skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Is something causing people to consume more calories than before?

Yes. For most of human history, food was scarce. People regularly died from starvation.

Today, that is no longer the case. Despite the outrage industry's continued and tired claims that hunger is at all time highs, etc, the truth of the matter is that most people in developed countries -- far more than ever before -- have access to all the nutrition they need at a price they can afford.

Unfortunately, people are not used to that availability, and thus are not able to process it rationally. Instead we binge eat. For example, there is a free box of bagels today at work and I'm going to have one now because cream cheese... yum!
You may be missing out. I am overall so much happier since I got more active on Instagram. This stuff keeps my friends near me and emulates the accidental bumping into each other you get on a college campus. Like someone posts about the last Incubus concert they went to and you say "That's awesome! Can't believe I missed it" and they'll be like "We're going next Wednesday! Want to come?"
This isn’t what the article said. He said companies that came after amazon. Yet hacker news upvotes this the most.
> Medicare is mandatory in the US for retired old people. It's universal, it's mandatory, and it covers everything. They're literally not in the insurance pools, so I don't know what you're talking about

How about everyone who retired before 65?

As for your other points, I mean yeah, we shouldn’t have employers provide it. But they do, and you need to recognize it. There are definitely group plans large enough to spread risk.
Was this "rape" archive at the Vatican perhaps?
Dropbox launches new “smart workspace”
Ask HN: Why you left your job for starting a startup?
What attracted you to jump into the startup world, that you didn't have at a regular job?
I've been using Lipton for this purpose and don't like all the packaging either. What do you use to contain the dust while you brew overnight? I make mine in a pitcher that lasts a few days.
well the bose ones are probably just normal headphones without all the built in amazon botnet tracking bonuses to offset the cost
True - it's confusing from there as well!
I think the question for me is how these various things help people eat less calories. E.g., my mental model of hunger used to be like the "E" light on a car dashboard. But through various experimentation, I've noticed that the nature of hunger is very different for me depending on things.

E.g., if I avoid eating refined carbs (sugar, white flour, etc) for a month or so, suddenly hunger is this mild, easily tolerable sensation. I just end up eating less. If I go back on them for a while, hunger returns to being MUST EAT NOW.

I used to hear people talk about forgetting to eat, and I would always think, "How is that even possible?" But now I know: we might use the same word, but the experience can be very different.
If you do not want to hear one thing about negotiating power then you are missing the main reason why medical costs are skyrocketing.

Medicare/medicaid does not negotiate drug costs down because it is prohibited by law from doing so. This is because of a law signed by the Bush administration (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_Prescription_Drug,_...).
This is still very experimental. I think doing the experiments in applications makes more sense than potentially breaking every network request on the system at once.
What do you conclude from cable companies? On the one hand, competition is legally restrained. On the other hand, the cable companies are still somewhat constrained by imperfect substitutes - for instance, wireless is not a great substitute for cable, but it's enough for me to live without it.
The Future of the Construction Industry (Infographic)
> Here, for example is a recent study by Harvard Medical School detailing how partipants on a low-carb diet burned more than 250 calories more then people on a high-carb diet.

You are countering the claim that diet is about calories in being less than calories out by claiming that, because a low-carb diet causes more calories to be burned, it negates this claim.

I think you are simply trying to qualify the claim by showing also that, while it is true that you will lose weight if you consume fewer calories than you expend, it also so happens that what you eats influences the basal metabolic rate. That is certainly an interesting point, but it ultimately relies on the truth of the claim you're attempting to attack. In order to believe your counterclaim, one must believe that the relationship between rate of caloric expenditure and caloric intake is important.
Why is that an issue? Presumably firmware updates are at best a monthly occurrence. Why do I care if it takes two days to push? Just make sure you have reliable resume and error checking.
iCloud Bypass Pro – iCloud Bypass for Latest iOS Update
> It's absurd that we can order something on AliExpress, have it shipped halfway around the world, and pay 1 Dollar

Especially if you care about the environment.
My parents owned a business, which I worked in sometimes. Working elsewhere I do really notice that employees capture a lot of benefits which perhaps should go to customers...
I personally think that there might be something in Baltic genetic makeup that makes us more prone to suicide.

Lack of sun exposure probably does play a role, though, because I suspect that the average adult doesn't spend enough time in the sun during the time of the year when we can produce vitamin D.
> So compared to for example Apple

Or even Google... like with their Google Glasses.

This is actually a pretty clever way to get early feedback on new ideas.

And the people who say "you have to pay for this stuff". Um yeah, that is the point. If nobody buys it.... maybe that is a clue there is no market for the idea (at least at that price point).

Neat! Too bad the discussion is about this particular device and not the actual program itself...
After https://stackoverflow.com/a/57247614/308851 I am at a complete loss of why I would I want GraphQL. A client uses it , so I obey but I do not see the point. To quote the linked answer to save you a click:

> GraphQL does not provide any built-in mechanisms for filtering, sorting, pagination or other arbitrary transformations of the response
There is a WHY (or at least a general why):
Obfuscation.

- lack of clarity on competitive pricing

- obfuscation by adding multiple layers in buying process (broker - insurance - claims adjuster - hospital)

- obfuscation through too-many-options syndrome (Obamacare versus Medicare versus state-driven healthcare versus emergency-only healthcare)

- lack of clarity when being billed (getting several bills from several different departments)

There's also the problem of insurance companies being a for-profit enterprise that answers more to stockholders than to patients.

This is the result of "free market" idealists at work. Health is something that everyone needs, so businesses want a piece of the big pie by trying to wedge themselves somewhere in there. Only massive government overhaul can fix this.
> Sounds like they're making people pay to be beta testers.

Kind of the point. If people aren't willing to part with their hard earned dollars for the device, maybe it won't be a market success and they should stop investing in it?
Hinkley and Vogtle are the first Gen 3 reactors. It would be surprising if construction was fast and easy.

When we build more reactors our processes will improve. Just like Korea, Japan, and France.
Good! I think we could solve a lot of immigration issues if the government targets the corporations that abuse the system, not the people.
> What started the mortgage defaults though?

Good old-fashioned fraud. Oil prices had nothing to do with it.

Source: acquaintance who spent three years in court testifying about the rampant fraud in the mortgage industry. He worked for an investment bank which is no longer with us.
More trivia: ASCII characters were designed to support overstrike (using BS) to generate more characters. For example, á (&aacute;) can be written as a BS '. Acute, grave, and circumflex accents, and umlauts, can be written this way on lower-case letters. ñ is n BS ~. Cedille (ç) is c BS comma. Underline is character BS underscore; strikethrough is similar, using dash or tilde. Bold is character BS same_character.

Many Compose key sequences are based on this.

So ASCII, in a way, may well be the first -or one of the first- variable-length codeset.

Note that overstriking upper-case letters to add diacritical marks does not work for ASCII (see more below).

Also, overstriking was how one typed diacritical marks back in the days of mechanical typewriters. Spanish used to (and may still? I forget) permit upper-case letters to not carry diacritical marks precisely because it was difficult or costly to get typewriters and printers to print such letters. Adding diacritical marks to upper-case letters requires fonts designed for that, and clearly an overstrike sequence cannot work unless the typewriter/printer holds printing the character until it knows whether the next character is BS.
Sure, but the air isn't ionized before the lightning ionizes it. In any case, it's moot since the lightning could bypass the rubber by going through the air next to it.
They only mention Bluetooth and wifi... Are we pretending zigbee and zwave don't exist? This just feels like an excuse to create yet another proprietary protocol.
> Negotiating power alone isn’t going to drive $1.5 trillion in costs out of the system

Of course it could. It works in Germany! And France! And Switzerland! Why not here?

Look, I don't know how this can possibly work with our current system. It cannot be solved by the market alone. There's no transparency in the current system. Insurers can just keep passing price increases along. And many Americans want "the best" and "right now" and that ends up increasing costs for all of us.

People will argue that the American system is so expensive because: reasons. e.g. we subsidize the rest of the world. Or we are overweight. Or we don't get enough exercise. Or we want the best of everything. Or health insurance profits and CEO salaries. Or fraud.

We also keep saying: America is exceptional. None of what other countries do will work here.

So what do you propose? At the end of the day, doctors, hospitals, and the payer or payers need to negotiate reasonable pricing for decent care. And that cost needs to be spread equally across all Americans. I'd favor doing it with cost-sharing from paychecks like we do now for Medicare, with the government picking up the bill for the unemployed, and with tax credits to offset income differences. I like the system than France has, where you have a co-pay, but it gets reimbursed. This makes the consumer at least aware that there is cost to using the system. Then allow supplemental insurance for people who want better.

And Americans will somehow need to realize that not every medical problem has to be solved right away. And that you don't need the most expensive treatment option for every issue.

We cannot continue to ration health care by ability to pay. It's immoral.
I co-own a security firm with a friend and this past year we've been getting infrastructure projects. I hire people with college degrees and most of them have crippling student debt. Debt I dont have.

You got a lot of resentment in you and you need to stop thinking there are guarantees in life for someone. There isn't. The idea that theres a path made of velvet and lined with roses that offers you everything in the world is the brainwashed concept.

A person's character is built and forged through how they approach and deal with hardships. You can define yourself by being knocked down and staying down or defined by getting back up. I say this in hopes that someone reading this who's in a shit situation, like me about a decade ago, doesn't give up hope on themselves. A silly expensive piece of paper doesn't grant access for shit anymore. Except for crippling debt. It gives you access to crippling debt.
Is Amazon really much more than an arbitrage on people's desire for "free shipping" at this point? The last time I wanted to buy something online, the price plus shipping elsewhere was noticeably cheaper than with free shipping on Amazon.
I think the real problem is that the patent office gets fees for approving patents, and no negative feedback for approving bad ones. The natural result is that they externalize the cost of disproving bad patents to the population at large. Do the people who approve overturned patents even hear that they've been overturned? If not, then there's not even the emotional cost of being told they've done a bad job.

If whenever a patent was overturned, the Patent Office had to pay the court costs of the one who managed to overturn it, they'd be a lot more circumspect about what they approved.
In the UK the NHS negotiates prices for drugs. NICE have to approve all drugs and if a drug is too expensive, the manufacturer either has to lower the price so that the benefit outweighs the cost, or they lose a large market.

This is why hand waving away "bargaining power" ignores one of the sources of high costs.

The other is that our doctors are mostly either employed by the NHS, or employed by a private provider who is paid by the NHS ... yes, there are doctors who do private only work, but they are fairly small in number.

Perhaps our student loans system also helps - fees are £9k a year, but you start paying them back at 9% of income over £25k ... so it's essentially a graduate tax and they are fully written off after a set number of years if you don't pay them off.
It’s also an absolute moral disgrace that we’ve decide the profits of insurance industry and other for profit entities are more important than many people’s lives and the suffering of many others. Anyone who wants to argue in favor of the continued existence of this system should have all of this hung around their necks.
> If you know Dimon’s actual reputation, him getting suckered isn’t surprising. From what I heard back in 2009, Dimon is a mediocrity who essentially got lucky his bank was too slow to get in on the subprime scam in 2006; he then used his bank’s incompetence at getting into the bubble as justification for how prudent he was.

This is some backwards logic if I ever saw it. Damned if he did, damned if he didn't, I guess.
You’re Not Alone If You’re Crying at Work
BBC World Service and RT are absolutely comparable. Both are very obvious in pushing the agenda of their state sponsors.

If you want subtlety, watch France24 English. If you want the propaganda arm of a dying empire, BBCWS is for you.

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/bbc-fake-news-1811...

http://oro.open.ac.uk/36441/
I am eternally fascinated by this. A couple years back paleo diets were all the rage and I started hearing people talk about things like "paleo waffles" and "paleo brownies". I never said anything, but I could not believe how much work people would put into "eating healthy" only to reconstruct the same unhealthy things that made them say, "man, I really need to start eating healthy!"
What do you mean spend more than they take in? The USPS is in the black, save for some strange law that they must prefund pensions 50 years in advance (any company would be running a loss if they had to do this).

The USPS can't increase their domestic prices but there is good indication that they are charging more to offset this. There are complaints in this thread even about the cost of shipping abroad, as international shipping is not regulated like domestic postage rates if I remember right. So the USPS uses outbound international shipments as a cost center to make up for the subsidy to China.

The article states there is a ~$500M subsidy to China through UPU rates.
Apple state that it is equivalent to a 1-lead ECG.
The Oceans We Know Won't Survive Climate Change
That's not how profits reporting works.
I can see the appeal of everything else Amazon announced (even the glasses, which have value in that they're basically headphones you don't have to take off when having a conversation). But cannot figure out the target market of this. I'm even someone who is interested in the idea of a smart ring, but the feature it needs is sleep tracking (since I haven't ever been able to sleep with a watch or band).
> Well they need to be paid a lot because medical school debt is 250k or more... why?

You are doing something called confusing cause and effect.

Medical school costs a lot because doctors earn a lot of money.
I didn't know of the `ascii` command-line tool, so thanks. What I've always tended to use when I need to look at an ascii table is `man 7 ascii`.

In retrospect, maybe I did know of the existence of a command called `ascii`. It's the reason why I needed to specify the section to `man`, since it would otherwise take me to ascii(1).
GNOME has brought me so much value over the years, yeah, sure, I'll use this excuse to throw some money at it.
If you keep the airpods, you might try one of the many silicone "skins" you can slip over them. They don't fit into the case with these things on, but they do stay in more securely (and sound better).
> Your argument was based on a premise that students who are admitted via merit to elite schools do not actually benefit by attending these elite schools

No that is not at all what my argument is. My argument is (quoting from a previous comment)

> legacy admissions does nothing other than to help the legacy students network with the merit students

I used a study asserting

> that those who get into top schools and don't attend do as well as those who do get in and attend

You are attempting to attack the study over my usage of the term 'top school', which you believe applies to MIT. That is far. However, if you read the study (which you clearly did not), it is actually talking solely about Ivy League schools not any 'elite college'. Actually, if you didn't read the study at all, but had only clicked the link and read the title (as most HNers are apt to do), then you still would have known it's about the Ivy League, because it's titled The Ivy League Earnings Myth. All the ivy league schools have legacy admissions. The use of the word 'top school' was my invention. However, using that word versus just using what the study used (Ivy League) does not change the core of my argument which again is

> legacy admissions does nothing other than to help the legacy students network with the merit students

You are attempting to attack the study by giving your own anecdote about your experience at MIT. Attempting to extrapolate global truth from your anecdote argument is yet another instance of logical fallacy. However, even admitting your use of fallacy as an actual argument, the argument itself would fail to actually refute the study, because again -- as a non-Ivy League school -- the 'success multiplier' of an MIT education has nothing to do with that of an Ivy League one.

I suggest you go back to my first comment and replace the word top school with 'Ivy League schools', and see that the arguments still follow. I apologize if my use of the term 'top school' to mean 'Ivy League' was confusing.

> This premise is false, as I have argued, because income alone is not a good measure of benefit.

That's a perfectly reasonable argument, but is actually orthogonal to the one you are continuing to make about 'elite schools'.

> Any argument based on a false premise is an unsound argument. Consequently, your argument is unsound.

Well... no. An argument based on false premise is false. In mathematics, unsoundness is a property of a logical system, not particular statements in that system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soundness
Sex Cam Live
Well somehow it doesn't seem quite as toxic as newsvertisements similar to original post in question, and despite my original statement, I still enjoy posting here, so clearly this is a spectrum and what you are describing and what I am talking about are not quite identical.

There's a difference between offering up a startup-oriented forum that still encourages people to post anything that is intellectually stimulating and interesting, while still allowing it to be an outlet for YC-backed startups to post and share things for discussion vs. posting a news article that piggybacks on Andreessen's well-publicized and becomes marketing spin about a specific product after a few introductory paragraphs. Just like how there's a difference between allowing a few "sponsored posts" on a search page, and having all of the front page be sponsored posts. Does that make more sense?

Do you disagree that there's a difference between those two things?
So you know the requirements and persist in presenting it as a package shipping option? When any item thicker than 0.75" wouldn't apply and thus invalidates this as an option for the vast majority of package shippers?

And you ignore that point that even at the high volume flats rate, it's still more expensive. Maybe your needs are an edge case, I don't know. But you asked for examples where shipping within the US is more expensive, and you have those examples in spades. Once given, you want to move the goal posts, and can't even move them to where you're actually right. You're being deliberately obtuse and intellectually dishonest. I'm done trying to have a conversation.
Alexa can mimic celebrities, starting with Samuel L. Jackson
There's a simpler explanation: processed foods are more caloric per weight and/or they tend to increase portion size as well.
United Nations Online Volunteering
can't remember the name of the place, but there's a low cost franchise place I went to a few years back. I had a prescription from eye exam, but they'd do those there too. I was in, chose some frames, had my stuff done in about 45 minutes. 3 frames - one was $$ because I chose rimless, but I got 2 backup pairs as well - total cost was a bit under $200. Had I not chosen rimless, and just got the 'regular' basic frames... would have been ~$60?.

They had a deal at that time too - $99 for exam and one frame/lens set, done in a couple hours.

They're fine - have worn every day for 3 years. No 'insurance' to worry about.
Agreed. When you have a legit question SO can be great. Maybe I'm being harsh on your example but it's just not the place to get the basics explained to you like your comment infers.
> Multiplexing on what?

Light.

Optical fibres can move _way_ more data than actual households need, so you use one fibre to move data for, say, 16 endpoints until you get closer, and split it later, saving the cost of 15 long fibres.

You can do everything so that there are no active components out in the field where it's annoying except at the customer site, a passive splitter is quite capable of shoving frequencies A-A' to Alice, B-B' to Bob and so on, it's not just solid state it's completely passive, no more likely to need maintenance than, say, the fibre itself.
Is there anything I could do to help support bromite as a project?
What other goods is the US Gov the sole buyer of, for which the sellers can't easily shift to other customers? Cop cars clearly doesn't apply, as carmakers have other customers. Doctors, hospitals, and pharmaceuticals will face true monopsony, which means sell at gov rates or quit entirely. Some suppliers will quit entirely, but most won't.
A home for apps that push the boundaries of iOS. No jailbreak required
Anyone around to convert this to that nushell that was featured on HN a few weeks ago? I'm curious to see what the comparison would look like in a super practical real-life scenario
But leasing becomes ownership - and than it's a "high fixed costs, low marginal costs" situation.
Shrug, not every product is for everybody. I love the crap out of my QC30's, they're magical