skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> For example, universities and hospital bills have shot up way more than inflation, just huge.

It is not a coincidence that you picked two industries that thrive on the magic of regulatory capture.

Student loans, which follow a person even if they go bankrupt, removed all incentives for banks to lend intelligently. In fact, they are incentivized to lend larger sums to as many people as they can. And health care is a 9,000 layered beast of corruption across local, state, and federal levels.
Not really, as I've found. Even if you manage to find something that's not "made in PRC", you have to realize that many products are complex, and some parts will still be made in China.
The other thing is that I don't see that some other places are "better" than China in this way. Are sweatshops better in other places for example?

I think what can be done is to consuming less. Buying second hand. Learning basic techniques to repair. Things like that.
This reminds me when I was learning to code I was working through the Project Euler problems in python, one of them has you write code to do something with the English words for numbers.

I wrote my code and was fairly confident it was correct, submit the answer and it is rejected, spend the next few hours trying to find the logic error. Of course it's because English is ridiculous and it's "forty" instead of "fourty".
How China’s Digital Currency Could Challenge the Almighty Dollar
Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are slugging it out for space supremacy
The domain is read.cash
Herd Immunity Threshold
Four proven ways to build a high-growth startup out of a service business
Why this criticism? Is HIV research not a good enough cause for you? Much better than a 10 billion dollar airport or 15 billion dollar Olympics in my opinion.
Tim Cook can pay the Chinese workers rounding errors on his net worth because they and the other workers able to do similar work are not organized. They have no power. They can't ask for better working condition and better salary.

Also, he really cares about making money, so since the workers have no power, why give them anything else than the minimum and get yourself the maximum?

Who cares about some random oversea workers? Their problem, not mine. /s
That’s my question. How does this benefit Apple as a company or shareholders?
imagine how many potential Tim Cooks are among those workers who can't ever become Tim Cooks due to their circumstances
Deploying the contract must've cost quite a bit[0]. Seems like the creator of the contract minted 10 tokens for over $900[1].

Idk, I guess I must've been a poor 12-year old, if that's what 12-year olds spend on their hobbies nowadays.

[0] https://etherscan.io/token/0x96ed81c7f4406eff359e27bff6325dc...

[1] https://etherscan.io/tx/0x17654fa3a9b49fc1688df27d195ffb59a1...
People are not paid based on what they need, they're paid based on value they provide (and other things, like how difficult they are to replace).
Of course there are different forms of value that are not fungible. Moral or human value as independent of financial value.

The point I'm making is that the £1m came from somewhere. Now yes sometimes it came from a Mafia sex slave operation or whatever, but those are minuscule edge cases on the scale of say the UK economy. We're talking about the economy in general and what makes on economy more valuable than another one in economic terms.
the scarcity is the role not the person filling it
Option A) The money is taxed and spent on HIV research.

Option B) He retires and (maybe) gives it to support HIV research.

So the question is, interest and efficiency.

It's possible in may situations for charitable giving to have greater efficiency, by leveraging the knowledge of the investor, directing the money towards really effective outcomes. Or not. Then there is the public interest.

Option C) Reduce the market power of monopolizing entities, in which case instead of gigantic profits accumulating in specific centres, you have workers, suppliers and consumers getting a better deal across the board i.e. Foxconn staff having more income, consumers getting better prices etc..

I like Option C.

I like Option B when there's effective leadership.

I like Option A when governments are really smart with their investment or redistribution.
We have absolutely no idea since only a truly tiny fraction will ever have the chance to try.
Most of the comments are focusing on your salary comparisons, and while I do think it's not quite as simple as what you've laid out (we know how capitalism and its reward structures work), the wider and much more important point I take from your comment is about how workers in these overseas factories are treated generally, not necessarily just about what they're paid.

There clearly IS a problem here. It's not just Apple and it's not just corporations, we all (in the West) have to take a bit of responsibility around this.

So for everyone disagreeing with you, I do think you raise/{remind us of} some important ethical issues that do need ongoing and open discussion.
It depends entirely if he's actually responsible for that created value. Maybe he didn't actually do anything special that anyone else couldn't have also done. In that case why would he deserve that much money?
Positive news for Waymo. They previous sold their excellent in-house lidar system to keep costs from ballooning. That they have decided to stop suggests they expect other money coming in soon.
For some reason owners of Apple value Tim Cook worth of billions.

I am sure that if you can replace Tim Cook and work for 390$ per month, owners will happily fire Tim Cook.
Nigeria’s oil firm NNPC considering IPO after first profit in 40-year
When will people be done with these communism ideas? Go to Cuba or Venezuela to experience the equality by yourself, like I did: I was born in the USSR, and though I was young when it finally dissolved, I've had enough of this commie shit.
You don’t know how vaccines or viruses work, do you?
Swift PR: Add an option to build the concurrency library for back deployment
How many of those 160,000 people would be able to successfully run Apple?

Would all 160,000 of them put together be able to do a better job than Tim did?
The source is me: https://gist.github.com/casperisfine/1c46f05cccfa945cd156f44...

Note that this overhead apply as soon as a refinement is defined for a method regardless of wether it's ever active.

That 40% figure is for an empty method. So for "big" methods that are infrequently called it's probably fine, but it should really be avoided in hotspots.
Crunchbang++ 11
Ok now do this same exercise with your own salary.

In fact, anyone here can. Are you as a software engineer making $200,000+ delivering as much value as ~42 of these Chinese laborers at Foxconn? I doubt it.

And people pointing to Tim Cook about how it’s all unfair and everything. Dang I mean the cognitive dissonance and ego to think that you making 42x a worker is ok because the JIRA tickets you addressed add a lot to the bottom line but Tim Cook just makes too much?

Personally I don’t really care. Just find it interesting to see how people justify themselves.
Tinkering with free software is not necessarily a hobby. You are actually learning from it a lot about technology. This understanding and skills (fixing problems, debugging, patience, reading docs) can be converted to money.
Depends on what's on the line.

Software for automatic trading, dosing radiotherapy, controller for moonshot etc will have different requirements on correctness than ordering of search results.

Ignoring these things can have people killed/ruined and they have.
Imagine a world where we didn't have to choose exclusively between dictatorial communism and unfettered capitalism.

So sad that any other system is completely impossible
It's generally that simple.

You should have an excel you update annually and print the latest version each year and keep the printout in your records.

As long as under the annual limit and it makes sense, you should be good.

If you're trying to be fancy, search for more info on how Thiel setup the ultimate Roth.

Also, note that a general strategy is to borrow against holdings, so you don't even need to sell the Roth to get access to it. (One of the reasons executives hate short sellers is that it screws with their loans if compensation share prices go down.)
Contracts (APIs, interfaces) imply both parties understand what is being exchanged. The process of developing a contract helps each party figure that out and express it concretely.

Downstream, on one side of contract, as you develop and test, you may find that you understand the problem differently. Then the contract becomes a constraint. This organizational model then requires that parties revisit contracts if needs on one side or the other change. That still looks like coordination.

Perhaps the win is just less frequent, more focused coordination. We still need a common picture of "what", just now as expressed through contracts. I like the peer bob1029 post on consistent labels, in that way. The other decoupling to consider would be "when" - how can we work in parallel with minimal synchronization and blocking?
Just compare with other tech companies. I haven’t checked but I don’t think 0.1% is high, my guess is that it’s very very low, but I could be wrong.
Power centralization is an inevitable outcome of improved techniques. Centralized control imperfectly selects for highly specific skills that only few possess. One can attempt to regulate inequality and inform opinion to some extent, but this will become harder as we go forward due to their improved techniques enabling manipulation.
At this point most students learning about that number assume it's misspelled when first introduced and incorrect the teacher.
So many sour comments. When Tim Cook took the place of the legendary you know who, every reviewers is worried about Apple's future, and Tim's not doing a so bad job after all. Most of his investments paid off, and Apple's performance has remained stable and has grown.

Tim deserves credit for running such an successful operation. Do you really think those running-up phone makers aren't looking for someone like Tim? The competition in the phone market is real.

Although we could also argue Tim failed in a way with the rise of Huawei and Xiaomi where we had to block the competitors via 'national security' concerns.
More than one out of 160k. CEO are like president they don't do much, you remove Cook and replace it by another high level exec, probably nothing will change for Apple.

All the major tech compagnies have increased their value over the last 10 years, so it's def not because of their incredible CEO.
As per your FDA figure 65 per million cases of Myocarditis in 12-17 year olds vaccinated:

At https://data.cdc.gov/Vaccinations/COVID-19-Vaccination-Demog... we see 11,776,463 vaccines administered to 12-17 year olds. Using math: 765 cases, which are generally non-fatal.

Using https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Deaths-by-Sex... we get 1,131 fatalities among 15-24 year olds.

This, again, is 12-17 year olds; I was using figures for young adults before, where the chance of getting Myocarditis is smaller and the chance of dying from COVID-19 is larger.

The worst case figures for vaccine side effects you have been able to come up with is that the number of Myocarditis cases is about the same as the number of COVID-19 deaths in the adolescent age group, as as per the FDA paper you brought up “available data from short-term follow up [of Myocarditis cases] suggest that most individuals have had resolution of symptoms”. Even here, I would prefer a condition which gets resolved over something which would kill me.

I know you don’t like me making bad faith assumptions, but in the real world, people who argue against getting vaccinated usually argue in bad faith, and the results of their arguments are increased deaths because people didn’t get the vaccine. As I posted elsewhere in this thread, it’s well known that, in the US, skepticism of vaccines and public health measures, unfortunately, are bad faith arguments being made with a political bias, and, lo and behold, people with a “COVID denial” political bent are much more likely to get a case of COVID-19 significant enough to report: https://i.redd.it/4o4i7arucpj71.png [1] Also, well over 95% of COVID-19 hospitalizations are from unvaccinated people: https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/5Qts7/9/

[1] The image is on Reddit, but the figures are from New York Times’s COVID-19 tracker and MIT Election Lab figures. My own graphs comparing COVID-19 infection rates in red states (states with right-wing governors) vs. blue states (left-wing governors) shows a much smaller COVID-19 Delta surge in places less “vaccine skeptical”; compare https://samiam.org/COVID-19/redStates.html and https://samiam.org/COVID-19/blueStates.html

So, before we talk any further, I need to know this: Did you get the COVID-19 vaccine? If not, why not? I will not reply to you until I know whether you have been vaccinated.
That’s not how checking accounts, savings accounts, or shares of stock work. It’s only how physical dollars in your wallet work.
Ah, good ol' SQL injection attacks... If the author is reading, please do add a disclaimer mentioning that the code would be vulnerable to SQL injection attacks.

From a purely learning point of view, it is indeed an interesting read, however.
Waymo will stop selling its self-driving Lidar sensors to other companies
Even comparing excess deaths can be misleading, because you're comparing deaths during lockdown to deaths in previous years not in lockdown. In other words, you're not isolating a single variable (SARS-CoV-2 pandemic vs no pandemic) but rather multiple (pandemic plus non pharmaceutical interventions vs no pandemic).
I think the broader society does always have a say into the private agreements of individual entities and corporations. This is called labor law. So technically, they do have a say. Of course I highly doubt that society would be willing to pass a labor law to limit the bonus of CEOs. But I don’t think that’s because society doesn’t have a say; I think that’s because society broadly doesn’t consider this objectionable enough to forbid.
Nitpicking: There is a lot of surface covered with water, but not too much water in total. Water is a thin layer over a rocky base. https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/all-earths-water-a-single-...
std::unique_ptr still suffers from The RAII Syndrome, where freeing memory, instead of being a constant-time operation, becomes linear, when one std::unique_ptr owns a struct, which owns other std::unique_ptrs and so on. Another problem with The RAII Syndrome is encouraging large numbers of microallocations, over allocating memory in bulk, increasing the number of places in your program where something may fail.

And although not strictly RAII, a related issue with the C++ model of constructors, destructors and whatnot (The Rule of N, where N goes to inf as the version of C++ goes to inf), is that when you use std::vector::push_back, and the std::vector needs to be resized, instead of executing a simple memcpy (or equivalent), move constructors for every element need to be called.
The real issue is not homes but rather wealth, and some people (and some countries) have more of it than others. Unless you have a solution to reshape the Gini coefficient, setting arbitrary limits on the number of things one can own is not going to solve anything. Much the same way as rent controls don't solve anything.
Since these are stock awards, the money really comes from old and new Apple shareholders, not the company itself.

When the stock award was granted, existing shareholders agreed to dilute their holdings by allowing the company to issue new shares to Cook. And when Cook sells this newly issued stock for cash, the money comes from new shareholders who want a slice of Apple (or existing shareholders buying more, thus paying cash for the shares they themselves gave to Cook).
Ugh, can't let the truth get on the way of a good story though, I guess.

The graph is also scaled awkwardly, starting at .5
A10 was kind of a strange big.LITTLE in that it could only run one set at a time. Future revisions fixed this.
Working overtime is usually an antipattern
Maybe a little off topic, but in my country you will have a very good life with $390 per month and yet we have near 35% of our population living on poverty.

The minimum wage is a little lower than that and there are a lot of laws favoring employees which makes it really hard for companies to hire. Just to give you an example, last year the president signed a decree to forbid companies firing people with the excuse of covid, nothing but a populist measure. The result is that no company will ever hire here, which creates more unemployment.

I mention this because giving a lot of rights to employees by law sounds good but I have seen and lived the consequences my entire life.

Should apple on their own pay more to chineese people? I think another comment address that, at the end is an scarcity problem, supply and demand.
I may teach my kid programming. If he’s interested. But I’ll never ever tell him that anything to do with crypto is a good thing to be involved with.

I kind of have the same mental association I have with drug cartels. Except somehow it’s legal.
> How many Tim Cook's do you have lying around?

I think that's also silly calculation. Beyond a certain (admittedly unknowable) point, compensation becomes a meaningless number for the individual.

Would Tim Cook "rage-quit" Apple if they could only pay him, say, 75 million instead of 750 million? If yes, then it's pure greed. If no, then it's too much.

Is there something substantive behind that 750 million figure other than very powerful people just paying themselves as much as they can get away with? I think not.
HN has been lurching left very quickly over the past years. Dunno if you’ve noticed.
To be fair Apple was already a giant rolling ball of success, and they have historically had an ingrained culture of caring deeply about their products above all else.

Any decisions that would affect their trajectory will get a ton of deliberation from a lot of smart people; i.e. there wouldn't need to be a ton of input or ingenuity from the CEO to see returns like those from Apple, imho.

Not to say that Cook isn't great or that it wouldn't be difficult to achieve that success.
It is naive to think that thieves and scammers will go away so easily if other people just become poorer.
A bit of a silly thing for people to celebrate, why not celebrate people that won the lottery ?
Taken out of circulation? The money will surely be invested into the economy where it will very much fund (profit motivated) initiatives.
By "good" I mean probably trying to pump the NFT's his son has made and therefore generate more bitcoin from them in the long run.
I mean, no for two reasons. Traffic lights grouping people as you say, but also the bottle neck causing so people commuting on bikes to use this road wouldn't have existed if the other roads in the area were also designed to accommodate bikes.

On the flip side, this isn't a city where a large percentage of people commuted by bike. If you turned all the people commuting by car and public transits into cyclists it wouldn't surprise me to find out there were still areas with congestion.
The scheduler looks at resource consumption by the program and guesses what it is doing and when it should be scheduled.
>You must ask yourself what is the reason that people in London have more money

As an African that's an easy answer. They stole it.

Before you all go clutching your pearls: it's beyond impractical to even suggest paying it back nor would I even want to think about that. Not an option. not suggesting it.

But don't pretend it's because you're special. You stole it. Just own it.
First page of google searching for "lft false positive rate" gives me https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-11-11-oxford-university-and-p... :

The specificity of the test was recorded as 99.68% - the
overall false positive rate was 0.32%, although this was
lowered to 0.06% in a lab setting.

> PCR results in the real world seem to vary a lot, but a 3% false positive rate seems appropriate.

Not to me. Again, first page of google: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthan... puts an _upper_ bound on the PCR false positive rate of 0.08%, and that would require all the positives in that survey to have been false. And that's a real-world result across 208,730 samples.

But given the existence of LFTs and how cheap and immediate they are, I don't think anyone's talking about population-wide PCR testing anyway.

> You are assuming total costs of a trace/quarantine regime are linear in the number of people prevented from participating in society and productive activities.

For the proportion of the population removed at any given time? As close to linear as makes no difference, yes. Is your argument that there's a quadratic factor in network effects? You haven't explained what your cost model actually is. For your argument to work you need those costs to follow an exponential curve, and there's just no mechanism for that to happen.
Then why;

1. Wasn't this priced in already?

2. Is it necessary to pay the new CEOs so much?

You argument is actually in opposition to the one I replied to, justifying Cook's renumeration.
Thanks, I meant from a paperwork perspective, trials, etc. I know about the FDA website for medical devices. Not sure if there's anything specific to what is essentially lab equiptment interfaced with a cell phone (not patient worn or anything). So I'm just guessing, but I would think approval and testing would be easier for say a home pregnancy test vs a ECG.

I've already validated that the idea would be useful. There's a potential annual patient population of around 7 million people in the US. Even at 10% adoption, that could be revenue of $100-200M with a conservative guesstimate profit margin of 10-20% at that level (variable costs are low, so that should be higher as it scales). Current price of testing is high enough that I think this device could fit into that range or under cut it, with a multifaceted improvement to patient experience. A brief search turned up no competitors.

Now I'm trying to decide if I should spend the money to build a prototype and file a provisional patent or not. It depends on exactly how expensive and lengthy the approval process is, how HIPPA might or might not apply, etc. The type of software it will require will also be a challenge for me since I've never made anything like this.
Yeah?

If people have money to spend on Apple stock they clearly don’t need it to survive.
The explanation is not unreasonable, but you have reasonable explanations for the masculine too. Wifi is a good counter-example: Fidelity is feminine, yet the masculine gender is widespread for Wifi. You can also justify the masculine form by metonymy (at the beginning of the pandemic we mostly said coronavirus, and we shifted to covid but kept the masculine of the former).

If you'd like some background on this (in French):

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dS3BfFPM3qI (France Inter, short)

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zykIohErTr8 (short)

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L78FkTtwKw4 (Linguisticae, longer)

In short: you cannot argue against the usage, even with the most logical explanation that goes against the usage. Natural languages are far from being formal, entirely consistent and completely logical.