skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Are you saying that AI should wait for hospital management and doctors to step their game up, before being involved in diagnosis and medical monitoring?

Medicine is a fast evolving field. If a doctor takes time to read up the latest papers, she doesn't have enough time left to treat patients, if she spends all her time treating patients, she's got no time left for refreshing the latest discoveries. In the end, you are going to see an outdated doctor, because that's how it works. I'd prefer that doctors rely on AI and be up to date while treating patients.

AI might have a huge impact in poor countries where doctors are scarce. The alternative to AI is "no doctors, no help" for many. Just like self driving cars - they don't need to be perfect, just less deadly than human drivers, and in this case, access to medicine = life.
That doesn't sound quite right. Nuclear is very energy dense and has very low footprints in terms of land, fuel, mining, pollution, waste, and everything else except capital cost. I hope we can figure out how to build them cheaper.

Acres per Megawatt Produced for different energy sources [1]:

Coal 12.21
Natural Gas 12.41
Nuclear 12.71
Solar 43.50
Wind 70.64
Hydro 315.22

[1] https://www.strata.org/pdf/2017/footprints-full.pdf
> You're equivocating on the word discrimination. When activists or people in the media talk about discrimination as a societal problem, they're referring to discrimination based on irrelevant characteristics

You're not doing better. They're referring to discrimination that they don't like. In general, they make no effort to establish that such discrimination is based on irrelevant characteristics, only to claim that it is.
Won't accept which - that computers only have to beat human fatality rates to be preferable, or that the ratio will be 10:1 (or better) in favour of computer-driven cars in terms of fatalities?

I'd agree that if we aren't seeing better fatality numbers, people won't accept it -- but there's little to suggest that humans are a difficult target to beat. Especially in the US, where car-related fatalities are so numerous and much of the research and trials are being done.

Working out accountability for fatalities is already a hugely complicated process, involving an unhealthy number of law enforcement and legal personnel. The problem of identifying responsible party for a - as you put it - failed algorithm doesn't seem intractable, and certainly isn't a show-stopper.

Haven't voted either way on this thread, but I suspect your re-hashing of regular topics already resolved is the problem.
Competency and safety are relatively minor factors. The real reason is that senior pilots control the unions and airlines have to stop operating if pilots strike.
your memory is right. it was showing both those numbers at the same time. one on the chart the other on the bid. made no sense.
> China has 1 billion MORE people than the US and yet the GDP of the US is still 165% of China's

That's because the rural population - 800M - only makes about $4/day, or $1400 a year....crippling poor. https://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2016/09/16/china_is_.... Whenever my clients say they want to expand to China because they have 1.3 billion people! I laugh.

>It means more Chinese entering the middle class, buying American goods

China urban household's per income isn't that much better....at $4500 dollar/year or around $375 dollar/month.
What's your point? I was specifically responding to a claim about gun-related robberies.

Knives are also short-range weapons and are arguably a ton less dangerous than guns. If someone brandishes a knife at me and doesn't have an accomplice to surround me, I've got pretty good odds if I simply turn around and run. The equation changes if they have a gun.
> it is royally annoying and time consuming.

16x16 would be.. 15x16x2 moveable boards, then whatever you've got around the outside. I was wondering if you could maybe automate that with simple motors or electromagnets or somesuch, but I guess that would be quite complicated and potentially expensive to pull off.
Simply put, at the moment, you wouldn’t. But when wasm is mature enough (host binding to control DOM directly), there will be framework for 10x performance (compares to js’). This framework is a step toward that direction.
Also it provides options for Rust programmers to not touching js. Totally worth it.
Some of the greatest artists to live have been using linear algebra to produce masterpieces for centuries. This just doesn't hold.

"Coming up with the picture in the first place" doesn't happen on a physical plane in the mind. One's imagination is connections and concepts which triangulate world with perspective with medium. Making that into some thing that can last and be shared not only produces the thing but builds new connections and concepts to use in production of the next thing.

If you mean "linear algebra" as in code, or computers, these are merely mediums, and tools. And as for drawing 'by eye', maybe this helps: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X97bhjx4EaI
On one hand, yes. On the other, classifying whether programming is a math or not doesn't help you decide whether you should use APL, or much else for that matter.
Would be neat if early humans became infected with an Andromeda strain-like bacteria from inhaling meteorite dust. Maybe from the same source that seeded life on earth originally.

After the alien bacteria took up residence in the human gut, it enhanced the human brain, creating the modern human.

Andromeda Strain 50,000 B.C. (2019)
Have you dabbled with Julia [1] before? It sounds like it might be right up your alley. It's not a lisp, but it's very "lispy" in a lot of ways, and it's focused on scientific/numeric computing with an active community focused on the same. The creators also mentioned J as an influence I believe, though I haven't used J myself, so I can't comment on that.

[1] https://julialang.org
The Chinese government has grown slightly more protectionist as of late, imo their current economic situation is very fragile, despite the western fear of the rise of China. The U.S. economy is very diverse and robust, and has undergone several shocks...China, has not in the modern boom really experienced any sort of deep economic swoons. I fear what houses of cards have been built, which normally don't reveal themselves until the chairs run out. Their government is so hamfisted and wasteful, it's hard not to imagine an economic earthquake on the horizon. The US and Europe are really the main drivers of the world economy right now, China and many emerging economies have been slowing down.
OP's point is that its hard to get funds to conduct 9 studies per year with hope that 3 will result in paper as expected from the tenure track. I neither have intention to counter argument nor I have insights in to specific field that author is working on (which seems to be anthropology). My argument is exactly more broader as you have mentioned: Lot of research - at least as captured by media - involves simply doing some statistical survey and getting comfortable p-value to suggest some weird correlation. There is a lot of money spent in this type of "research" because it is expensive to conduct such studies. My objection purely on calling this "science" and calling people doing this as "scientists" because these two fairly reputable words are being used to lure general public to believe such "studies". I feel such works should be called "surveys" and people doing it should be called "surveyors". The real scientific work should involve taking the survey only as a hint and then uncover actual mechanism that falsifiably proves or disproves the correlation with hopefully more predictions. Simple surveys don't have these properties and hence such studies shouldn't be labeled as work of scientists.
Robert Glasper, whose piano is all over To Pimp A Butterfly, is also extremely worth checking out. It's been great seeing him get more exposure with Kendrick. https://open.spotify.com/album/7M4DuL9Z6JqcNapcOUTPNS
It is more synonymous to banks being hacked than Federal Reserve if at all. However, the idea is to have a secure system as much as possible.

By layering it with a secure regulatory system, we get what you are asking for. If you like, have an eight-day bank holiday (if your jurisdiction wants that).
there are many many regular US products that are banned from being exported to China. for example, you can order a Intel Phi processor from your local computer shop and build a hobby computer using that, yet it is criminal offence to sell that to Chinese buyers living in China.

watch the video below, Chinese citizens could end up in US prison for doing that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0U6ZMeVrB4
Podcast interview with de Soto here: https://www.acast.com/ft-alphachat/hernandodesotoontheeconom...
> I would literally rather die than pay for an ambulance.

I wish more people realized this was an option. You can't even imagine how common it is to see the claim "medical care is a special market, because if someone is dying, they will pay ANY AMOUNT for care no matter how high".

Sure, if that person is dying and rates their own health infinitely higher than the welfare of their family, maybe. That's not many people.

Incidentally, the same stupid argument also proves that scamming a life insurance policy by committing suicide is impossible. Life insurance companies, in general, do not agree.
Christmas Celebration at Intuz: A Day Filled with Real Happiness and Love
Please don't post ideological rants to HN. They lead to nothing good and so are always off topic.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I injured myself and needed to go to the ER. The injury wasn't life threatening, but I definitely needed to go to the hospital immediately.

I called an Uber.

I don't have the time or expertise to do the months of legalese and calculus it would take me to understand my insurance policy, so I have no idea how much an ambulance ride would have cost me. $0? $400? $15000? None of those numbers would surprise me. As best I can tell, insurance companies throw a dart to decide whether you're covered or not, and then the healthcare provider makes up some insane number if you aren't.

The Uber got me to the hospital faster than an ambulance would have, for less than $10, and I knew it would cost less than $10.

The injury, though extremely gruesome and painful, only warranted an x-ray, some tylenol, and an ace bandage.

I'm insured. They sent me a bill for over $900. For taking a picture, and giving me tylenol and an ace bandage.

I view insurance as a tax my employers pay to the American healthcare system to be compliant. When I have my end-of-life event, whatever that is, I fully expect a choice between death, and living a little longer in bankruptcy. I'll probably get treated outside the US or choose death.

The system works if your net worth is somewhere above $5 million. For everyone else it's just the mechanism that sends everything you earned back to rich people right before you die.

Or maybe I'm wrong! I hope I'm wrong. The stack of papers is 4 inches high so I'll never know, but I sure hope so.
> there are nuclear subs running around at a tiny fraction of that size.

That never have to make a profit. And that's the key.

The US Navy is INSANE about keeping the reactors properly tuned and serviced. The number of staff they throw at assembling, servicing, and decommissioning their nuclear vessels is astounding.
> my ride to the hospital to be 30 minutes late, to refuse to turn the music down, and to tell me the credit card reader is broken

As much as I'd like to stick it to taxis because of their decades of price gouging due to being granted a monopoly, I have not had many bad experiences riding a taxi. If I had to put a number on it, I'd say that less than 5% of my taxi rides were in any way unpleasant other than for the cost. What city or country are you in if I might ask? Are taxi experiences really that bad for most people?
Yup, from the article there doesn't seem to be any indicator what metric the 'Centre for Economics and Business Research in London' used. If I had to guess, probably the Chinese government reported GDP growth (very fake) and the size of population.
>... there's a huge amount we could be doing with ASTs, where right now we're mostly kludging along with line-based tools. Merging/diffing is one example. ...

Strongly agree - seems a strange situation to me.

The line-based thinking that still dominates the majority *nix has some advantages but also does seem to impede progress.

It reminds me that I meant to read Rob Pikes "Structural Regular Expressions" [0]. (ht #pmoriarty - from HN mid-November [1])

Furthermore, even if there is well-defined AST available, it doesn't mean it will be used. XML based formats for example - e.g. see here: [2]

If we could even semi-automatically merge Microsoft's Office Open XML formats [3] anywhere using the associated AST that would surely create huge value for lots of businesses.

[0] http://doc.cat-v.org/bell_labs/structural_regexps/se.pdf

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15714169

[2] https://joepairman.com/posts/xml-in-git-mercurial-watch-out-...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Open_XML
While we're talking about audible I wanted to bring 2 things up.

1. You can cancel and restart your membership to get a new token for $15/month.

2. They recently added different portals for different countries. If you've been using the American portal (.com) like me, you may not have noticed your own countries. You should check it out, it may be cheaper. For example, the Canadian portal (.ca) charges $15 CAD a month which is cheaper than $15 USD.
I'd argue that the best chance for anyone reading this to be remembered in 1000 years is to be the first person to do X on Mars, where X is probably "set foot".

That'd get you in the history books for anything related to space travel for generations to come.
They did overtake U.S in terms of GDP per capita by 1995, with a margin of 60%. China doesn't have to do this, they only need the GDP per capita to be 1/3 of that of US, they can surpass US in terms of nominal GDP.
Technically speaking, it’s all art, but we make distinctions between the practical arts and fine arts (and design arts are also separate from that). A lot of drawing is not done for fine artistic purposes, it’s a skill that can be used in many different ways. Designers learn to draw and use it in their practice, but they don’t (mostly) consider this fine art.
The only challenges to the accuracy of Carlin’s showa are pedantic and nitpicky.
The EU will continue to shape regulation and policy, but with rising China and India, there may be some change in that.

I'd say it's good to have the EU and the US set some regulation minimums (EU is stronger in some areas, the US is stronger in other areas) but China and India will likely begin influencing policies --perhaps for the better. For example, China regulating (banning) the importation of certain rubbish.

W/re GDPP[1], they have always had an issue with productivity vis a vis the US. However, your figures exaggerate the extent, according to this: https://www.bls.gov/ilc/intl_gdp_capita_gdp_hour.htm#table02

[[1], to your point below]GDP per employed person at PPP which to me is more reflective of an economy.
Collaborate on inputs, compete on outputs
Here's the article:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/dec/06/kazuo-ishiguro...

It's a great anecdote. I knew exactly what point in the book Kazuo was referring to.
Depends what you mean by remembered. History will record rulers but is that really remembered? Feels like it’s more a footnote.

I’d argue that remembered means something... more.
Depending on what state, you may have several options for this.
> > It is not a regression if that way of life was not sustainable.

> Yes it is. It's literally a regression.

It’s not a regression. It’s an advance in way of life. In the past, if you wanted to move fast, you had to own the car. Now you don’t need to own it, and can use the space for something else. Now you don’t need to drive it, and can have your hands free while someone else drives the car.

> > Just-in-time global supply chains that make tropical fruit affordable in the neighborhood grocery store, also provide anything else in the world to my doorstep.

> None of that helps a family of four cart their kids around town. Or anyone who lives outside of an urban area. Or anyone who likes to have room to carry anything around, go on weekend trips, etc.

Owning a car is not freedom. Owning a car is being separated from friends and family, because the car is literally, physically, coming between you. Owning a car is being stuck in traffic. Owning a car is being a slave to the DMV, the gas station, and the repair shop.

Living without a car is not giving up mobility. It’s living in a place where the car is just one option, and not necessarily the best option. Growing up, my family of five carted around town via public transit. We couldn’t afford to own a car, so living in a place built around car ownership would have meant living in isolation. Requiring a car is not sustainable.

> > Emission control technology and tree plantings make urban life sometimes less polluted than rural life.

> A vague generalization, and generally unlikely.

https://www.livestrong.com/article/119955-harmful-effects-fe...

https://www.menshealth.com/health/lawn-chemical-hazards

Intensive agriculture has helped make food incredibly cheap, but the concentrated chemicals do not seem healthy to be near.

> > We live great lives without personal cars, and we don’t want to be forced into legacy environments that require cars.

> This is also bizarre. It's especially so when you look at the bigger picture, in which cars are an evolution of the horse-drawn carriage.

Not everybody owned the horse-drawn carriage. And people did give up the horse, sometimes reluctantly, because they could not afford to keep it. Fortunately, they lived in places where the horse was just one option, and not necessarily the best option.

https://www.strongtowns.org/curbside-chat-1/2015/12/14/ameri...
Please don't name-call in comments. Apart from breaking the site rules (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html), it discredits your point. That's particularly bad when your point is good.
Based on my own experience (not solving Rubik's cubes, but still), it's similar to how one can navigate with turn-by-turn directions despite not having a map. You just need to know how to "walk the graph" of the objects involved.
Share of China's population living in extreme poverty:

1980: 88.3%

2013: 1.8%

(World Bank)
> The reason to have citizens own guns is so the population can't be bullied by a totalitarian state, whether foreign or domestic.

The US military is far too well-trained and well-equipped for any local civilian militia to have even a remote chance of winning a fight with them. That probably wasn't the case in 1800, but that ship sailed long ago.

> To subjugate a populace, to keep them under your boot without outright killing them, you need infantry or police on the ground, and rifles in everybody's hands is a nightmare for such an occupying force.

So what? The public having guns won't stop that from happening. Having or not having guns makes it equally bad. Actually, civilian gun ownership might make it worse: you end up with a lot more deaths on both sides, but the US military still wins.

> I don't think it's a coincidence that the number of democracies in the world exploded so very close to the same time in our history that guns became widely available and cheap enough for average citizens to own.

That's a pretty extraordinary claim that requires some research and evidence.

> Be careful about tearing down a foundational pillar of what keeps governments in check.

Even if we blithely ignore reality and assume that civilian gun ownership keeps the US government in check, what's keeping all those other democratic governments in check where civilian gun ownership is either not the norm or is mostly or completely outlawed? They seem to be doing just fine, and as a bonus have levels of gun violence that are much, much lower than that in the US.

> It's tangible, and it's already happened repeatedly.

To whom? I don't see regular revolutions happening in the vast majority of present-day democracies. Even if it's the case that legal civilian gun ownership was necessary hundreds of years ago to get us to a point where those democracies were able to be formed (I don't really buy that, but let's just give you that for a second), clearly civilian gun ownership is not necessary to maintain those democracies today. We have clear empirical evidence that it's not necessary if you just look at (nearly?) every other (actual) democracy in the world.

But still, all of this presupposes that an organized, armed, civilian militia could realistically win against the US military and overthrow the US government. That's laughable.
Yes. An Android tablet with FBReader or Pocketbook.

Almost certainly a similarly configured iOS device.

(I use the former heavily. It is among the devices autoconfigured by the system described in the OP.)
Most of the debate seems to be around "corruptible" politicians and how they want to control the financial system. Some purists in Blockchains are afraid of regulation it seems.

What does a world without regulation look like? In my opinion it is like playing with fire. It may cause forest fires or it may cook delicious meals.

In the interim, it is better to deal with a "known enemy" (personally I dont view regulation as an enemy). Decentralize regulation. If someone wants to create his own regulation, sure go ahead. Its just that your country's regulation may agree to trade with your regulation or may be not, based on what you have created. Negotiate well with your country's regulator, and get coins flowing across "your borders".
No one is predicting that for all time. Though China is definitely already upper middle income when it comes to gdp/capita, they aren’t a poor country even if they aren’t a rich one.

PPP isn’t very meaningful, it doesn’t account for many things being more expensive in china for equivalent developed world lifestyles. It just means people have cheaper life styles outside of services.
Would you please not post unsubstantive or uncivil comments to HN? You're welcome here if (but only if) you want thoughtful conversation.
Thanks, I'll fix it :)
Arnold will.
Yes: Demonstrating that the "we're gonna take your domains away" approach fails, and will result in backlash.
> I await your immediate downvotes.

This breaks the HN guidelines. Doing that leads to HN prison. Please don't do that.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
The system works fairly well if you are poor too. I know several people who have walked into and out of the hospital without paying a dime.

It really seems like the middle class gets the raw end of the deal.
"taking a picture" is not the same thing as "an x-ray"
Taxis in cities with decent taxi systems, in a neighborhood with decent taxi coverage, hailed by waving your hand on the side of the road are fine, and getting better by way of competition. I have no qualms with taxis in, ie NYC or DC. Taxi dispatchers, though? Especially in smaller cities? I lost count of the number of times I had a cab no-show when I lived in Pittsburgh.
That seems like such an anti-feature. I'd want the compiler to issue a warning for it by default and the IDE to ship with 'warnings are errors' by default.