skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
All you need to do is look at the health care costs per citizen of other developed countries to understand that the US is paying way too much in their current healthcare system. I'm aware that the US's healthcare system is unique in many ways, but so are all the other countries on that list and they made it work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_hea...
I watched a long-form interview with one of the PI's. They used very conservative estimates and didn't estimate additional savings and benefits from uncountable knock-on side-effects that would increase lives saved. M4A would save additional lives per year over double that of the ACA. That's a minimum additional twenty-three (23) 9/11's of people saved every year like clockwork while saving money on a net basis.
It'd be a great business opportunity, to provide resources for turn-key homesteading. (It'd probably work best at the level of small communes, rather than individuals.)
Selling private shares / options on the secondary market is near impossible if the company isn’t on something like SecondMarket. Right of First Refusal, Co-sale Agreements, and the challenges of sharing information with a 3rd party make this difficult. That said, has anyone succeeded and written about their experience?
I've recently come up with a crazy pet theory. If we are indeed living a simulation, maybe this simulation is just to test whether 5-day workweeks make better modern civilizations than 4- or 6-day ones...
It makes me kinda mad how it seems like Capitalism more and more isn't about providing goods and services but inserting extractive industries anywhere possible. The reason Capitalism was such a success for the past few hundred years was that it was laser-focused on providing better and better products and services to the market. This is not the way forward for human society.
Yes, LaTeX on my Redmine board.
> I had a manager at a startup tell me that conventional management assumes that engineers will only stay at a company for 18 months, so they really pile on the stress

which is ironic, because isn’t that why people stay less and less longer at a company (can’t stand the slog)?
The important issue with Warren's "plan" is that it's essentially a $8,000 per year per employee head tax, so it's a regressive tax. An afterthought in the expense of hiring a very highly-paid employee, but a not-insignificant expense of hiring a lower-paid employee.

Not to mention that her plan exempts contractors and business under 50 employees, so it incentivizes businesses to to lean on contract labor or reorganize themselves into smaller sub-companies - a small paperwork expense in the scheme of things.

The business tax should be universal to stamp out avoidance and scaled to all payroll spend so it's at least not regressive, even if it's not a progressive tax.
Well there you have it, I guess. Thinking in the small, I wonder how it would have affected that Rabies shot treatment I had to get that ended up costing me $25,000 and the fucking thing wasn't even infected.
> less incentive to investigate fraud

From the paper: "In addition to savings on overheads, a comprehensive database of health-care charges would facilitate detection of fraud, which extracts $85·7 billion every year. Following the transition to a single-payer system in Taiwan, an 8% reduction in overall national expenditure was attributed to the reduction in fraud. By moving from a fragmented health-care payment system to a unified system, irregularities in provider claims can be more easily detected. For example, under the fragmented system excessive claims for physician time can be spread across patients with several different insurance providers. However, acknowledging that improvements have been made in fraud detection since Taiwan's transition, we conservatively assume that the improved fraud detection would garner savings amounting to half that observed in Taiwan, corresponding to 4% of total health-care expenditure."

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...

Aside from decreased executive pay and decreased fraud, many jobs will be eliminated.

From the paper: "Improvements in system efficiency, such as reductions in billing tasks, will involve a contraction of the workforce. Although the country will benefit from lower costs, 936 000 administrative positions and 746 600 positions in the health-care insurance industry are estimated to become redundant. However, detailed transition plans have suggested either funding for early retirement options, extensive severance, retraining programmes, and relocation expenses for all workers in these sectors. Implementation of such a plan is estimated to cost $61·5 billion annually over 2 years, a sum which would be recouped within the first year by the health-care savings estimated here."

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...
@ilaksh the middleware pattern is a common pattern for many large frameworks like ExpressJS and Ruby on Rails. It allows you to cleanly handle the request and response cycle. From a code maintenance perspective, using a well-established pattern that keeps your codebase module and extensible is desired.

If you have one or two lambda functions, then definitely this may be overkill, like you said just call a few functions. But as your system matures and grows, these few functions become a few modules, then your few modules become libraries, so on and so forth. You might want to consider this pattern before it's unclear what exactly is interacting with your requests and responses and in what order.
When I was working as a software development contractor, I went without health insurance for a year. I'm young and I don't have any medical problems, so I could get away with this.

Because I'm a software developer and I make decent money, I didn't qualify for any tax credits or discounts. The cheapest health insurance plan that I could find cost twice as much as just paying both the ACA penalty and the Massachusetts state penalty. It made more financial sense to just go without insurance.

I can imagine that a lot of young software developers and other people who do contract work find themselves in similar situations.
VAT is a highly efficient tax, very hard to game. But it's regressive.
If you couple it with an UBI, you can fix the regressivity, and keep all the good parts.

It's a way to make VAT good, not a way to make UBI good.
not paywalled, try this link: https://rdcu.be/b0mtx

just a naming similarity, the common part is a pun that is a popular google naming scheme, eg. alpha-bet.
That's not the issue. The issue is that there are sewage systems that dump raw sewage into rivers. Toilets are more of a nod to human decency than environmental issues.

But if Bill would like to phone me, then I would explain to him that while decency does score high in my books, you can have perfect golden toilets that dump sewage into rivers. In that case I would rather take a veldtie in the bushes.
If only there were some kind of proposition that could be phased out over time to accomplish that... perhaps a proposition with an unlucky number. Like 13...

This is the problem with the proposition system - it often encourages residents to enact policies in their personal best interests that screw over a huge number of people down the road.
It is a great tragedy of our day that so many software engineers are poor at SQL. Use tools like Jinja and DBT to modularize it, and Airflow to schedule it; but use of SQL should be maximized wherever possible.
I mean it's not so much that it's a bad place to quarantine people, it's that they put both sick people and well people inside the quarantine. (i.e. taking for granted what seemed obvious to me all along, which is that the boundary of the quarantine is the outer hull of the ship)
(not OP, just a new paying customer)

FWIW, the mobile-optimized version of Mochi’s Web site is excellent on both phones and tablets.
I am sure, on paper, it is a brilliant plan. Unfortunately, reality and human behavior almost never follow the plan.

Is waste, fraud, and abuse taken into account at all in this study? What about the inevitable changes to consumers' motivation, behavior, and decision making around healthcare? It will change drastically as the cost of their care is even further removed from them than it is now.

People who have a proclivity to go to the doctor too much will go even more when its 'free'. Younger people who eschew doctors because it interferes with their current lifestyle will feel even safer continuing bad health habits because free care will be there for them later in life.

Why should I subsidize other people's bad decision making?

EDIT: All healthcare is really too broad of category for government funding. Obvious things like cosmetic surgery and others are already excluded from consideration because they are not necessary. But IMO even when medical care is necessary I don't think it always falls into the category of something society should pay for. How many ER visits, ambulance rides, and surgeries a year can be attributed to purposeful recklessness by an individual? If someone decides it is a good idea to stand on a motorcycle's seat on the freeway and then crashes, why should the public pay for that? On the other hand people who have medical issues that are no fault of their own do deserve care.
They’d rather create an inhospitable environment for people and businesses that will cause a net out migration
The net savings would be $450B, but the total cost would still be in the 10s of trillions of dollars (Edit: 30-50 over 10 years), bigger than all of our federal spending combined. It's one thing to have as an objective, and another as a plan for getting there. The proposal they cite would make federal healthcare expenditures 69%(!!!) of the GDP (Edit: total federal expenditures). It's simply not realistic to convert our entire economy into a government and healthcare first system within only 4 years.

These calculations also ignore any affects of changed consumer preferences if you eliminate copays and deductibles, something no other universal healthcare system has done.

This is one of those calculations that is entirely accurate, but also entirely misleading.
What about performance?
maybe YOU ALL are bots too!
> The $1,000 is going to be spent entirely on taxes!

That's how UBI work. Only poor people pay less than they receive.
Exactly the health care costs are less for businesses. But that's not coming through efficiencies but largely through the US government picking up the tab for it.

Which is completely fine because it's what happens elsewhere in the world. But there is no discussion around the impacts to budgets and taxpayers which is the challenge the faced Australia and UK for example.
So that makes it OK for how many people to die due to lack of insulin?
Literally no similarity, it's an IBM Watson like branding move
I’ve really wanted to write a Kakoune style layer for VS Code or even a Kakoune style editor that works natively on Windows.
I don't believe anyone but the very impoverished get free health care, and I believe the subsidies vary by state.

See the bottom of this for a graphic: https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2... also the removal of the individual mandate probably contributed to the gap.
Never only just 1 cigaret again! I quit similar circumstances 4 years ago.
> Isn't Clojure an extremely unpopular language

Are Haskell, Rust, F#, Elixir, OCaml, ReasonML, Elm, Purescript, Racket extremely unpopular?

Clojure today has more podcasts, books, conferences, jobs than any of these languages. But sure, it is a dying programming language. Just like Haskell has been "dying" for 30 years now and OCaml "died" multiple times in the past 24.

There are good reasons why they are still being used and why people get excited about them.
I'll add the Introduction section to the Readme page soon. Thanks!
If you're willing to gamble on your health, it's still much cheaper to pay the fine than pay for healthcare that isn't through an employer. When I was unemployed for a few months a couple of years ago, I opted to not get any healthcare coverage from the state exchange while I was looking for work because it was going to be over $1000 a month to cover my wife and I, plus it only covered a percentage of healthcare costs instead of 100% with a small copay like good insurance does. It also had a high deductible, around 10k I think, before they'd start covering the percentage.
I don't believe he'd ban supplemental insurance, just insurance that covers the same services the State option covers.
They're pretty different tools. If anything, you would use Freshpaint to send data into PostHog.

PostHog is an analytics tool. Once you have data in PostHog, you can run queries against the data to produce various charts and graphs. Other analytics tool include Mixpanel, Amplitude, and Heap. The primary reason you would use an analytics tool is you want to ask questions about your users.

Freshpaint is a data collection tool. We automatically collect data from your site such as clicks, pageviews, etc. You can then use our UI to send that data to different tools. We integrate with the large analytics tools and also a ton of marketing tools like Intercom and HubSpot. There are two reasons you would want to use a tool like Freshpaint:

1) It's easy to collect data. Freshpaint instruments your entire site, so you don't have to.
2) It's easy to send the data to different tools. Once a piece of data is in Freshpaint, you can send it in one click to any of your analytics and marketing tools.

Does that make sense?
Tax credits don't help people who are struggling to pay day to day bills. What good is a tax credit they'll receive up to a year later? When your horizon is 2 weeks, you're going to prioritize food & accommodation before a health insurance plan.
What... no. Install Caprover or Flynn or any of a dozen systems that provide Heroku-like functionality.
Yes, in a properly functioning universal healthcare system, wait times for specialists can be longer for things that are less urgent. First priority is those with the most medical need, not whoever steps up to pay to play.
Many of us in California do care if you think they "shouldn't" live here.
Caprover's probably the closest I've experienced, but there was still a bit to do.
IIRC, coding is on the order of a million jobs across insurance, hospitals and doctor offices. Then there's all the other non-value-add activities of negotiating of prices, authorizing/denying treatment, billing and management. Oh and there's going through bankruptcy while you have cancer... I forgot that one.
Allegedly, "food, clothing, medicine, and education" costs are excluded. To what extent those exemptions don't matter in practice (the grocery store pays more for printer ink and passes the cost along to you) is debatable.

Personally, I'd rather start with a revenue-neutral Pigovian tax+dividend [0] on environmental externalities like carbon and disposable plastic, which set a price of unsustainable behaviors while also functioning as a progressive tax for the vast majority of people.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigovian_tax
> Many procedures are made unavailable due to being considered cost effective by The Single Payer, and the wait time for specialists can often be long.

Right now, many procedures are made unavailable due to being considered "elective" or "cosmetic" or "out of network" by The Private Insurer.
Let's take smoking as an example.

You think there are people out there who will smoke, knowing that it causes lung cancer, because they figure government will pick up the tab for the chemo? Bizarre, but ok, if so, why doesn't having insurance give them the same incentive?
I'm in neither state, so either petri dish is informative to me. :)

"The bill would authorize the department to adopt regulations to implement the program" makes it kinda sound a bit like a Brexit vote, in that the bill is really only meant to get everyone to vote to agree to do it, and then the precise details of how you'd actually implement it would be attended to later.
My summary is pretty generalized, aimed more towards a layman audience, and so I definitely am missing pieces. Co-evolutionary couplings between different protein sequences provide a very rich source of information, and are definitely very important!

For those of you that are curious as to what these couplings represent, the basic idea, is that intuitively you can sort of see how given proteins are a product of evolution, that they're might be a large amount of conserved structure between one protein to another. Co-evolutionary coupling is just an attempt at quantifying this relationship in a rigorous statistical manner.
It’s a stretch to characterize the state politics as having strong ethics, CA is a corrupt place.
I think this is also a very individually subjective thing.

I typically don't engage in social media, but sometimes I post pictures of food I've made to Instagram and about once a week I take a quick scroll through Facebook to keep in touch with relatives.

And it's never seemingly done me any harm. I've had weeks when I've forgotten to do the above, and aside from a family member mentioning it, would have never noticed.

But for some people, it certainly seems like Facebook causes them a whole bunch of harm. I don't think that's per se intrinsic to Facebook specifically (I have plenty of other things to blame them for, they're not off the hook). I think there are people who maybe due to anxiety or something else going on really struggle with social media and it causes them great panic.

But if the issue is with the individual and it is highly subjective, then that suggests the solution isn't to change social media but to change the individual having troubles.
The same problem you describe exist in the us system as well. Wait times are also shorter when people are cost prohibited from seeking certain services.
i don't think you can arrive to any conclusion based on analyzing traffic/dns reqs made alone.

How can you tell a user didn't jitter scroll and caused more content to show up?

What if it was a 404 page.

How's the intruder able to see the query param anyway? if it's non secure all bets are off.

The same argument used revolving around text can be made about words in a domain name.
This is such a tediously computer-centric vision. There are hundreds of tools in the world that are used every day that have "friction" and need to be "explained". Nobody complains that their UX is not that good, because they understand that certain tasks require some level (possibly mastery, possibly just a basic understanding) of the tools and processes.

As noted by another commenter, the fact that you know how "most modern chat/msg apps work" doesn't mean that they all have good UX - it means that they all have the same UX, and you've already learned it.
There is only one party in CA
The problem with a new business tax is that it doesn't come for free.

Increasing businesses taxes reduces international competitiveness which can reduce taxation collected in other areas. Also politically it's an incredibly hard thing to implement.

And remember you have to do this at the same time as you're implementing Medicare for All. Making it a pretty radical transition by any measure.
I think where we disagree is on "no evidence". There is not definitive, comprehensive evidence, but there is some evidence. Nicotine, for example, is fairly well understood and so the knowledge base for that is shared between traditional cigarettes and vaping. We also know from chemical analysis that something like Juul has fewer & lower levels of known carcinogens. We don't know long term effects of inhaling novel chemicals found in vaping but not cigarettes, and that is a major gap.

However, in the face of having to form public health policy decisions in the time between right now and a decade+ down the road where real, long-term studies can be completed, we can only use and compare that available data. Though we should hew very close to specific facts and avoid words open to very wide interpretation like "safer". (it may be safer along a single vector, carcinogens, but much worse in others, so it's a misleading term) We would be more wise to stick to specific known evidence like:

--Nicotine levels are similar, so there is little or no difference in health issues related to nicotine ingestion, except in so far as evidence shows nicotine salts used in vaping may hit your system faster.

--There are fewer known carcinogens or lower levels of them in vaping, but the effects of novel chemicals are not known. Short term health benefits in switching to vaping have been observed but longer terms outcomes are completely unknown, and could be worse.

--Use Risk, as apposed to a more ambiguous "safety", and say that vaping is not a risk-free activity from a health perspective.

The above could probably still be better stated, but I think the point is clear enough. This is no different than any other scientific issue or area of research. You use available data to convey the current state of knowledge, possible implications, further areas of study, etc. And as more data arrives, you expand and revise. But we're not starting from zero data.

A primary issue in this topic is that it is front & center in the media. Media in general is not good at conveying technical nuances, and the well-funded marketing arms of tobacco (and now vaping) companies have every reason to help the media make incorrect leaps of logic and over generalizations, e.g, fewer carcinogens == safer.

Another consideration is individual context: I'm trying to get my 67 year old father to switch from smoking to vaping because available evidence shows he will very likely be able to breath more easily, reduce his risk for heart disease, and so on. But he's 67: Long term risk from unknown vaping effects are probably a non issue for him, while he's about 4 years away from COPD. And there's zero chance of getting him to quit while I'd peg my chances around 1 in 10 of getting him to vape instead. If it were a friend my own age, I would have a different message, such as "You may very well be trading some short-term health for long-term issues that are as bad, or worse. Or maybe not, but we don't know, so quitting is the proper response, not switching to vaping"
The CDC has reported that the problem was black market juice. They call it "products from informal sources"

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6902e2.htm?s_cid=mm...
If you look at the individual market for health insurance, premiums, deductibles and co-pays will exceed the total UBI benefit. Medicaid sets group rates that it will pay, so it is more efficient at reducing costs. I can't imagine that using UBI benefits to pay for health insurance on the individual market would be more effective than such a program.
I would say don't presume that. Presume instead that this program will not supplant other programs and it will not be universal.

UBI is a popular idea, but the way you see it isn't the popular version of it, at least in California. I only know this because I had the same misconception.
New York City has a turtle problem
Also check out this essay Einstein wrote in May of 1949,

https://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism/
Working from home is still working. Working four days a week is entirely different.
Kudos to California reps for attempting to make this happen, this is a good example of using states' rights to address local desires.

Unfortunately coastal ideas are defined a priori to be everyone's best interest, so experiments on them can only return one type of data. When this creates massive unintended perverse incentives, proponents will blame its failure on lack of scale and insist that it be federally imposed on the other states that want nothing to do with it.