skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> much less a prostate exam

What's the point of a prostate exam? Prostate screening doesn't save life, and it causes harm. People may want to do it if they know they have risk factors, but otherwise it's not recommended.

https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/recomme...

> For men aged 55 to 69 years, the decision to undergo periodic prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer should be an individual one. Before deciding whether to be screened, men should have an opportunity to discuss the potential benefits and harms of screening with their clinician and to incorporate their values and preferences in the decision. Screening offers a small potential benefit of reducing the chance of death from prostate cancer in some men. However, many men will experience potential harms of screening, including false-positive results that require additional testing and possible prostate biopsy; overdiagnosis and overtreatment; and treatment complications, such as incontinence and erectile dysfunction. In determining whether this service is appropriate in individual cases, patients and clinicians should consider the balance of benefits and harms on the basis of family history, race/ethnicity, comorbid medical conditions, patient values about the benefits and harms of screening and treatment-specific outcomes, and other health needs. Clinicians should not screen men who do not express a preference for screening.

The advice for people 70 or older is stronger: The USPSTF recommends against PSA-based screening for prostate cancer in men 70 years and older.
> "if this thing is available, everyone must have fair access to it"

Ok sounds. Good. Medical treatment is an available service. Everyone should have fair access, no?

> 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 me this reads like pretty creative mental gymnastics to try to exclude universal health care from the original premise. If you're in a remote area, your access to treatment may be of a different quality/difficulty to obtain but everyone in your area will have the same difficulty.

> 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".

That's kind of how voting rights are today but they certainly weren't always. We don't argue as much about the poll tax or various "poll exams" anymore, but banning them at the time was "politically contentious". Something being "politically contentious" is not a good argument for or against doing something as it's really easy to generate controversy (look at the modern news landscape).
US healthcare is severely under-performing in comparison with other systems. https://ourworldindata.org/the-link-between-life-expectancy-...

People should acknowledge the system as flawed and not have market ideals stand in the way of fixing this flawed system.

Another note is that universal healthcare does not imply government-run healthcare. I live in a country which is an example of this - Israel.
I like it. It is different, but I still into tech - not as used to be. I write apps/programs/scripts that I needed for my day to day operations.
So they'll default to showing directions for biking, walking, and transit?
it's called the Gab plugin or "Gab.com Share Extension"
We can say that Google did a thing or two to break people's trust.
I want what you’re smoking.
Georgia had a bad spell back before some new rules for new drivers came into effect, but it seems to have cleared up.
Either you're being purposely obtuse or you honestly believe the accident rate between walking and riding an electric vehicle is the same.
Anything like a major PR campaign is approved at the highest levels.

EDIT: I'd also note that in the book Surveillance Capitalism, Zuboff discusses how Pokemon Go was seen in investor circles as a successful demonstration of manipulating masses of people to go to commercial spaces by luring them with imaginary characters. This sent market caps soaring. When I saw this headline, I immediately thought that this is them doing that with maps, but in a PR friendly way.
I have no desire for to start flame war on subject, but since you are asking: because I am opose paying for health care for other persons. More even so when it is involving state force as collector of payments. I make votes not against "everyone is healthy" but against "i pay for everyone to be healthy".

I also am having zero trust in governments with my health. Mask advice early 2020 is good example: pencil pusher decides to make decision maybe harmful to my health because he have adjuged it to be for "greater good". I have no trust that it will not happen in such a manner with my health, some one make a decision bad for me for "greater good".
Open sourcing Querybook, Pinterest’s collaborative big data hub
Yup a lot of Americans would happily vote for themselves to suffer, if it meant that a group that they didn't like would suffer even more.
As someone who has been purchasing individual insurance since 2003, prices were spiraling out of control long before the ACA. My premium went up every single year outside the first couple years the ACA was in effect where they went down a little bit.
So the relatively affordable apartments go to those with the best tech skills... Gotta love rent controls. This is exactly like SF in 2000
Let's look at it a different way. How often has youtube recommended to you a video that you felt the need to click dislike on? How often have you visited youtube from some link provided externally and felt the need to register your dislike (and how often was that link followed with the understanding you would probably be seeing something you found disagreeable)?

What is a dislike in these instances actually communicating to youtube and to creators? Youtube already probably wouldn't have suggested that to you, and the creator probably isn't making content for you. As a useful signal, dislike brigading is very low (and whatever usefulness it serves in communicating to the creator is already served by comments and external media).

In that context, I think removing the indicator of how many people have disliked the video (but not the ability to dislike) may serve a useful purpose.
My guess would be that they dislike sarcasm in general.
Scandinavia is OK, not what many people in the US would call great. My uncle had prostate cancer, was basically put in hospice to die. He was kept comfortable and it was a nice place, but he was in his 70s and basically written off. And I'm not even saying that's the wrong approach. His life expectancy was in single-digit years at that point regardless, so why spend a lot of money on low probabilites of success? But a lot of people in the US think that every effort should be made, no matter how hopeless the situation or how much it costs.
you know this website has no down vote, twitter also has no dislike button
I can't comprehend how someone can believe in a flat Earth or that vaccines cause autism but I'm knowledgeable enough about those issues to emphatically state that such people are stupid or willfully ignorant.

With regard to government run healthcare not being socially optimal. The United States spends far more money per capita on healthcare than any universal health care system in the world. There are lots of examples which show that universal healthcare systems can be much more optimal than the American system.
Lack of hint is definitely a controversial topic. There are situations where there is only one obvious way to execute the query, in which case a query hint would help to prevent the database engine from going berserk. However, there are also situations where different query plans should be used according to the parameters, in which case a query hint would harm.

We now also have some empirical evidence on how the query planner evolve/devolve based on this decision. InnoDB always relies heavily on query hint, and recently it has given up on trying to get the planner to support some simple pagination queries correctly, after killing too many production systems that didn't add a hint: https://dev.mysql.com/worklog/task/?id=13929. It basically declares that "we know our query planner sucks for this class of queries, here's a flag to disable that portion of the query planner"

Meanwhile, in recent releases, Postgres started to allow statistics to be created for correlated columns, so that the query planner can have the necessary information to come up with the correct plan: https://www.2ndquadrant.com/en/blog/pg-phriday-crazy-correla...

> Another surprise coming from MSSQL is PG does not cache plans at all. It actually spends time replanning every statement coming in.

This is actually the thing I hate the most about MSSQL. If I allow plans to be cached, then some queries would end up using some bad plans intended for parameters with very different data distribution. If I disallow plans to be cached, then the query planner can take 1~2 second just to come up with a plan for a rather simple query with 2 levels of nesting. A rock and a hard place.
> (...) but for something like Amazon where the barrier to entry is just a website,

This comment is totally alienated from Amazon's business. Amazon is not a website. Amazon is a retail company, and their barrier to entry is their logistics infrastructure. You don't buy stuff from Amazon because you can click a button. You buy from Amazon because it can ship your order right to your front door in a matter of hours or days, and do it without any added cost, and even allows you to return everything for free no questions asked.

Anyone can put up an website in a week, but no one can put up a high throughout low latency logistics network that allows for a turnaround time between click and doorstep as low as a few hours.

In fact, Amazon's website is notoriously horrible in classification and search. I'd argue that Amazon dominates in spite of its website in general, and search and detail pages in particular.
agreed - but what this comes down to is YouTube sells ads and advertisers only pay for safe spaces. Advertisers do not want your commentary or your dislikes. YouTube is not a public forum, it is a publisher with editorial discretion.
So the wheel is efficient, and a low mess wheel more efficient.

Unicycle?
They should go the arrested development route and replace ‘up and down’ with ‘lion and crocodile’
Yes it is. At places that require two reviews to merge having a pair gives you one for free and they have practical knowledge of what was done.
Not really. These don't make great APs; the wifi radio is in client mode.
Cancelling Google Reader is a sure sign that Google is out to exploit people by encouraging them to take lower-carbon routes.
I don't agree with you but you deserve corrective upvotes; this is a perfectly cogent and constructive dissenting view.
What I want is an option to find the route with the least amount of turns. I live in a place with little to no urban planning and extremely confusing street layout, and Google will consistently choose very twisty routes, only to later zoom out the map and find that I could have followed an L or S shaped route with just one or two turns.
Only recently Google been caught degrading UX of Firefox, capturing web standards, pushing AMP and Chrome Manifest v3, making Android less open source with every release and locking it down with SafetyNet, etc. I'm not even going to tell about all dead services, APIs, permanent account-wide bans and non-existent tech support.

Do you expect people to believe in their good will?
> Scandinavia, UK. Public healthcare doesn't need to be bad

Here's an article from 2018 (Pre-COVID) claiming the NHS has 4.3 Million people in it's operation backlog with over half waiting for more than one year[1]. That sounds outrageous, and a massive step backwards from what most in the US have today (even with low tier health insurance plans).

I do not know why this is the reality in nations with Universal Healthcare, but the UK is not alone.

I constantly hear anecdotes about people waiting 6+ months for minor operations in the UK (corroborated by this article and others), and how the wealthy/elites of Canada fly into the US for treatments.

Why is it that Universal Healthcare seems to universally turn into massive backlogs and poorer service?

I'm also not convinced we need some new "Universal" system in the US. Everyone in the US already does have access to healthcare (Medicare/Medicaid/Private). The only difference is above a certain income level you're expected to shop for your own. I much rather prefer that instead of it coming out of my paycheck in another mandatory tax without choice of provider.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jul/13/nhs-operatio...
only like? WTH your world lies :Ð
Pomodoro technique helps building some momentum. Once you start you forget about pomodoro.
That's a good point. Who really knows, but possibly Google just doesn't see that coming, or at least not any time soon. A true competitor to YouTube would really do consumers and creators a lot of good though.
Do you have a link to the studies? I definitely notice a huge difference in washing with soap in cold water (camping), which is hard to not leave a film, and warm water which does a pretty effective job quite quickly with the same exact soap.
It's also the cheapest route to drive, as it's optimizing for lower fuel consumption:

With insights from the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Lab, we’re building a new routing model that optimizes for lower fuel consumption based on factors like road incline and traffic congestion.

Provided that the few extra minutes aren't critical to one's wallet, it's a cost savings. For me those extra minutes are rarely critical. If I could, I'd usually choose the lowest stress route! But I'm definitely going to enjoy using this additional information.
I'm not saying we do a good job of it in practice, but it is a positive right in the BOR.
If it's about using less fuel, why not just market it as economy mode.
Up until around April or so, the CDC was explicitly saying they did not recommend the general public wear masks. For example, here's a tweet from the end of February:

https://twitter.com/cdcgov/status/1233134710638825473
I am an introvert and absolutely hate group behaviors and nonsensical smalltalk around lunch time.
However I have no issue being a manager and talking to people on 1:1s or with a clean agenda and subject to discuss.
I tested out of high school at 15 by way of the California High School Proficiency Exam (CHSPE). I was free to enroll in Jr. college and to work full time. I even bought my own car at 16.

Both of my kids did the same thing, but today the minimum age for taking the test is 16, so they had to suffer one year more than I did.
> Imagine if someone could white out a section of a book and apply the changes instantaneously to every printed copy of that book in existence.

Considering a fifteen year old YouTube video can resurface and the millions of votes can change the vote-ratio, digital media isn't necessarily the same as a permanent historical record.
If only this cynicism was shared by the general public, the regulatory authorities etc.
> Essentializing Google as a singular

Google themselves do this with their shared branding under the google umbrella.

Companies that want the upside of this branding need to accept the downsides too.
It's documented truth - from RMS himself:

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-02/msg00...

Chris Lattner's original email: https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc/2005-11/msg00888.html

> The patch I'm working on is GPL licensed and copyright will be assigned to the FSF under the standard Apple copyright assignment. Initially, I intend to link the LLVM libraries in from the existing LLVM distribution, mainly to simplify my work. This code is licensed under a BSD-like license [8], and LLVM itself will not initially be assigned to the FSF. If people are seriously in favor of LLVM being a long-term part of GCC, I personally believe that the LLVM community would agree to assign the copyright of LLVM itself to the FSF and we can work through these details.

If your view is LLVM's licensing is irrelevant to the free software movement then perhaps you don't understand free software as much as you think.
Electric vehicle and trains don't use gas
Completing high school is one of those things that isn't a big deal for some people who are already on a good track, are broadly intelligent.

But I'm going to guess the overwhelming majority of people who think it isn't for them actually need it quite a bit.

I also think for self motivated intellectual kids, completing high school anyways really isn't much of a roadblock or time waster.
There's also epigenetics to consider, like methylation and acetylation, which adds a whole extra layer of complexity.
:/
View time isn't adequate if a video isn't obviously bad until the very end though.
I understand this, but at some point you would think investors would cut their losses.

I mean... _years_ without profitability. That's a long time.
"I think the key problem is that James doesn't like what the ACLU is prioritizing, that is all"

Except that's a serious criticism.

"“case selection guidelines,” stipulating, “Speech that denigrates such [marginalized] groups can inflict serious harms and is intended to and often will impede progress toward equality.” Before agreeing to take a free speech case, the document continued, the ACLU would now consider “the potential effect on marginalized communities,” whether the speech advances the goals of speakers whose “views are contrary to our values,” and the “structural and power inequalities in the community in which the speech will occur.” "

i.e. you can't say something, even factual, if it doesn't support the ideological causes of a specific version of 'equity', or rather, the ACLU doesn't care about your rights in that endeavour.

And that right there, is the end of the ACLU.
Edit: reading on tiny phone screens sucks
Show HN: Useful Linux search tool: Find wrapper in Bash
Now updated with removal automation
Agreed but youtube has some valuable content, e.g. if you're into chess, there are some irreplaceably good videos out there. The way I use them is via youtube-dl.
Best time to get a cheap ticket is right after the first dearly crash!
Elastic tabstops – a better way to align and indent code
>Some people also take the really risky step of throwing out their US citizenship

It is actually quite a lengthy application process to try and renounce your US Citizenship, and the federal government can simply deny your application.
And then loudly proclaim that they are adherents of a certain prophet.
This is very reminiscent of Wendy Carlos's "Switched on Bach". If you liked the video, but have never heard the album, I recommend you track down a copy. Tragically it never seems to be available on streaming services (at least the ones I subscribe to).

Anna von Hausswolff has done some great work with real church organs too.
I love the image of someone in a parking lot with their car being surprised that the walking directions are asking them to leave their car. "Not again!"

More seriously, though, when shopping in roughly the same area of town, the best way to walk is to pick a spot that's close to the last place you're going to shop. It'd be an interesting mapping feature to suggest a spot based on a list of locations.
Because ultimately all rights are just made up. They're only what sufficient amounts of people agree to. They're all just really good ideas.
I agree. I've seen a lot of YouTube videos that are basically a robotic automated voice-over on top of some stock footage. They're everywhere, and usually I can avoid getting tricked into watching them based on the dislike count. But the like count alone is not enough to figure that out since niche videos can have low like counts.
Right, but right now, you lack the ability to push me to the back of the line for healthcare because of my love for extreme sports and motorcycling. You may want to do that because you believe it is "fair and equitable" but you can't, because you're just another third party in this relationship between me, my provider, and my insurer.

You may want everyone to only ride the lowest risk means of public transit, only eat the right food, only perform the right activities because you arrogate to yourself the right to police behaviour in pursuit of equity.

You are welcome to want this, of course, and I do celebrate your openness in stating your objectives. But that's why we're opposed. I don't share your objectives. I am willing to accept some degree of inequity in the pursuit of some degree of individual freedom.

For the record, I don't smoke. I do speed, like so many other people in California. But fortunately, my auto insurer adjusts me up for that.

EDIT: I cannot reply to you, jay_kyburz, but I do not anticipate mere societal pressure. I anticipate legal rules placing me in a different line that only gets treatment after 'conventional risk' people. i.e. at some point I believe someone will say "Rich software engineers get treated for pulling their shoulder jumping off bridges while this brave firefighter had to wait (unstated that he had to wait to have a wart removed or something)" and then the outrage will roll up until anyone jumping off bridges for fun is now placed permanently behind everyone else.
> Biden received more votes than any other presidential candidate in history

You mean Dominion voting machines recorded more votes for Biden than any other presidential candidate in history.
It doesn't say that. It says people 70 or older should not go at all. That's why the page I linked to uses a red box.

> The USPSTF recommends against PSA-based screening for prostate cancer in men 70 years and older.

For the "why" read the PDF linked on this page: https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/documen...

> The problem of overdiagnosis has received an increasing amount of attention in the field of cancer screening. It is a particularly large issue for prostate cancer because prostate cancer can have a long period when it is detectable but asymptomatic. As early as the 1980’s, before the use of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for early detection of prostate cancer, overdiagnosis was recognized as an important issue for prostate cancer screening that used digital rectal examinations.1

> Individuals with cancer that is overdiagnosed do not benefit from having their cancer detected by screening but they suffer from the harms of evaluations done to establish that cancer exists and the harms of treatment for the cancer. The harms of treating prostate cancer can be both serious and common.2, 3 Even if individuals with screen-detected prostate cancer do not undergo treatment, they may suffer from anxiety and diminished well-being because of the cancer diagnosis and they may be burdened by the testing and interventions used to monitor the cancer. Uncertainties regarding the benefit of PSA screening in reducing prostate cancer mortality in randomized trials2 and evidence that the incidence of prostate cancer increased dramatically with the adoption of PSA screening,4- 6 have moved overdiagnosis to the forefront of discussions about whether and how to screen for prostate cancer.
A lot of people feel that broad welcome in a policy means fewer resources to share with more people. If you're in an advantaged position, it may make sense to oppose such broad social care measures.
Lithium batteries are mostly nickel, despite the name. AFAICT the main benefits are replacing the nickel.