skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In 2016 a meta-analysis of 130 studies across 10 countries also found them to be effective. I think one of the strongest predictors of suicide is gender - but I'm not sure you'd find many gun control advocates advocating for gender based controls. But I suppose since the studies sometimes don't explicitly call out the correlation between gender and suicide that their methodology and conclusions must be... invalid???

I fully acknowledge and think it is an absolute tragedy that veterans can't access the support services they need, and I think that problem, and the problem of mental health issues in America could be mostly addressed by a better healthcare system.

For many of the gun suicides and some of the murders though, better gun control is effective.
Very Hobbesian. I think you'll find actual implementations of the systems you propose don't really discourage murder or theft; those don't concern the bottom line. I'll point to the Belgian Congo as a relevant example in this space
Yeah but that would be the last option you will think of when you will try to re-compile project that was working just yesterday ...
The first article is a paid promotion piece, which WP won't accept as an RS.

The second is a press release by Arrow's sponsoring company, which, obviously, WP won't accept as an RS.

I have no idea what "The Silicon Review" is; this is the first time I've ever seen it. To the extent it's not a pay-to-play trade publication, it might qualify as a notability-establishing source. The fact that the "Review" does not itself have a WP page might make it harder to claim it's reliable, since it suggests nobody else knows what it is, either.
==Eventually, they or their children become citizens, which is little different from the policy you claim literally no one is proposing.==

Literally none of those are "giving citizenship to everyone who wants it". To take your eventually example to the next step, if their children's children have kids on US soil, they will automatically be US citizens. By your logic, the existing US Constitution is "little different" from the same policy.
"DRIVING LEADERSHIP WORKLOAD PERFORMANCE" indeed! Fun fact: Intel hired AMD marketing team, the same people producing less than honest PR during AMD Bulldozer years (Chris Hook, Heather Lennon).
The obesity explanation doesn't pass the sniff test. Canada is 12% less obese than the U.S., but it spends 6% less of its GDP on healthcare. Put differently, if obesity was the reason for excess spending, the U.S. would save $1.1 trillion for every 12% of its population that is cured of obesity. If true, that would peg the marginal cost of obesity at $27,777 per person per year (1.1 trillion/.12*330 million), or 9x the annual salary of a doctor in Cuba. That is beyond the realm of believability, even if I introduce the other population-induced causal factors which you implied but didn't specify.

Additionally, the government would be more invested in the population's health under a single-payer model. It would actively work to reduce the prevalence of obesity and lower its costs. That would include taxing consumable goods with a negative health externality, commensurate with the magnitude of that externality. That would also include incentivizing the consumption and production of goods with positive health externalities and investing in pro-health infrastructure.

Imagine if a city faced the following math: "A network of bike lanes would cost us $40 million and $10 million to maintain over the next 10 years. It would also save around $50 million in health expenditures every 10 years. After one decade, it will cost $10 million and continue to save us $50 million." All the bike lanes you could dream of would be built overnight, assuming there would be subsidies by a M4A healthcare program. I'm more excited at the prospect of converting roads into pedestrian walkways and scooter highways. That wouldn't seem like such an expensive proposition if the government would recoup the cost in healthcare savings.
Show HN: A new way of setting new year's resolutions and stick to them
Re Accuracy Concerns Regarding FBI Matters Submitted to the FISC [pdf]
This. I think people generally are just really boring and don't have the capacity to think about all the extraordinary things they could be doing with their limited time on the planet.

The world is infinite and extraordinary and full of joy and pain and suffering and intrigue - most people through upbringing, education and lack of long term thinking, cannot see past menial jobs, solving menial problems of no real value - simply because it passes the time and gives you a little lazy leisure and the occasional pat on the back from your superiors.
I was guilty of this. Spent far too much time optimizing database indexes and far too little time actually talking with customers and validating new ideas.

Technology choice is the least important part of a startup. Pick what you know and roll with it. Make sure the first developers you hire "get" startups and aren't in it to tinker with their pet projects or push some bozo agenda (eg: don't use js frameworks because.... they are "bloat". don't use third party libraries because they are "security risks". don't use the cloud because RMS said not to). Developers with strong "unorthodox" opinions about technology are toxic to startups.
"You should watch the news and be aware of all of this" says it all. You watch far too much TV, all of these points are laughable and your phrasing suggests you are rather emotionally involved in all this. I would suggest staying away from the 24-hour news cycle and finding better sources of information.
2005 was 15 years ago, not 10.
Ask HN: What if Linux and FreeBSD had the same license?
It's my understanding that Linux users are opposed to software that isn't compatible with GNU; what if Free/Net/OpenBSD and Linux all used the same license: would support and use of Linux and *BSD be the same or is there more to it than just the politics and religion of licensing?
Overproduction is when production exceeds demand. Abundance doesn't have to exceed demand, so I don't understand your comment. Furthermore, it doesn't matter if prices stay high or not. You want profits, not simply high prices.

There's also induced demand - the more something is available, the more it is used.

But that's beside the point. There is a high demand, right now, for new sources of carbon-free power, and plenty of profit for a viable, eg, Mr. Fusion.

The only sources I can find for your CFC comment are from right-wing radicals who are philosophically opposed to government restrictions.

A recent scientific report is at https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/csd/assessments/ozone/2018/ , "Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2018".

> Actions taken under the Montreal Protocol have led to decreases in the atmospheric abundance of controlled ozone-depleting substances (ODSs) and the start of the recovery of stratospheric ozone. The atmospheric abundances of both total tropospheric chlorine and total tropospheric bromine from long-lived ODSs controlled under the Montreal Protocol have continued to decline since the 2014 Assessment. The weight of evidence suggests that the decline in ODSs made a substantial contribution to the following observed ozone trends:
Too bad this doesn't seem to be ending any time soon. The government previously promised they would be here by Christmas but time is running out.
My experience has been the exact opposite.
Examples drawn don’t have an entry and exit?
Before betting on stocks, bet on ideas
When you have root, it doesn't take many more random syscalls to cause a panic.
We Launched a $1.5MM/Month Digital Wallet and Financial Services Company
I get most of that, but it’s a bit more complicated:

BMW/truck makers could sell the smaller engine for proportionately less money, but they don’t because it would make the vehicle too available. Or just make up close enough numbers and most won’t care.

99% of bystanders won’t know the difference.

BMW doesn’t follow its numbering scheme for engines anyway (The 323 had a 2.5L engine.)
That is a strange one.
Ask HN: How to license Python software with keys?
> It's hard to imagine how this could be accidental behavior.

Ooops, I meant to drag it onto my desktop, but I accidentally dropped it onto my terminal.

It's very easy to imagine how this could be accidental behavior.
> This is an inaccurate summary of that thread, in which you raised a simple accusation that the article cherry-picked the models

Ironically, or not, your summary of my summary of that thread is inaccurate.

> "you raised a simple accusation that the article cherry-picked the models" is not what I did. What I did do is ask for an explanation of how we know no cherry picking occurred. Their methodology for article selection was not published, so therefore it cannot be reproduced. I emailed the authors asking for clarification, and they did not reply.

> were swatted down with a citation from the article referenced in the OP

"swatted down", but didn't address my actual question, rather re-reffering to the original ambiguous wording that I was complaining about.

A reproducible methodology could clear up the uncertainty (and please note, my claim is that there is uncertainty not that there is wrongdoing), yet no methodology was offered in the original paper, and the authors did not reply to the request.

In such situations, I adopt a position of "Unknown - more information is required", but obviously others have a much more flexible approach to what they're willing to believe. Although, I wonder if this approach varies depending on the subject - would be interesting to read up on.

> and then retreated into a maze of long, twisty replies that failed to raise any other specific points

"Mazes of long, twisty replies", and failures to "raise any other specific points" are a common consequences when one party in a discussion is unwilling to directly address questions as asked, and the other party's response to that is re-asking the same question.

> Your comments in this thread have had the same flavor.

Indeed they do, as do the replies: unwillingness to directly address questions as asked.

> Consider brevity and specificity.

I will do so.

In return, please consider honesty, epistemic humility, your willingness to acknowledge that ambiguity often exists in written language, and whether a lack of 100% agreement should be interpreted as opposition, as opposed to curiosity and strictness. Sometimes those who appear to be your enemy may actually be some of your best friends.

EDIT: Here's another way to look at it (a better description of my main intent): "conspiracy theorists" and "deniers" are a problem, to some degree, in broad acceptance of climate change messaging, agreed? Might it be a good idea to consider whether there are some flaws in the messaging that could be improved, that would result in reducing the material they have to work with in any influence campaigns?
Right, because only Apple-supplied software can possess the right entitlements. If there was any other way to do this, applications could bypass the protection (looking at you, Dropbox…)
Linux versions are not decimal, you subtracted 1.-2
> I think it does exactly that, though.

I'm honestly curious: what has changed? Ads and cookies have been a thing on the web since the very beginning and the terms of service are generally available for the curious. Is it just the scale with which it is happening today?

> ...my concern is all the spying that takes place outside of such services.

Are you talking about government surveillance here? If so I'm definitely with you on that. I think the extent to which private companies can be leveraged and compelled by the government to turn over information is very disconcerting. I see that as a problem of abusive state authorities though, not anything to do with capitalism.
The employer medicare tax doesn’t max out.

The employee gets most of the benefit of RSU’s. They’re taxed as cap gains, maxing out around 23% while cash is taxed at the marginal rate, closer to 50% all in with state and federal and a FAANG salary.
For a startup, something like heroku is perfect. Course, my opinion is formed based on data 5 years out of date. Now days I'm sure there is something that abstracts things even more.
A bit of a garden-path headline --- I initially thought "Samsung chair" was a product that had somehow malfunctioned and trapped 24 people.
Fair enough, I'm not familiar with the composition of that community so I just used numbers reflective of the general population.
I'm not a lawyer, so take this with a grain of salt. I'm an employer, though, so I was incentivized to read up a little on employment law (you learn a lot of things you never wanted to know...)

German labor courts are most of the time well aware of the power imbalance between employer and employee. Even we, as a tiny company could bring more legal resources and funds to bear than most of our employees. So courts usually favor the employee.

Given that, I'd expect that the result would largely depend on how bad the infraction rates. If you failed to report a job that the employer could not have vetoed on any grounds, I'd generally expect a slap on the wrist (Abmahnung, "written warning") or such as the result. Worst case regular termination. On cases where the employee failed to report a side job that could or would have been vetoed, immediate termination with cause is possible - the link I posted above cites such a case. If the side job caused damages, suing for damages would be possible. However, suing for damages requires you to prove damages, which will be hard in many cases.

So I'd really recommend that as an employee you dutifully report when you plan to take on a second job - just be sure to phrase it as such: Don't make it a request. It's a notice.
Wouldn't a drummer just be paid cash for a one-off 2-hour gig? The music industry isn't exactly renowned for ethical accounting and there is no union for session drummers that would enforce the rule you're describing.
What about Paquita Salas! That show is brilliant and has Spain coming out of every orifice. So much so that I don't even bother recommending it to English speakers because they won't get so many of the references
What that sentence says is: Bell's theorem predicts the linear dependence of the correlations angles - or at least it's consistent with such a model. It's not an assumption of the theory.

Also keep in mind we don't observe linear correlations - at least one of the assumptions of Bell's theorem must be wrong.
Which 30 year period you get to live and work in is what matters most, and the timing of the bad years. Which is why I recommend this calculator: https://firecalc.com/.
In that case it sounds like the real explanation for forking was "the relevant part of the Firefox codebase had too much tech debt to make contributions so we had to fork our bodges." (No offense wrt tech debt; I know what it's like to be saddled with it and congrats on addressing yours.)

I hope to soon see a cliqz blog post about their project unforking, only spun as an ingenious way of saving memory, improving security and extending reach.
How do you use them? Are we talking about developer desktop PC's here? Or user namespaces as part of a containerization setup?

The main use of user namespaces seems to be running stuff that wants to be root as non-root. It would seem better to simply fix all those tools to not check if they are root, and instead just try to do the thing they were trying to do.
> The app, it turns out, is the easy part.

Automating existing Excel spreadsheets is much easier for solution creation success than automating what you perceive to be a business workflow.
Apologies!!! It's https://transfer.midrive.io
Sure, but that's trivial, just delete two edge walls of your choice.
Ah, thanks. I didn't realize that you could drop Car2Go vehicles elsewhere.
Agreed, worthy of the Economist. I do appreciate a good pun in a title when it is so relevant to the story.
hehe - actually I am an Android dev primarily and I thought that starting a project without CI sucks way more. So I built this for myself and was happy paying $7/mo for not having to spend weeks+$$$ on setting one up with current solutions.

Spot instances do take upto ~2 mins to come up so probably a turbo add-on that devs will feel happy paying for or please feel free to suggest.
I guess Germany's liberal drinking laws make for a much smaller fake ID market. You could still pull it off, especially since most people aren't really trained for spotting fake IDs. But a German fake ID is not exactly something you buy for $10 each at the drug dealer on the corner.
I don't think this is by passing any permissions system. My understanding of how the new permissions system works is that dragging a file into an app grants access to that file. You drag an image into a Microsoft Word, and permissions is granted to access that file so it can insert it into the document.

I think that's just what's happening.
It should have been moved to a "Relocated Items" or "Previous System" folder, or something similar.
Building DNS resolution into applications, bypassing the OS, is not something I like as a user. It robs me of control. Chrome started down this path and then withdrew. However Golang seems to encourage building applications that do their own DNS resolution.

Then there are computers like Chromecasts with hardcoded DNS servers and Apple devices with inaccesible HOSTS files. This sort of design takes control from the user and puts it with the company. Net/Free/OpenBSD still offer a reasonable level of control for those users who want it.

The way it was introduced, DOH seems inextricably linked to one application. It is 100% browser-centric. I hope that will change. The internet is more than just a medium for a commercial web. Maybe people will start HTTP tunnelling more than just DNS.

As for DNSSEC, it only makes sense to me if one is sharing a cache with others. If it is not a shared cache, if the user has her own caching resolver that connects directly to authoritative servers, then IMO most of the reasoning behind using DNSSEC is gone.

What is interesting about some of these DOH comments is that it appears some folks do not want the operator of an authoritative DNS server to know they are sending a query. It seems they want to "hide" behind a third party cache, assuming that is even possible.^1 That sort of "privacy" is not something I care about. I want to cut out the third party DNS middleman. I prefer to query authoritative servers directly without using a recursive resolver (either local or remote), using custom programs I wrote; this is much faster than using a cold cache.

The issue for me is control not "privacy". That is the point of the original comment I made about the Mozilla press release. Even NextDNS' FAQ admits a user-managed solution (the example they use is a PiHole) is superior, in terms of "trust", to one managed by a third party, such as NextDNS.

1. I would bet some of the folks complaining about privacy leakage in DOH are using a third party cache that sends EDNS Client Subnet, like Google Public DNS. IMO, if someone is really intent on keeping their DNS lookups private, then the most effective way is to avoid making remote queries. Get the DNS data in bulk and put it in a HOSTS file, a local zone file, "local-data:" in an unbound.conf, etc. There are zone file access programs, public scans and now DOH (outside the browser, via HTTP/1.1 pipelining).
what is not good about it. Privacy? Security? :~)
> so employees don't ever know about that unless they know about employment law.

I'd really recommend all employees to read up at least on the generics of employment law. No need to read up on the edge cases, but the general law is pretty clear and not too long.
Three species of early humans lived in same era in close proximity
Furthermore; democracy relies on there being meaningful communication and an at least somewhat unbiased sampling of popular opinion.

So firstly on meaningful communication: Under the guise of freedom of speech nowadays falsehoods, and even more critically just plain noise is pervasive; the freedom to shout nonsense is inhibiting the freedom to hear a reasonable and diverse set of opinions and facts. Most (loud and repeated) messages are by corporations and other groups too; because that channel simply has more resources - and that's unfortunate not because corporations are intrinsically evil (which they aren't), but because people are intrinsically social and groups of people often quite the reverse; so that corporate "speech" in the form of campaign finance typically is plainly corruption - albeit legal, even if most of its constituent individuals are reasonably moral people. In short; we know the evils of censorship and have robust traditions to at least oppose that; but we do not have similar traditions vs. overload and deception, and indeed our (entirely reasonable) protections against censorship make us more vulnerable to these rising problems. Is there a solution? Who knows; but any solution certainly is not on the public radar yet let alone nearby.

Secondly on democracy: It's pretty plausible that democracies undeniable success in the past centuries may have benefited in part be due to the uncanny wisdom of the crowds. But that effect has risks and flaws (a quick google finds e.g. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20140708-when-crowd-wisdo... discussing some of those). And as it so happens, simply because we communicate so much nowadays, we're always bombarded with what which constituency will vote / should vote / thinks / etc; in ways that would have been simply inconceivable a century ago. And exactly that kind of information turns out to critically undermine the wisdom of the crowds. Polling (and in general political commentary not on the substance but on the shifting political winds themselves) is poison to democracy. The more people know about how others vote and how they should vote... the worse they vote collectively. Democracy's decision making advantage is being eroded without any malice or election manipulation required; it's an entirely natural social process that indeed may well be the ultimate root cause of the polarization of US politics.

We're not going to get congress to do much good until we can get democracy to work again; and we won't be able to do that until we have some way to address these fundamental, underlying weaknesses we currently face. Almost by definition if you can get one party on board, there will be another that's opposed - and a cacophony of voices shouting factually inconsistent statements, lies, disagreements, lobbying to the point that no unbiased sampling of voters will ever exist. So whether people have thought about it or not; everybody realizes that grand benign national changes are utterly beyond the divided, impotent congress that suggesting they do more then keep the lights on (and even that is pushing it nowadays!) is so naive as to come across as almost insincere.
I personally consider UI responsiveness to also be something that really matters.

It's great that part of the UI handling code is fast, but that doesn't mean all of it shouldn't be fast.
> riff-raff (poor, less rich and homeless) are unable to buy/rent a place to live. The only way to solve this is to add costs to people who rent.

Or as an alternative, live somewhere where you can afford living. Downtown Portland is expensive and that's ok.
I think you're trying to derive too much insight from a small change like this.
Not all government expenditure is waste: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Entrepreneurial_State

But it's also not hard to imagine equivalent scenarios of corporate welfare / graft. At some point, how different is it to give a corporation a bespoke $10B tax break, vs. wasting an identical amount in markup on a crony no-bid contract? Choosing the former over the latter is not necessarily any better.

It's entirely reasonable to default to skepticism with regard to government spending; but that's different than the Norquistian view that taxation and government spending is a a-priori evil or net-negative on outcomes.