skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Do you think that it is only through a coercive State that I can have the right to food or housing? Put another way, do you believe the only way to ensure others have things is by coercion?

I totally admit that a State is needed to ensure safety. There’s always a boogie man. Not sure if that’s true for all rights though. What do you think?
The open border policy of the current administration is reason enough to reject it.
The way I understand cancel culture it means removing someones ability to take care of themself. For instance, getting them fired.

The response to that is people downvoting companies they no longer agree with on platforms like youtube. So what does youtube do? By removing the ability to downvote, they further strengthen cancel culture because the ability to display dissent is further decreased.
Yeah, they don’t have a great reputation. Just give people money instead.
They probably think that dislikes aren't actually a good signal for whether or not a video is relevant to a uer.

Crappy videos could automatically be filtered out of their search and recommendations because people abandon them early. They may have determined that's enough to help user's find what they need.

It also helps the issue of dislike brigading since you won't be able to "dislike" a video at all.

Not sure if that's the right move or not but I don't think it's necessarily a bad one.
People who argue #2 might simply not understand how insurance works.
Actually, the entire problem with the economy of the USA (and EU) is that it suffers massively from deflationary pressures. Trade deficits cause savings gluts which fuel underemployment and cause stocks and other assets to go up. The secondary effects of trade deficits are the primary cause of growing wealth inequality.
Trans issues were mentioned in only two paragraphs of the source article. Even there, the subject was a prominent ACLU attorney's opposition to books on the topic, not advocacy for rights as such. I think you're finding his conservatism stereotypical simply because you're projecting your stereotypes of conservative beliefs onto him.
This situation points to an increasingly clear body of evidence that he misinterprets data - either due to his lack of speaking/reading Chinese or knowingly.

For example, check out the IUD section showing his sleight of hand here: https://thegrayzone.com/2021/02/18/us-media-reports-chinese-...
Lol. The alternative is the PETRODOLLAR, where a global military force (costing trillions) locks the global trade of hydrocarbons to dollars.
It is psychosomatic for me. It took me a lot of reading on the Internet trying to find causes and solutions to give into the possibility that the crippling pain I had could be such, but what helped me keep it at bay semi-permanently was truly realizing it.

It still comes back in a mild form when I read about it or discuss it, and your thread literally triggered pain on my left hand and forearm.
Same boat, Thank youuuuu vscode team and contributors
>> I cannot comprehend why anyone would be against health care for all

A lot of people feel slighted that they work, or worked to pay for things and other people that don’t get those things for free. Health insurance is provided by your employer so it is one of those things.
> Any state? Any due process outcome? Any percentage?

My original comment does not state my opinions on these parameters of the taxation process. I was commenting on how I felt the act of moving to a new state, just to get out of paying taxes in the state you currently live in (and earned that money in), is, in general, immoral. I could have spent several paragraphs going over every possible exception to this viewpoint, and hedge every assertion with "in general", "except when", etc., but that tends to be tedious to both read and write.

> Would you consider to read the state's law to discover that you are not subjected to the payment in many circumstances that you can create?

> Which this logic its not about imagining that you are passively paying for roads and schools

Could you restate these sentences? I can't quite understand them.
Friendly amendment: s/flaunted/flouted
Once my bad health-related decisions are costing others money, society has a much stronger case to stop me from making those decisions. And I don't want to leave the determination of what constitutes a bad health-related decision to the vote. Especially with how expansively the scope of public health and mental health has grown.
Virgin Galactic rolls out latest generation of spaceship
To restate this for US folks who aren’t familiar with cancer -

The reason they rarely get to see stage 4 cancer in Australia is because their health care system would rather treat it when it’s at stage 1, and patients are able to seek that treatment without fear of bankruptcy; but in the US, public health care isn’t generally available until you’re 65, leading to a huge spike in “I couldn’t afford to see a doctor sooner” stage 4 cancers.

EDIT: Please do review the replies below, as they offer legitimate questions/doubts about my comment.
I don't see how this relates to a jump in medical treatment at 65
New bug: Counter follows strict definition of small arm, only displays count of rounds in the chamber while ignoring the magazine/belt.
Certainly they wouldn't support M4A, but it's definitely the Democrats that work to pass laws that increase the cost of healthcare. Prices have been spiraling out of control since the ACA.
Wow, what an unexpectedly inane and ignorant comment on HN.

That is like saying: "I just drove by a cop at 3mph over the speed limit and he didn't even turn on his lights. No fine paid." (implying that therefore speed limit laws don't exist)

The fact that many trivial violations go un-prosecuted never invalidates the law.

Here's a key line just a few paragraphs into a Georgetown Law paper on the topic [1]
>>Many entertainment corporation shave left fan fiction alone, but a few have attempted and are attempting to stamp out unauthorized use of their proprietary characters.

It is very common. Your trivial "example" may come under fair use, but that says nothing about the actual facts of the matter.

[1] https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?a...
All of the things you mentioned are in the spirit of "if this thing is available, everyone must have fair access to it".

If there is to be a vote, everyone (of age) must be able to participate. If you are to be tried, you must have representation, a jury of peers, and possibility of appeals (alternative being that case against you is dropped). If protest permitting is instituted, they must be provided fairly and expeditiously.

Equal treatment is another type of right and even more different than a hypothetical "right to health care".

The issue with health care is that it might not be available (depending on if you are in a remote area, public health circumstances e.g. strains due to a pandemic, limited specialized equipment, etc.). So a "right" to utilize it is unrealistic. At best you can posit a "right to non-discrimination of access to health care on the basis of X,Y,Z" where X,Y,Z can be such things as "gender, race, age, etc." or more politically contentiously "preexisting conditions, enrollment in insurance, ability to pay, etc".

To be clear I also favor public universal health insurance of some kind. But I also think that considering that health care is or could be a "right" is kind of ridiculous.
Integrate data for who? I feel the common footsoldier is not the aim here, this is just more metrics for the comms to use and if that.

My scepticism lies in the fact that bulletproof vests, widely used across different countries, was not an invention of the overfunded military-industrial complex, but an ex marine who hacked it together in the back of his garage with a rusty fork.
In case you're wondering why you got downvoted, my guess is that people have the following trivial counterargument. Even if all of that is true, that wouldn't explain the specific jump at 65. That's clear evidence that people want the medical treatment but it's not available to them without Medicare.
This demand ignores the economics of songwriting.

The thing in short supply is not catchy tunes and beautiful lyrics. The thing in short supply is the attention of an audience in a world full of distractions. A popstar brings you attention. You bring them the hit song. You will get a smaller share of a huge pie in return.

If you wish, you can take a 100% share of a tiny pie and keep your artistic author's integrity.

That's the tradeoff.
>But from that, you can ask what is the one dimensional analogue of this conservation of mass principle and you get .. the fundamental theorem of calculus!

Things like this sound awesome! Is there a book you can recommend? Or are you writing this book? Because I want to pre-order it.
>Deflation decreases the value of work you have already done.

Are you sure? Deflation increases the value of work you have already done and decreases the value of work you will do in the future.

Simple example: If I immediately convert my paycheck in BTC then I would have earned more BTC in 2013 than in 2021. My work in 2013 would be worth more than the work I did in 2021.
While I think this isn't stated very well, from a Canadian perspective I think there must be some truth to it.

Of course, the Republican party will always oppose universal Healthcare. But why does the Democratic party oppose it when the majority of Americans can agree on the specific plan of Medicare for All and much more than the majority of Democrats too?

There must be some reason for the Democrats not to back a generally popular and overwhelmingly popular amongst their base policy that also is generally good for the country and economy, both to reduce inequality and increase economic output, but I just don't see it plainly.
I agree, I think the main point is to not show the dislike count to the viewer rather than hiding the information from the viewer and this was a convenient way to frame it... Though, trying to steelman it, this change may push the dislike count one click deeper in the interface. If only the creator knows, they are free from screenshots of the ratio being presented publically. It's still a stifling of the masses' ability to express and view negative review and dissent, definitely not worth it in my view, even if there are benefits to creator mental health.
> I didn't ask how much DeFi has grown, you said 1 to 40B I can divide 40 by 1. Im curious why you think no other sector has grown by $39B.

Hey, fastest growing, means RATE OF GROWTH. 40x is how life-changing gains are made. That's the number that VCs are hoping to hit when they poor several million into a startup. Right, the finance world works off of ROR, it's called Rate of Return. Look up that up sometime.

> The blockchain is slow, you know that right?

No, it's not. It has 100% uptime and you can execute ANY transaction within 15 seconds on Ethereum layer 1. Depending on congestion, you may have to pay a higher fee ($20-$40 as mentioned above). Paying $20 to settle millions of dollars in 15 seconds is a no-brainer for a company like VISA. It's trivial compared to what they currently pay to interact with the legacy system.

Anyways, you're obviously close-minded and anti-crypto, and you're going to get left in the stone age. Your ignorance is my alpha. Stay curious!
Dozens in Florida contract Covid after being fully vaccinated
It puzzles me how HN is so cynic about anything that comes from Google.
Oof. Based on examining the publically-available code[1], I have one major concern with the methology and conclusions of this study.

The problem is that the “tell us about yourself” questionnaire that determines whether the study classifies someone as being “low in moral character” happens after the experiment in which cheating would or would not have happened[2].

This means that the results of the questionnaire are going to be affected by cognitive dissonance as people are rationalising why they made the choices they did during the “actually cheating or not” portion of the experiment. For example, it seems intuitively likely that people who have just cheated on a task are going to be much more likely to answer affirmatively to sympathetic prompts like “Cheating is appropriate behavior because no one gets hurt.” (an actual statement from late in the questionnaire to which the participant is asked to indicate their level of agreement).

By my interpretation, the study isn’t telling us that people who think that cheating is okay are more likely to maneuver into situations where cheating is possible; it’s telling us that people who have gone into situations where cheating is possible are more likely to tell us that cheating is okay. Which might not necessarily be the same thing.

I’d have liked these results a whole lot more if they’d asked people to fill in the questionnaire before giving them the opportunity to cheat, rather than after, to exclude the confounding effects of rationalising on the results.

[1]: https://github.com/bahniks/Experiment-cheating
[2]: https://github.com/bahniks/Experiment-cheating/blob/master/S...
> Copyright 2002, 2004, 2010 Wes Beach

Is this still a thing? Does anyone know how it worked out for any of those kids?
You act is if people who inherit money now have to work? They hire wealth managers to protect and grow their capital. There is no need to work.

What deflation does is reduce the cost of everything. People who are ambitious and want to better their situation will still work, earning an income. People still require goods and services to survive (and thrive). In a deflationary world you reward savers, who delay their gratification, rather than an inflationary world that rewards debtors, who desire instant gratification.

Again, there is nothing inherently useful nor required about inflation. We can live in a world where prices are stable, decreasing, or increasing. I like the one where prices are decreasing.
Does it stay evenly dispersed over time so you're still getting the 70%?
> How do you grok the practice of coin-clipping? You hand in one gold coin which is then clipped and you are given a coin with a smaller percentage of gold in it. 1 solidus is still nominally worth 1 solidus. But it's really worth 0.x a solidus. Does this debasement matter? The coin has the same name but it's not the same coin.

That's not how modern money is reckoned. It's a neat aside, but it has nothing to do with a modern currency.

> Over the long term, Bitcoin can only gain and has only gained purchasing power, algorithmically.

True. As of this moment it's gained before. Day to day it's an entirely different matter.

> Unlike with fiat, your proportional share, based on your stack of coins, of the total value in the economy has not changed. This assumes a Bitcoin Standard where bitcoin is the world currency. (Some of us already live on a Bitcoin Standard preemptively.)

Bitcoins are being generated. It's a planned inflation - how do you reckon that with the share not changing? You have less porportions of the total Bitcoin supply. Unless wealth is created from nothing with every bitcoin generated you've lost a proportion of the wealth. It only works right now because it's being measured against things, if it ever became the determining standard, you'd be experiencing inflation with it.

> With fiat, your share has been debased. 1 usd is not equal to 1 usd over time. With Bitcoin, your ruler is always accurate. 1 satoshi = 1 satoshi over time unto eternity. Fiat cannot make that claim.

Again, this is a nonsense argument. You either have to accept that the 1973 $1 bill is still worth a dollar (relative to the dollar) or you have to admit that a 2010 Bitcoin is not worth the same as a 2021 bitcoin.

> Now you see why gold was the world's hardest money. It's chemical stability guaranteed this statement. Hardly any other commodities behave this way. Unless you have examples?

Silver. Sheep, salt. 1 measure of any commodity has always equaled itself.

Bitcoin is just a commodity right now. That's it. If it becomes the standard currency it'll experience deflation as the supply grows just like any other currency.
There's the "Settings" UWP app, and the older Control Panel, which itself launches lots of even older settings dialogs at various points. It's not actually good for usability that there are multiple places to change the same settings, but what's worse is that they have disjoint functionality. Some things can only be accomplished with the older Control Panel, and some things can only be accomplished with Settings. I find it hard to believe you haven't discovered this, it was an almost daily annoyance for me.
2 is a serious objection because while a government administered program promises to be cheaper in aggregate, it will almost surely not be cheaper for every individual/household, especially if you intend for or expect people to supplement or replace the government insurance with private insurance on top of the public option to get back to the level of the insurance they have today.

You could argue that 4-6 aren’t real objections either because most people aren’t in those fields either.
You don't need the other half of a base pair in your calculation
I've been putting my keyboard right at the edge of the desk so my wrists have to be held in the air. Pain has is definitely reduced since last summer.
Main job (40h/week in theory, 35h/week in practice): tech lead, senior software engineer.

My side hustle (40h/week in theory, 5h/week in practice): junior software engineer for another company.

I have around 8 years of professional experience... so while working as a junior in my side hustle I don’t need that much time to finish my tasks (hence the 5h/week). Sometimes it’s a bit difficult to write code like a junior. I usually quit after a year because companies expect progress and more associated responsibilities (i don’t need that in my side hustle, i have that already on my main job). Funny thing is: I make like 95K/year in my main job and 50K/year in my side hustle... but the proportions don’t hold when it comes to time spent in each role.
You don't have to ban private for people that want to pay for more that public healthcare would provide.
Would Google be doing this if they thought it would reduce productivity?
Digital currency comes to Visa’s settlement platform
It's certainly better than nothing. I agree that different people like WFH for different reasons. For my job, anything that lets me move farther from the Bay Area would be better. 1 day WFH per week doesn't let me do that, but maybe 3 days WFH per week would. My current commute is 4 hours, so maybe Id be willing to do an 8 hour commute if it was only twice a week. A week per month would be even better: I could move out of $tate and just fly to the South Bay once a month.
@DSR_ I used to be in the music world last century. Even then there was show business (visual appeal, dancing etc) and there was musicians (people who can play and/or sing really well).

This is very accentuated today, with a tremendous amount of effort put in by artists to be visually appealing/charismatic on instagram etc, which has replaced the top 20 chart position marketing trick.

There is little to no time to create music, the emphasis is very much on sound bites and visual marketing...
I forgot to ask, did it erase the metadata from my picture to make it anonymous?
The jump at 65 is likely in part because it's the official definition of old for basically everything in the US and it's a lot harder to justify being in denial about needing to see the doctor from that point forward.
Since the hand sanitizer that smells like whiskey (mine smells more like tequila) comes from beverage distillers, it seems that they'd already know how to make ethanol without benzene and other contaminants since they are distilling for human consumption.
Ill try
There are many power-to-x chemistries that I think are much easier than methane once you grow out of easily available concentrated CO2. They don't quite reach the energy density of hydrocarbons, but that's not much of an issue for stationary storage in the "seasonal scale battery" use case. Almost everything can serve as an "oxidizable" in reduced form, and if the resulting oxide isn't gaseous you lose the "tank gets lighter" effect that is only really important for aircraft but win a solution to the capture problem for completing the cycle. Iron for example is said to get an energy density roughly comparable with coal. Another x in power-to-x is ammonia, which could be used in an open cycle scenario where DAC would be trivial because so much of our air is nitrogen.
> What is the alternative, the purchasing company has to accept that they'll purge all user accounts?

Have a transition window (say 3 months) before the sale goes into effect where users get to choose to either keep the account and allow the new owner access to the data, or to have their data destroyed. After that window, data from anyone who didn't respond gets deleted.
In California one can also take the CHSPE: https://www.cde.ca.gov/Ta/tg/sp/

Many of my homeschooled peers took the CHSPE at 16 then enrolled in a local Jr College and graduated at 18 with an AA
It's amazing--I love the story of Delia Derbyshire creating the iconic theme for Dr. Who using tape loops and all kinds of wacky tech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkIEkLww3lg
Redirect people toward the eco-friendliest products, show eco-friendly advertising, favor eco-friendly UI design, etc
“I worked for what I got, why should someone else get something for free”, 57 year old white housewife recently said this to me.
Interestingly, the right to vote doesn't appear in the original constitution, probably because it doesn't fit well with the idea of natural rights.

It's a little easier to reason about a right to vote, though, because in any particular contest, votes are treated equally.
I apologize. The topic is personal to me, and I was seeing red. I'll edit my comment and step away from HN for a bit.
It is mathematics for anyone who wants to describe discrete and hybrid systems, including programmers. But I believe mathematics is used by mathematicians, physicists, engineers of many kinds, and biologists for many different things -- that's what mathematics is for -- and they all use pretty much the same notation. Also, and this is important, there is no standard programming notation for mathematics. TLA+ operators and functions simply don't behave like subroutines in any programming language. I think using the same symbols, but with a different meaning, would be more rather than less confusing.

For example, when in TLA+ you specify the function, f, from the integers to the integers such that f(x) = -f(x), you've obviously defined the zero function; I'm not aware of any programming language that works like that. While TLA+ doesn't have macros, the value of x = 3 ∧ Foo(x) = 5 might not be equal to x = 3 ∧ Foo(3) = 5, and I'm not aware of any non-logic programming language that works like that, either, at least not without some hidden complexity (simple mathematics also doesn't work like that, but this is because TLA+ is a modal logic), and logic programming languages have syntax that isn't any more familiar to non-logic programming language programmers than TLA+'s.
I get that you're being flippant, but I did have a coworker who calculated the carbon footprint of his commute for various modes of transport, including walking. He came to the conclusion that, given the average amount of CO2 produced per calorie consumed, riding an e-bike was actually the lowest-impact way.
Other purposes? It's easy! You can make people avoid businesses that didn't paid to you and make them drive close to fastfood that wanted advertising. Or you can drive people around some political protests...
Okay, I don't recognize the logo in the very center of that diagram, any hints?