skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's going to be difficult for them not to enforce it, if something like this actually goes into effect. Getting those who think they can go without insurance to pay into the system is one of the major ways it is going to get paid for.

(It is, objectively, a wealth transfer from young people to old people. I find myself wondering if youth support for the bill would drop somewhat if youth realized what was being done to them. I'm not "old" but I'm past the age where I feel I can go without now, so I guess I'm out of this "youth", but I still don't like it. I am young enough that I don't foresee a single penny of this ever being around when I'm actually old enough to need it, since there's just no way in hell either the current system or this new one if it passes will hold up until 2045.)

One interesting scenario I saw (don't recall where, sorry) pointed out that the entire idea of forcing purchase of coverage like this is very Constitutionally dubious. (Where "dubious" means that I actually can't even come up with an argument I disagree with that the Federal government can do this based on the Constitution.) So it is possible this provision could be struck down, but leave the rest of the bill intact, committing to massive outlays with no way to pay for it.
So does this mean we can all quit our jobs, live off our savings and get free health insurance from the government? Because I find that prospect exciting, if not morally dubious.
It's so "absolutely required" that most of the most popular web applications, all written in dynamic languages, are not the product of reviewed codebases.

You don't sound argumentative. You sound hyperbolic.
The sad part is that a conference committee will come up with the final legislation. The Senate has their own version, then the conference committee will write the final. For example, it is likely the "no pay of abortions" will be removed there.
A Good Trademark: A Historical Perspective
In the inline style tag right before the ads, there's a reference to

http://2.afs.googleadservices.com/images/partners/COi4yqbh-p0CFQJciAodOTAbrQ/kosmix.png

which is the "Sponsored Links" image. This strongly suggests that Kosmix and Google are working together to provide these links. Given that, there's nothing too weird about this.
There's an important difference between the 19th century and today. We are nearing the point when computers will be mentally equal, if not superior, to humans. They are already physically superior in many regards. Even before that point, there are tons of jobs that can be done by machines with minimal intelligence. If a machine can do everything that many humans can, but for less money, those humans will be unemployable. If machines are stronger than you and smarter than you, then there's nothing for you to shift to that they aren't already doing.
Not caring. Not news.
Why can I buy car insurance across state lines, but not health insurance? The funny part is that the "public option" crosses state lines, but current insurance companies can't.
Citroen vans sales
Van sales and Leasing of commercial vehicles made fast and easy, direct with free home delivery, even in Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Three Paradoxes of the Internet Age - Part Three
That functionality's available, but not to everybody - you need to have a relationship with Google.

When operational, Findory did this client-side - each page included a list of space-delimited keywords based on the content of the page and the user's past behavior.

If you look at some of the Findory pages at archive.org you can see the premium publisher AdSense call, with the keywords listed under the google_kw variable.

To learn a bit more about what premium publishers' ad call can do, just search around for google_ad_request_done.
This seems like a horrible violation of property rights

I couldn't agree with you more. On a related note, there is apparently a religious conscience exemption:

http://www.pajamahadin.com/?p=1376

Reminds me of the Amish exemption from Social Security:

http://www.amishnews.com/amisharticles/amishss.htm

And so it came to pass that in 1965, the Medicare bill was passed by Congress. As Wayne Fisher writes in The Amish in Court, "Tucked into the 138 page bill was a clause exempting the Old Order Amish, and any other religious sect who conscientiously objected to insurance, from paying Social Security payments, providing that sect had been in existence since December 31, 1950. After Senate approval in July, the signing of the bill by President Lyndon B. Johnson on August 13, 1965, made it official and canceled tax accounts of some 15,000 Amish people amounting to nearly $250,000."
> I think it's incredibly reckless to write him off at 13 years old.

Serious question - what percent of repeat offenders would be acceptable to you? Because if 95% of the extremely brutal, violent people we lock up forever could've been rehabilitated, but the other 5% would've raped/murdered/assaulted/brutalized someone innocent, that seems like a tradeoff worth making. If you let extremely violent criminals go, some of them will repeat. I'm okay locking up someone who does such heinous thing forever, and I don't feel that's reckless.

Put this way - if one elderly woman isn't violently raped by a repeat offender, and 99 violent criminals spend their lives behind bars who could've been rehabilitated, that's a fine tradeoff to me. So in such a horrific incidence, I'm not okay with a repeat rate of 1%. You?
I get the feeling with people are unwilling to have unmanned trains, then unmanned planes are a no go (except by the military who can make a logical cost-benifit-risk decision in this case).

"Learn how hackers can bring down planes into buildings at 5"
"AFAIK Google adsense for search comes with its own everything (searchbox + searchresults + ads) and there is no API to simply fetch ads on the query terms."

This is where you are wrong. Google does give out XML ad feeds.
In python, it seems like it would be trivial to add a __test__() method to a class that was run, well, whenever.
I think it all boils down to proportions and intentions. Of course, the two can be related.

If a small % of your ads are scammy, it's unlikely that you will get that much attention. Similarly, it's unlikely that you intentionally are allowing those ads when they make up a relatively small revenue stream.

On the other hand, if they account for significant revenue and you have the CEO talking on camera about these ads, something is wrong and you should get heat. The Google CEOs are usually talking about getting rid of these ads(not so much because of moral reasons as because they are not that desperate for revenue).
file:///c:/my/scripts/home.htm

c:\my is under Subversion control, allowing me to sync and propagate changes made on any home or work PC which has my setup to all the others (next time I use them). Created this setup (first using CVS) about 10 years ago...

I also have easily accessible Google/Wikipedia/Craigslist/MSDN searches setup in my text editor, which these days get used more than the search-forms in my home page.
many-worlds is roughly what you'd have if you got rid of wave function collapse and naively applied the rest of quantum mechanics

Okay, but that suggests wave function collapse is erroneous whereas many-worlds is more likely. Based on that alone you can see why I'd consider many-worlds silly. Also, I'd say anyone entertaining it as plausible or even likely is probably reasoning from a purely mathematical vantage point, which is simply not accurate enough to draw such conclusions from. I can't see how else they'd arrive at its feasibility. I don't believe Shrodinger or Einstein would ever propose it.

Also, be careful when talking about "observation having a bearing on reality"--the quantum mechanical sense of "observing" state has little to do with the conventional meaning of the word, and absolutely nothing to do with the presence of a conscious observer

Hmm, here I won't argue directly against that statement, but instead offer this: If a tree falls in the forest when no one is around does it make a sound? I'm pretty sure you know the answer is 'No', and that's more of where my conscious observation of reality statement came from.
Hopefully there are no musicians nearby. One with a good enough ear can easily memorize a 15 second-long toneless rhythm :)
I really don't see the "We are nearing the point when computers will be mentally equal, if not superior, to humans." AI hasn't produced any results that have even got within range of human intellect. I am not denying that a lot of factory jobs can be made robotic, but I am saying a lot of skilled labor still cannot be done by robots (e.g. plumber).
You're right, I meant "minifier".
I use a search engine home page for the same reason. Used to be google, now it's bing because I like seeing the picture of the day.
Considering that military planes are used with the intent to kill, it's not as much of an issue as when passengers are aboard. Plus, most of these fighter planes are going to be flying over war zones where lots of people die all the time.
My point is that there already is not enough work to do. We can fill the basic needs of humanity with well below full employment and this will only become more obvious in the future.
I wonder about the regressions too, but that doesn't make for quite such an exciting title.
In the near term, only unskilled labor is really at risk. Even so, plumbing has no potential for growth in developed countries above the rate of population growth. It's something you only care about when it's broken. The key to avoiding huge disruptions in the face of advancing technology is having new jobs for displaced workers. I don't see it.

There are plenty of jobs that will be automated in the next decade. What will those workers do?
oops, sorry. Had submitted the wrong article. Thanks for correcting it.
Actually, a lot of the unmanned military planes are used in the US (some are stationed down the highway from where I work). I just think society isn't ready for unmanned mass transport, but the military has some systemic advantages in being allowed to go that way.
I am curious to learn about this. Would you care to provide a link ? Is it something available only to Google Partners or everyone in general. A lookout on web for this doesn't fetch me anything relevant.
There's a big problem with fingerprint readers. If I steal your fingerprint then unlike a password you can't change it.
Capitalism and free markets.
> We are nearing the point when computers will be mentally equal, if not superior, to humans.

No we aren't. We are no closer now than we were 50 years ago. The hardware is faster, but the software has not changed. (And hardware is not getting faster anymore either.)
Incendiary language is basically what you're likely to wind up with when you discuss politics on the internet. Yes, even on sites like this one; vaksel isn't just some random guy who joined the site yesterday.

Which is why I keep harping about keeping these types of articles off this site.
The problem here is capacity. Whether minors are involved in a homicide or not, the legal system has typically said that people under the age of 18 lack the mental capacity to be involved in certain activities (i.e. contracts, voting rights, juvenile as opposed to adult offenses, etc.). The courts have made a distinction and thus believe that minors are different mentally. This is not dissimilar from an insanity defense against a murder charge. The courts have said that mental capacity matters, and minors are not equal to adults.

And that's where this article upsets me, because in the cases mentioned in this article and other "tried as adults" cases, the court makes an exception, which to me doesn't follow logic or the way the courts, and statutes have typically distinguished things.

Life sentences for children, especially when there isn't a homicide, just isn't right.
Why is this more of a violation of property rights than any other form of taxation?
" It's something you only care about when it's broken." - you do realize that plumbers are needed for new construction and renovation? Actually, given the needed improvements in infrastructure and new building projects, a lot of skilled labor is needed. I am really not seeing robot electricians, plumbers, etc. for many decades to come.

I am really unclear what you think unskilled labor is.
Already happening. Radar/IR vs. ECM vs. ECCM is an ongoing 'cobra vs. mongoose' co-evolution that won't settle in favor of either offense or defense.

US air superiority is a system that includes AWACS (enabling better situational awareness), GPS (enabling JDAM/SDB for example), tankers, and a constellation of factors other than "mano a mano" with bullets. UAVs are already an integral part of the mix.
I read it is being: How to save Apple from making the same mistakes that lead to it being in such a bad state in 1997.

The current iPhone vs Android battle could turn out to be a repeat of 1995. Only time will tell.
The health care system in the u.s. is immune to supply and demand. The doctors control the supply of doctors. Laws control supply of medications. Insurance companies control supply of procedures.

I agree with the post you are replying to. I think if people didn't have to worry about whether or not their health was at stake, they could make better decisions about the work they do. They'd be more productive and worry less and have more brain waves to devote to a better life.

People seem to complain a lot saying the government can't do things well. But they run our defense industry and it's the best in the world. They run the roads and we have plenty to drive on. They control the dams and those aren't breaking. Many are lasting way longer than they thought. Furthermore, plenty of governments around the world run their health care systems and they get better care for less money than Americans do.
I think the main difference here is that this is an across the boards increase in complexity of technology. Whereas during the Luddites time any bloke could become a worker in a textile mill. Now technology is increasingly moving in a direction that requires more intelligence and a larger skill set to operate in a useful way. The eventual problem will be that unless we evolve or engineer ourselves to become more than we are now, we will eventually hit a wall where we simply cannot comprehend beyond.
Oh, hey! I remember you.

I sold WB a lil' while ago... what are you up to these days?
Leaving aside whether people like the government to do things for them or not (there are many internet libertarians here who obviously do not), is requiring you to purchase something really that different from just taxing you and purchasing it for you? For instance, I am not happy about having purchased a share of a war in Iraq or numerous other things the government spends my money on.

Also, a point for consideration: you're pretty much required to own car insurance if you want to drive.
Taxation takes a portion of what you make while this imposes a burden to buy something even if you don't have anything. I don't see the argument for how any of this violates property rights, but it's different from taxation.

With taxation if you wanted to exclude yourself from a world of currency and live a "simpler life" without any form of modern money (and somehow found land to do it on, which I acknowledge is a tricky aspect) you could. With this new bill, for the first time ever, this way of life is closed for all Americans.

Or not really, since the penalty simply appears to be (I'm getting all my information third-hand.) that if you don't buy the mandated insurance you won't get care, which seems semi-reasonable enough to me. Not optimal, but hardly the violation of rights I was worried about.
And moreover, why should we have to pay for food? By God, I pay taxes. It seems so barbaric and 8th century to make people pay for the food they eat.
I would have to agree with that. I buy a lot of Macs, but Dell was always my goto PC / Windows server company. They seem to have lost there way and actually make it hard to buy stuff from them.
You can't. Your car insurer needs to be licensed in your home state.

And especially Massachusetts where car insurance is completely run by the government, and few regular insurance companies operate there. (Every plan by all companies costs exactly the same amount - AAA has a 5% discount for members, so the other companies are allowed to offer a discount too if you ask for it.)
Oops, I overlooked that part of the job. Still, fewer will be necessary, and I don't think many jobs fall into that category.

There are many cashiers, food service workers, and custodial workers today, and I don't think that kind of unskilled labor has much of a future.
You know what's sad? You made very intelligent points, but people who feel the way they do are just going to glaze over them or write them off. Personally, I'd like to see original poster address those points, but too often these things are more emotionally held views than really thought out. I doubt you'll get a reply, and I doubt the original commenter changes his mind.
I'm genuinely interested in the debate on Health Care Reform, but I will be the first to admit I have neither the political chops or core knowledge of the bill to really back up that interest with a solid argument. So instead, I'll try some questions.

1) I've read somewhere that there are some states, Alabama I believe was one, where there is basically a single dominant health insurance provider. As your post suggests, when few players rule, the market doesn't function properly. How is this scenario any different than what you proposed will happen under the HCR bill? If it does indeed exist already in the private sector, how do we go about putting end to these monopolies (I know that's the wrong word here, but it's the best I could come up with), without government regulation?

2) My brother works at a very small game studio based out of Florida. The company has maybe 20 people, at best, and because of this it has been impossible for the company to procure any decent rates on insurance for their employees because they do not have the leverage that a larger company would have. Why should he have to pay amounts in excess of several hundred percent more for insurance than he would have to pay at a larger company, for the same coverage? How can that be fixed without regulation?

3) You mention that without the high costs of private health care, there will not be enough funding to assist with advances in medicine. You suggest that cures and treatments will come at a slower pace as more people switch to the public option or as more and more private insurers fold up shop because they can't compete at the new, lower costs of health insurance. And yet, on the opposite hand, I continually run into, what I consider to be intelligent conversations, that would suggest that advances in medicine are actually held back by these large organizations. That it is more lucrative to treat diseases than it is to cure them. Is your stance that these discussions are merely brought on by conspiracy theorists and have little to no merit, or do you believe that there is some validity to them?

I realize the position I hold is probably apparent, but I really am interested in hearing your (or anyone else's) opinions on these items.
Because the majority of the voting population has no problem obtaining food.
The iPhone's main competitive advantage is that it is made by Apple. They are cannibals. Apple is willing to eat red delicious in order to develop the best product possible; they will constantly release upgrades, iterations, and new products to beat the previous one. Will Motorola do the same? The StarTac and Razr tell me no. Hopefully, they have changed.
Good industrial design drives the rest of the product. It provides a laser focused attention to detail that drag the software and hardware along with it.
A matrix of 12 most visited sites.
Society creates ways to compensate people for doing some form of work.

It would be great for society if we all reached the point where perhaps 5% of workers covered our basic human needs and the other 95% were paid to entertain and do academic/scientific research to further improve our standard of living.

That is my expectation for a bright future for humanity.
True, but the environment in Western Europe is very different from that of the rest of the world, and it's not clear that we can scale up the conditions of Western Europe to 6 billion people, at least with present tech, and especially if we're nearing peak oil.

If peak oil is true, I would predict quite the opposite.
Thanks for the recommendation. Due to this sample chapter and recently getting a Kindle, I now own the book... this is too easy :(

(Or not due to 'copyright issues' - WTF. Phew. The point about it being too easy still stands.)
You can get them by asking your account manager; it's not an automatic approval thing. If you don't have an AM, well, you're probably not big enough.

Also, I believe (but am not 100% sure, and certainly don't want to be quoted on) that:
1 - AFS pays very competitive rates;
2 - in order to get an XML feed, you will probably have to agree to exclusivity. This isn't all bad though as you often get a better rev share if you go exclusive. Typical periods are two years.
Ask HN: Advertising coupons for ad networks like Facebook?
Somewhere back, I heard someone mention that Facebook was giving away coupons to get free advertising. Does such a thing still exist for Facebook or other websites?
There are actually already some UAV AI competitions that accept student teams, though they're typically not competing in a dogfighting sense, more in a "follow a path, search for an object like x and take a picture of it", etc.
I really don't think the labor stats match your belief in regard to the skilled labor, and I the unskilled positions your are mentioning are being limited more by raises in minimum wage / economic conditions versus automation / demand.
You are correct in the "McCarran Ferguson Act" leaves health, auto, homeowners to the state regulators, but it sure seems to be easier to buy my car insurance from a national company then any attempt at health.

Good to know about Massachusetts, I had never heard of a state pulling that.
I think it'd be difficult to guarantee that someone great at talking in-depth on a technical topic (most technical speakers) could do so for a range of audiences, which could make selling the speakers difficult. Yet, I do see the potential in this kind of matchmaking, especially if you get some big names on board early.

I've only recently started doing 'proper' public speaking myself, after a varied history in acting, improvisation, coding and a failed attempt at student politics. It's a lot of fun, and my sort-of-plan is to get the rest of the year's gigs under my belt and then see if I feel confident/ready to charge, as I'm not being paid (just expenses covered) so far. To be honest, though, if I get a conference ticket and expenses out of it, that's fine for me right now..
I don't think we'll see the end of it any time soon. It's marketing. People have been told that more MP = better. It's really only professionals who know that there is much more depth to digital camera quality.
Top quality field hockey sticks
field hockey sticks of top quality from morrant
Stimulating Failure
How to write a rude Q&A
I wonder how different the voice recognition in Android 2.0 is from 1.6. Voice search was really crappy in 1.5, and I'm continuously surprised that it's able to read my voice accurately in 1.6. I'm only ever muttering two or three words for voice search, though.