insurance. If you can spread the risk between healthy and sick people, the price goes down. If you can't, the price goes up.

Secondly, having a population that has no health insurance means less prevention, i.e. worse health problems down the road, again driving the costs up
Thats an incredibly unfair comparison. You're judging communism based on the merits of its intentions and ideas, meanwhile condemning capitalism for its failings in practice.
Rather, those willing to work for far lower wages than in the US.
> photons have properties x, y, z, so maybe they can travel at .5c, let me look into it.

No, the claim about what is possible for a photon was much stronger. I am asserting now that photons can travel at .5c, full stop. I will not look into it, as I have already determined it is possible. I am not making a hypothesis about the universe, I am making a claim about how I believe it to actually work. Anyway, that is an aside.

I still think this just comes down to semantics about what is a claim about the world and what is a statement about uncertainty.

I interpret them saying something is possible as them making a statement about their own partial knowledge. I specifically do not interpret it as a claim about the world. I do interpret it as a claim about their own research and their own partial knowledge.

Their research does not demonstrate an impossibility. That is the claim they present. I still believe you are making a semantic interpretation of the word "possibility" that is different from the intent of the researchers. I think you are interpreting a stronger claim than the researchers are making.

Here is, for example, the same qualification as reported in a different article:

> Although, in this study, the researchers found that commercial cognitive training alone would not have an influence on one's decision-making process or cognitive abilities, they believe that it was still an avenue worthy of rigorous investigation.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/07/170710135410.h...
> They will undoubtedly receive worse care

You're going to have to provide a lot more support for that claim. All you've really provided is the implication that "most expensive" = "best". But expense is also a result of inefficiencies, and we "undoubtedly" have a less efficient system (more administrative overhead.. I can cite sources if anyone doubts it).

Other single-payer systems, for example, also provide complementary or supplementary private options.[1] And since these private options have to compete with a baseline of quality public care, they may be more affordable.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-tier_healthcare
It's not a holy war, but it does have a lot of politics, which engineers like to pretend don't exist.

Here is the only solid criticism of systemd I've read that focuses on design (as opposed to bugs that surface from the sprawling throw-it-over-the-wall approach to development): http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/10/11/0/

Notably, darknedgy hosted/hosts uselessd, which was a lightweight version of systemd. On the whole i think the idea underlying systemd, of graph-based management of services and system state makes more sense that wonky initscripts garbage.

Technical discussion aside, I rarely see mentioned is that, what in my opinion, systemd resembles a lot of "politics-driven-development" i've worked on before. It's sprawling and ambitious--which means bugs--and like a high-politics project there's a certain incentive i perceive to downplay bugs--which also means it's a great way for RHEL to centralize control over things they didn't have say in previously as well as standardize, etc.

I'll go ahead and beat up on it more by saying that if the project is going to be used cudgel-like, I wish it would more loudly start talking about stuff like formal analysis, fuzzing etc., because it would be a great opportunity to promote research-y stuff in the "email your patches" world of OSS development.

Which is fine, but running Arch workstations for nearly ten years now, there's been a lot of gore with systemd... more than i'd like to see in PID1.

Of course, I hate writing C code with a passion so I'm just a whiner really.
Elective procedures work well in a free market system. That is not surprising at all, nor is it incredibly meaningful when trying to look at the health care industry as a whole.

> Nonsense. The important question is: 'would a "truly free market health care system" be more ethical than the current system'.

If you want to be overly semantic, which you clearly do, that's actually not "the important question" since it actually tells you less than my original question. You care about "a truly free market health care system's" relative ethicality not just in relation to the current system, but also in relation to (all) other potential alternative health care system (like a single payer system)...
Recovering from Data Loss: A Novelist Forces Himself to Press On
> Who's not receiving healthcare right now that would be ultimately saved by the government?

People not receiving basic preventative care with problems that are only going to snowball until emergency services can try to treat a much more complex situation in the future?

> Secondly let's cut the hyperbole and have a rational conversation about this.

You could have maybe had a point by quoting "but the market will win", but "Americans will die needless deaths from not receiving basic healthcare" is literally what's at stake. What exactly do you think the downsides of people not being able to afford healthcare are?
Dropbox Drops Photo Galleries
Speaking of inaccurate headlines: I know I was better off with a TI-85 in math class, so students don't necessarily have a problem with a computing device itself in a classroom environment as the headline would suggest.
calling context

In compositional verification, you generally want to prove as much as
possible about the piece of code at hand -- irrespective of calling
context.

spec very similar to this

Yes, I was using something similar. Note that this is right only in a
purely sequential setting ...

I recently verified a JIT compiler,

That sounds exciting. That must
have been a major piece of work. Anything published yet?

With JIT compilers the issue of self-modification becomes pertinent. I
know that Magnus Myreen has verified a small JIT compiler a few years
back but I don't remember exactly what theorem he proves. IIRC he was
using a tailor-made Hoare logic for x86 code that basically moved some
of the complexity of the spec into the logic.
This is one of my favorites:

> He said Google was careful to say the checks came with no requirements: “It was a gift. Recipients can do what they want.”

I have never heard a statement so akin to organized crime as this. Things like saying how it'd 'be unfortunate if something happened to someone' or how they 'gave him a suggestion'.

The fact that they are being so careful to avoid explicitly stating they paid professors for supporting work makes me wonder... is there actually a crime here they're committing? I didn't think there really was, but if there wasn't, I doubt Google would be so coy.

Google Transparency Project tweeted that Eric Schmidt used one such paper when testifying to Congress without disclosing their financial interest: https://twitter.com/GTP_updates/status/884851123529691137
ARM, Enea, Marvell, PicoCluster Announce World’s Most Compact OPNFV Pharos Lab
Ask HN: G Suite – App Script – In Your Organization
What G Suite App Script ideas are u using/ planning in your organization?
The article is written from a place (what Eric Evans calls a 'bounded context') where the term is so well known that people just use it as a common noun. But crossing into the HN context that's no longer true, so we've uppercased it for you above.

(I almost said improper noun but apparently that's like land seahorse.)
> allow third-parties to invalidate patents by showing prior art to the patent office for a nominal fee

I think there should be a punitive part to this as well. If you apply for a patent that is later invalidated, then those that licensed the patent should be made repaid. And yes there should be a fee for trying to invalidate a patent, but there should also be a reward if they are successful.
Overall you make a good point. In the context of this article, I tend to think the OP comment has thought about it harder than the author. These articles like "Down with capitalism, didn't you hear 51% of millennials don't like it! And what about that fire in london?" are invariably written by radical left-wing disciplines where the authors have no evidence of deep understanding of the issues - here anthropology.
> I keep waiting for the reasoned, technical arguments against systemd instead of veiled metaphors

It is interesting that you say that, because I am still waiting for the reasoned technical argument in favor of systemd.

Anyway, my main issue with systemd is how difficult it is to get rid of. It doesn't matter how awesome you think your software is, there is always going to be someone who disagrees. The beauty of FOSS is that it is easy to modify your system to suit your preferences. But for some reason systemd makes it difficult to switch. Even GNOME has a dependency on it. That seems completely insane to me.

>Systemd, for all its flaws, fixes some very important problems that init and runit and similar systems left unsolved.

I don't really know what you mean by this (and I hear people say it a lot). Systemd only rose to prominence in the last few years. Most systems worked just fine before then. What sort of significant open problems were solved by systemd?

> As far as I can tell, systemd is a holy war. It's the new editor debate. It's vi vs emacs vs sublime vs atom vs ... down throughout time, with people arguing where the tradeoff between simplicity of execution is more important than delivering a system people asked for.

There is a difference between systemd and the other holy wars, and that is that the other holywars were destined to end in a draw. No matter how much you like emacs more than vi, no one harbored the illusion that vi would stop easily installable on an average system. But for some reason a majority of the systemd supporters seem to view using an alternative as a serious crime.
I am going to say you are probably more right than me. I haven't flown in over two decades, so things are bound to be different/better nowadays and procedures and safety improves.

Take my replies here with a grain of salt and as being 'old school'. :)
Sikuli uses tesseract under the hood with opencv template matching. How is that going to be helpful?
But the 'rest of us' can only gain for as long as those people stick around to pay for it. There is a lot of wealth in this country, for now. If you wanna really see things go down hill then watch the wealth scramble out of the country as soon as we tell them they're going to have to fund the healthcare of everyone else.
I think VR will be the future of education.
So, the people too poor to pay but not poor enough for charity die slowly in their hovels?
Doctors don't learn to say sorry in the us?
What I don't get is why alts are losing value against BTC. Like, if you look at this chart it shows that Bitcoin is gaining market share and alts are losing it:

https://coinmarketcap.com/charts/#dominance-percentage

I would think that people would be leaving BTC and putting their money in alts due to August 1 jitters, but it seems to be the opposite that's happening.
See @arrrvalue's comment above.
If you want to prevent fork/exec, that's super easy to do in a conventional Linux application:

#include <linux/seccomp.h>
#include <linux/filter.h>
#include <linux/audit.h>
#include <sys/prctl.h>
#include <asm/unistd.h>
#include <stddef.h>

prctl(PR_SET_NO_NEW_PRIVS, 1, 0, 0, 0);
struct sock_filter filter[] = {
BPF_STMT(BPF_LD | BPF_W | BPF_ABS, offsetof(struct seccomp_data, arch)),
BPF_JUMP(BPF_JMP | BPF_JEQ | BPF_K, AUDIT_ARCH_X86_64, 1, 0),
BPF_STMT(BPF_RET | BPF_K, SECCOMP_RET_KILL),
BPF_STMT(BPF_LD | BPF_W | BPF_ABS, offsetof(struct seccomp_data, nr)),
BPF_JUMP(BPF_JMP | BPF_JEQ | BPF_K, __NR_fork, 4, 0),
BPF_JUMP(BPF_JMP | BPF_JEQ | BPF_K, __NR_vfork, 3, 0),
BPF_JUMP(BPF_JMP | BPF_JEQ | BPF_K, __NR_clone, 2, 0),
BPF_JUMP(BPF_JMP | BPF_JEQ | BPF_K, __NR_execve, 1, 0),
BPF_STMT(BPF_RET | BPF_K, SECCOMP_RET_ALLOW),
BPF_STMT(BPF_RET | BPF_K, SECCOMP_RET_KILL),
};
struct sock_fprog fprog = {
.len = sizeof(filter) / sizeof(filter[0]),
.filter = filter,
};
prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER, &fprog, 0, 0);

or, if you're using systemd, simply

SystemCallFilter=~fork,vfork,clone,execve

Again, the hard part here is architecting your application not to need fork/exec for its own purposes anyway, which (as far as I'm aware) is a strict prerequisite of porting it to the unikernel model. If you can do that, forswearing fork/exec for security purposes is straightforward and doesn't require a unikernel. (Also, if you take the prctl approach, you can do that after you've forked a few helper processes, which is probably a much easier port!)

Or in other words, the argument isn't "unikernels are secure," it is "programming in an environment without fork/exec is secure," and unikernels are a needlessly complicated way to provide that environment.
South Korea’s Brain Drain
You can't ask questions this way.
Yeah plus what a terrible analogy. The road is shared equally by everyone for the most part, my car tools along in a single lane. However if I smoke cigarettes and get cancer or eat myself into heart disease, this still doesn't cost any more for the road. It's something that can be mostly shared in a fair way. Healthcare cannot be shared in a fair way.

Plus if I don't play well with others the government will take away my license so I can't drive anymore. I don't want the government standing between me and healthcare in any sense of the term. If they are the ones in charge of a limited resource that means they are also the ones that have to say 'no' when there isn't enough to go around.
Many undergrad programs (in the U.S.) now have a course in math proof, which is intended to introduce students to proof techniques. It seems helpful to learn how to write proofs without the pressure of learning the content of a subject (like linear algebra, abstract algebra, and so on) at the same time.
Gnome and udev have hard dependencies on systemd now, parts of KDE do too (try installing k3b for example, can't be done without systemd).

It's not as simple as you think, unless the machine is a minimal deployment, in which case it works (I've got a docker host machine that runs runit instead of systemd)
> I want proof. I only see numbers. Everything else is conjecture.

But wait, is this not conjecture, since it doesn't currently exist? Sure, you have sources where it has worked, but the proof would only be implementing it here.

> Or is the US government not a leading force in fighting corruption anymore?

What? I don't understand what you're getting at here. My point isn't that the government is corrupt, it's that it's inefficient.
Well it depends on what you do in the classroom, when class is mandatory but you are not able to learn this way (by listening to a teacher), having a laptop can let you do other things.
And then use your time efficiently, like doing some administrative work, send email, coding ...

Some students are of course better with a laptop in the classroom
Amazon AI Designed to Create iPhone Cases Goes Hilariously Wrong
Calling it a "gift" has specific funding implications for professors with labs. When a professor is awarded a grant (e.g. from NSF), universities often skim a portion as high as 50% in overhead fees. However, "gifts" have no such overhead and the money can go much farther.
I don't really get this. Linus and Lennart both are opinionated and tend to be pretty convinced that they're right. The difference is that Linus, if he feels you're wrong, will tell you that you should be retroactively aborted (https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/6/495), and part of the HN readership will applaud this as a wonderful example of no-nonsense project leadership. From what I recall from the systemd-devel mailing list, Lennart can be dismissive or perhaps arrogant (i.e. opinionated), but is seldom rude.
Maybe they aren't as effective as hand written notes. but in my case Neatly typed, well organized notes using OneNote 2003 were more effective than hastily hand written mostly illegible notes.
http://politips.us
Damn. I didn't realize this mattered. I looked outside of .com because it's practically impossible to find a decent domain.
But an exception could be made for these

Or another idea, make patents non transferrable.
> For goodness's sake all I'm asking for is a little display with a map that shows where the plane thinks it's going.

Any commercial aircraft with a glass cockpit, which at this point is ~all of them, already has one of these.
Jessie Frazelle's Blog: Getting Towards Real Sandbox Containers
People don't want to burn hydrocarbons for energy they just want energy. The proof is in the pudding, if people wanted to burn hydrocarbons for energy there would be no renewable energy sources.

Demand for energy drives a consumption for energy and these companies provide the energy. If we had instead learned how to convert puppies to energy in the late 19th century instead of fossil fuels, we'd probably be burning puppies.
I remember hearing a story about diamond polishing methods in use right after the collapse of the Soviet Union where the resulting diamonds had a lower value than their inputs. I've used the metaphor in programming and management of dealing with value-subtracting workers.
Gell-Mann Amnesia effect?

http://www.omsj.org/blogs/gell-mann-effect
None of those countries are communist. They have large social welfare states, and tax rates that might push 50%, but essentially rely on the free market for most economic decisionmaking.

In many ways China is closer to pure capitalism than most countries on the planet. The vestiges of "socialism" primarily live on in their authoritarian government, restrictive social policies, financial repression and massive state-owned-enterprises. China is slowly moving away from the latter two as their massive problems are uncovered.
No. Real hospitals in the US and in Italy have offered to treat him, but the UK has indeed decided he should die and preventing the parents from bringing him to those hospitals.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2014/09/02/california...

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/02/140213-calif...

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/14/science/californias-histo...
Send me SFMOMA
Switching to a single payer would reduce fraud. Because simplified rules are easier to adult. A cynic might even say the USA's healthcare system is purpose built to maxmize fraud.

https://www.amazon.com/Healthcare-Fraud-Auditing-Detection-G...
glad to help. I always hate to "Advertise" but really VSTS is a great product, very open source and cross-platform focused and extremely great pricing model (considering the massive free tier).

So few folks know about it, they hear "Visual Studio" in the name and think its just for Microsoft stack, but its 100% not. We're here for all developers, at least that is our mission.
Making an emotional appeal is not inherently nonsense, so you will have to provide a little more of an argument as to why it's not a valid point to make.
Last time I checked the Electoral College is the election.
Really? Getting rid of a few rarely used and deprecated APIs (for the first time EVER) in a 21-year-old ecosystem is enough to discount the value of those 21 years of backwards compatibility?
Pev: Postgres EXPLAIN Visualizer
Learn TeX Programming with Free Books
You're still telling people what their time and efforts are worth rather than if there were no artificial restrictions.
"Or is the US government not a leading force in fighting corruption anymore?"

Um...
Yeah, and we ban people from public roads for bad behavior. Will we ban people from public healthcare for bad health choices? Do we really want to give the government that kind of exclusive control over a service while giving up control of our bodies?
So why has ET not used something like a Dyson sphere or a starshade to send us light signals as a form of "Hello"?

Maybe because by the time a planet is able to send such signals, they have discovered better means, faster than light speed, communications.

So, the "Hello" communications have been coming to us for maybe millions of years, but like our planet before we understood radio, we can't detect their communications.
Your gut may help you lose weight, fight depression and lower blood pressure
> Android: here's a bunch of fucking candy

whose initials follow alphabetical order