skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's no inherent incentive to produce a quality product when chasing profit either, just one that people will give you money for. Sometimes this aligns with quality, other times, it does not.
Several of the "perverse incentives" are possible because of insurance/medicare hiding the true cost of medications from the consumer, so there is very little rational price-signaling back to the manufacturers. Other perversions are made possible by the very regulatory agencies that originally had the good purpose of ensuring drug safety and preventing snake-oil remedies but which have become complex, ever-expanding nightmares of bureaucracy with vast opportunities for corruption and political favor-trading.
How to Delete your Google+ Auto Backup photos?
Profits ~= value of product - resources consumed

There is nothing wrong with firms making profits, it is a sign of efficiency, and a sign of where resources should be allocated; with time, the least efficient firms are eliminated, and only those which create the most value at the lowest cost remain. The problem is that the product (and its value) may not reflect the objective(s) of the policymakers and the public, and the chief goal of those creating any system should be to properly align rewards with desired outcomes.
Not really. I grew up in a developing country, where there were only public schools. And my school was by no means elite. Biographies of scientists were not part of curriculum either. It's really the culture. Parents did care about kids' academic performance, a lot. The whole society advocated studying hard with the right approach (whether it's really right is debatable). Even state media devote significant time to STEM related news and documentaries. Drug was never the problem because even carrying drug is capital crime. I'm not saying every every in every city was like that as our country had tons of social and economical problems. However, kids' education especially STEM education is THE focus of parenting.
Your logic is flawed. This business is not zero sum. It literally creates wealth. Your dollar now buys more than it did before. Taxation is zero-sum. Your dollar that you would have spent literally gets taken from you to be spent somewhere else. No wealth is created. Similarly, no wealth is lost when people evade tax - but we do have less for the government to spend obviously.

Also, at a large scale "the customers" are the same as "society."

Externalities are an important topic but what are those externalities? Fewer tax dollars, annoyed neighbors, that all I can think of. Both of those are easily solvable problems in a free market. Allow apartment complexes to choose if they allow airBnB.

The benefit far outweighs the negatives. There are also positive externalities. We all benefit from sharing our resources.

Air BnB should be legalized. That would also get rid of some of the externalities of crime, like paying for prison and enforcement of laws.
Have an upvote, you socialist bastard!
Officially, federal agencies are accountable to the elected government and only do as they are tasked. I invite you to study the history of these agencies and determine for yourself whether or not that's really true.
Are the masons still a thing? I know it was a big deal back in the day, but none of the masons I know (well, that I know are masons; I'm not one myself) are as well-connected as, say, I am.
In Madrid, Google Glass isn't called Google Glass
But are profits the best way to measure a "quality product" when it comes to something like education?

I would argue not, or at least that externalized costs need to be internalized somehow (regulation or taxation are the typical means).

That is to say, if we have for profit public schools, I'd want their profits to be tied to the long term effects of results of their students, not to yearly test scores.
A lot of the stuff that is featured on HN isn't about hacking or hackers per se.

The way I see it, this is news that's relevant to folks interested in technology... The reason this particular story is on the front page is that a lot of these folks do have connections to India.
But the US population as a whole has slid backwards in power and monetary means over the last thirty years. The shenanigans that allowed the elite to walk over the working class had their roots in the late 70's and 80's with the shift to the right and the "Greed is Good" era.
Is it really necessary for you to be so nasty?
Isn't that an example where the new drugs don't matter? Prilosec seems to be cheap and widely available.

I take the point that some of the motivation (I'm hedging here because I haven't looked into it...) for Nexium is a patent protected drug to market, but the tone of this thread would have me believe that Prilosec and equivalents are disappeared from the market.
> After dropping out of college, the Man took a job in high-frequency trading when he was 20, where, he claims, he made a killing.

> Thus far, he's found two properties that fit the bill. He charges around $500 a night for the first one; this second one is set to launch in the coming weeks with a similar price tag. He’s received funding from outside investors...

Parts of this story seem odd. If the Man Who Does Not Exist made a "killing" in finance, why exactly does he need or want investors for this venture? It sounds like the investment required is relatively modest and would quickly be recouped. And I can't imagine that increasing the number of people formally involved in his illegal enterprise will be to his benefit when, for one reason or another, the gig is up.
What a timely post! I'm in Delhi now for a wedding and there's definitely a ton of celebration going on. Here's hoping this gets past the honeymoon phase and turns into something bigger.
For those wondering why this is relevant to HN: AAP or Common man's party (translated literally) is like a crowdfunded startup. This guy is a rookie in politics who managed to get significant number of seats in this election using crowd funding(through AAP's website). AAP, in itself, is like a startup which is trying to completely disrupt an industry which has been in control of two parties(mostly) so far.
Framing Door Systems
You should read more about the "robber barons", as they did a lot of good, by increasing competition, decreasing costs to consumers, and breaking state monopolies.
I head it put this way recently: "Which good old days? The ones where people owned other people? Where children worked in factories? Where the only literate people were priests?"
The concerned person is a techy who graduated out of the prestigious Indian Institute of Technology.
> The question - and only question - should be what David Simon asks: are we all in this together or are we not? To me, the answer is blindingly obvious. It's demonstrated by what societies are flourishing - with high economic and social equality, healthy democratic government, protected personal liberties, well-cared-for populaces, and resilient economies - and what societies aren't.

And the blindingly obvious answer is?

Here's my simple model: large, diverse countries are more unequal than small, culturally homogeneous countries. Just like densely-populated, cosmopolitan regions are more unequal than bland suburbs. Just like world is more unequal than the US.
Very different domain, but potentially some lessons from this 'startup'.

A "social" startup.
Under one year old.
Challenging the oligopoly in their industry.
Raised 3 million and then stopped asking for more money.
Will now cater to 28/70 seats in New Delhi (population : 9 million, that's like 3 million users ;) )
Long term vision - a billion plus users (all of India)
This has been my experience as well. There's almost always a cheaper, effective alternative. In the one case where there wasn't, the benefit of the medication vs. its cost was so out of balance that we just decided not to use it.
Or maybe he just lied? He doesn't seem like the most trustworthy kind of guy to begin with.
Nordic model works if you have a ton of oil.
Of course - the rest of the world has 'caught up' to the USA. We aren't the powerhouse we once were. Even if you distributed CEO pay to minimum wage workers they'd only be getting a thousand bucks or so each.
It's cute that you think the NSA dragnet has anything to do with 9/11. This is just the kind of stuff the NSA does. Look up "Echelon".
interesting stuff. its very hard to judge translations without knowing the original and the language of it... its a shame this website mainly has the appearance of some kind of scam. can't quite put my finger on it...

maybe needs a good design pass on it - it might sell more books then. :)

can't help but notice its using apple's font preference and the same list of fallbacks too...
Everyone is entitled to (and does) ignore externalities that cause discomfort to others.

If Alice performs well at her job, and her company gains a lot of marketshare as a result, she has likely caused discomfort for the employees of her company's competitors. It's frightening to imagine a world in which Alice is forced to stop performing as well because of her competitors' discomfort.

A simpler example: "hapless" is all over this thread, causing discomfort for those who don't want this man thrown in prison. Should "hapless" be forced to stop?

Additionally, everyone is entitled to (and does) ignore public goods that they don't pay for. It's frightening to imagine a world in which we force Alice to pay for her neighbor's renovations, or to pay for a weekly advice newsletter she never signed up for.

People like the man in the article make these value judgments more independently from government policy than most people do. If anything, that is your contention with him, not that he doesn't pay for things he didn't ask for, and not that he sometimes ignores the discomfort caused by his actions.
"Need to know" apparently is no longer in fashion in either the civil or military intelligence communities, in any way whatsoever. Bradley Manning convinced me of that. As a low-level private, he was able to download megabytes of sensitive material completely unrelated to his job, and that he couldn't possibly have had any need to access. Regardless of whether you think he (she) did the right thing, it's just insane that it was even possible. It speaks of outrageous incompetence at the highest levels of the organization, incompetence that's likely to be a greater security threat than anything else under discussion.

Same story with Snowden, a low-level contractor who was apparently able to walk away with the whole store. Love him or hate him, he's not the Agency's real problem.
Bloody Heels - Hungry For Your Love
It's really because teachers and parents failed to teach kids how to perform deliberate practice, which requires handling a certain level of difficulties.
There is probably enough information (# of properties, rates, $78k, etc.) in the article for AirBnB to de-anonymize The Man Who Does Not Exist if they wish.
You can't say I'm false and justify it by citing a single price. What would a hotel have cost?

I don't understand your second point at all. But remember, prices are "set" by firms competing for the lowest price/best value, not by "what the market can bear." There should be no reason rents will go up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AstraZeneca#Nexium

It's their most commercially-successful medication, they did misleading studies in order to tout its comparative effectiveness, market it heavily and bribe docs to favour it.

Prilosec is still available, but if your doctor prescribes Nexium, you're unlikely to question it. Virtually all of the folks on it could likely be on Prilosec with equal effect and much less cost to the healthcare system.
> If you are ever in a situation where you have to pay for drugs out of pocket or your insurance doesn't cover enough of the drug call your doctor and ask for a lower cost alternative. They can call the pharmacy and often times find a lower cost alternative to fit your budget.

I think you hit the nail on the head. Most people just accept what the doctors, insurance companies, and pharmacies tell them, without asking for more affordable alternatives. My pool guy was complaining about how he got one of those "Your insurance is being canceled and your new insurance is 200% the cost" letters from Humana. I got the same exact letter a week ago. I asked him what he was going to do. He said "What can I do? Pay the high cost." I told him I got the same exact letter and I called Humana, talked to an agent for 5 minutes, and they put me on a plan that costs just a few bucks more than my old plan but covers a lot more and with similar deductibles.

It is in the best interest of every corporation to up-sell you the most profitable product. In case of insurance, Humana quoted both of us ACA-compatible plans that sound similar (similar/lower deductible) to the old plans but are actually different (no coinsurance, 100% Rx coverage etc.) and thus cost a lot more.

I also told him to call up BCBS, Aetna, and Cigna if he really wants to shop around because they all have good, competitive plans now. There is no reason to stick with Humana if they don't have a good plan for him. But I don't think he's going to do anything except blame the ACA law. There really needs to be a nationwide education campaign on healthcare. People really have no idea that there are better/cheaper alternatives, regardless of whether you are for/against ACA.
> Few people are saying saying "let's not do this" for some value of "this", they're saying "let's not force everyone to do this".

And while this makes sense from a naive perspective, it always rapidly breaks down in reality. That's why Simon, and others, call it juvenile. The complexity isn't hard to see: just use one level of meta.

Given an action or policy or whatever S, have the policy S' of "Do not force everyone to do S". Now take S' as the policy S, and have the new policy S'' of "Do not force everyone to not force everyone to do S."

This isn't contrived. The paradox of tolerance has been a major problem in liberal philosophy for a long, long time. The simplistic notion of "Don't force them" just refuses to engage with any kind of depth, and in doing so, perverts and defeats itself.

This is also assuming that the relevant species of libertarianism under discussion isn't purely economic fundamentalism; that is, it has actual concerns for social libertarianism rather than vapid one-off claims that permit oppression by failing to oppose it.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

[2] http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/toleration/
What I'm pointing out really has nothing to do with libertarianism, for what it's worth it's not a political position that I personally adhere to.

I'm pointing out that whatever your political leaning you don't "just" get the government involved. Even if you think you should have a larger government than you have now the question is what kind of larger government, and once you make the wrong choice there's a huge inertia in the system that makes correcting that choice very hard.

So even people that agree that government should do more aren't easily brought on the bandwagon of the something the government wants to do being the right version of that "more".
good stuff. i've been waiting for a small team to do something like this for a while... and have been planning something similar myself for when i can break free from the shackles of full-time work.

knowing some of these guys personally - i'm quite pleased its them who are doing it. :)
I think we are all in this together, whether we acknowledge it or not. Bombs fall on enemy and sympathizer alike.

To me the question is, "Who decides the allocation of the burdens and benefits?"

That answer is obvious. And it's not impartial.
The problem is that too many people reach for government power as a first response instead of the last resort it should be.

Government force is always going to result in unintended, negative consequences. Those socialistic programs you laud, with the high taxes, intrusive regulations, and government debt, are a net drag on the economy.

Working together voluntarily is vastly superior to being compelled by force, however well intentioned.
Just to think - there are people in some parts of the world who do not speak English - is there an app for that?
yeah, but lets be honest... that's never going to get finished. its not like they've already had 10-15 years of working on it and millions of pounds of investment that have already been wasted... long before the recent kickstart.
One might say that socialists want to enforce an oft repeated history of slavery and theft.
The question is the cost of enforcement in total versus the prevented cost in total, including both the costs that would be caused by this guy and the costs that would be caused by others that are deterred by the credible threat of enforcement.

And therein lies the rub. Sociopaths are not deterred by any but the most credible of threats. They will always find new avenues of exploit down at the bottom. To make an extreme effort to try and wipe out all sociopaths, parasites, free riders (or whatever else you want to call them) would impose enormous, crippling costs on our society.
> The libertarian and anti-government sentiments aren't saying that we shouldn't be all in this together, but that we shouldn't be forced to be all in this together. That difference is what the entire argument is about.

That's the kind of facile, juvenile argument the OP decries in this article. To make an analogy, I could equally say, "I shouldn't be forced to be in a family. Families are great and everything, but why do I have to have one?"

Well guess what, I have one because I'm a human being and got born into one. You're an American (or a Canadian or a Briton or whatever). You are part of a society and part of a nation whether you like it or not. So let's make it work for everyone.
Take this as sampling bias if you will, but most of the well-reasoned argument that I've heard from libertarians or anarchists are really just arguments that we should go back to building societies on the scale of city-states, and stop having them on the scale of the US.
I think that the problem isn't getting the right software/design (anyone can do that). The problem is getting the right community and mods to keep it going once you've started.

Good luck m8
It would have been nice if Android 4.4 had enabled Bluetooth LE on devices with Bluetooth 4 hardware but...
> In democratic society such a banding, supported by the people and for the people, is called a government.

Only when the people banding together claim a monopoly on the use of force to achieve their goals. This is exactly the distinction that Bastiat describes.
VerbalizeIt. But seriously, Google is branding Google Glass as "Glass" and not as "glasses"
I'm sure the Watergate burglars had low morale too after they got caught.
It's well known that the pharmaceutical industry sends representatives to doctors to persuade them to prescribe their products. Frequently this is achieved with special "incentives" (read: bribery). Some doctors around here have put signs on their doors saying that they do not talk to representatives of pharmaceutical companies.
Very good speech and an important national dialog to spark. I'd like to call attention to one thing though:

"I don't believe that a state-run economy can be as viable as market capitalism in producing mass wealth."

This demonstrates a basic confusion that we Americans have about ourselves, even most "lefties" and "libertarians": The false belief that we live in a free market economy.

The truth is, the state plays a massive role in our economy.

This is especially true for us Silicon Valley entrepreneurial Americans. Because the government's hand is especially strong in high tech.

The Internet. Microcomputers. Lasers. Jets. Robots. Siri. You name a major high-tech innovation, and it's probably got DARPA or NASA behind it in the earliest, highest-risk, most capital-intensive stages. Look again and you'll probably find lots more government support in bringing the technology to market through procurement.

This is all the more damning for our system's poverty. The rich and powerful are fully in favor of a strong, powerful state-run economy that serves their needs. That's why it's done under the rubric of military spending -- "we have to spend trillions of taxpayer dollars on this because we have to defend ourselves" sounds better than "because we need it to produce the Silicon Valley economic miracle."

Because the latter would suggest it's fair to direct major taxpayer support for other economic investments like education, health care and housing.

Instead, the state-supported rich and powerful can claim we live in a "free market economy" that just happens to have trillions of state-sponsored investment, for them.
We have that in the US, its called Massachusetts. Ever notice how no one argues for the European model?
That's fascinating.

I'd love to meet the "sensible people" who believe that debt, both personal and national, is not at all implicated in the economic divide between rich and poor that David Simon speaks of.
The welfare state is unsustainable. The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.
Some degree of socialism has always been a part of the system here, despite it being a dirty word.
If you are from an ex-communist country, you might have had the opposite experience, where (before 89) Marx's solutions were gospel, and even if implemented to the letter, you still had the problems of corruption and major outside political influence from the U.S.S.R.. "Socialism" and "communism" are inextricably linked in those parts of Europe, and now toxic ideas because of their painful history.

The speech is partly about degrees and dropping the hypocrisy, not advocating Marxist solutions.
Its just like crowd funded start-up who even stopped asking for funds when he had enough to fight for elections. Lot of Indians in India and other countries did help in donations. He was fighting from people's money for the people of the country . Fought election for first time and that too against veteran 15 year term serving chief minister and won.
If taxation is used to create infrastructure, then surely it is not zero-sum. Also, examples such as NASA would suggest that certain tax funded activities are hugely positive-sum. http://er.jsc.nasa.gov/seh/economics.html
> This guy is sociopath and I hope he ends up in prison.

Woah, that escalated quickly. This type of comment is more what I would expect from a sociopath then the mostly harmless individual described in this article. Don't you have any empathy for him? Have you considered that the author might not have depicted him in an accurate way? Don't you think prison would be a disproportionate punishment for his alleged crimes? Geez, the world is not black and white.
An open letter from Carl Bernstein to Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger
Hi Moxie,
What do you think of the certificate transparency project they mentioned? It is quite a bit different than pinning and doesn't have any of the scalability issues.

If you haven't heard about it, it basically requires that a certificate be observed in a central database for the browser to accept it. The server provides a proof (signature) of it being in the database when it passes the cert to the client so no extra connections are required.

This makes it immediately known when another cert is issued for a site.
I'm not entirely sure what point you're trying to make, but for what it's worth, while agreeing with lots of the speech, I found myself thinking that it was pretty good opinion, but not a great argument.
they are using one of the drugs as a profit center to fund future R&D

How else are they going to fund future R&D?
Neat idea. I would expect there to be a link to each freelancer's portfolio/personal website before ever considering clicking on "Hire Me".
Many are being taught by teachers who have no particular expertise in the subjects.

The expert PhDs that taught me math in the University were horrible teachers that made the subjects dull and uninteresting.