Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | dnewms's commentslogin

There is another University of Michigan professor who created an Introduction to Computational Linear Algebra course: https://grizzle.robotics.umich.edu/education/rob101.html

with free textbook: https://grizzle.robotics.umich.edu/files/ROB_101_Textbook_W_...


Great point. The sharing economy destroyed an entire set of spaces like this... when hosting a couchsurfer, I was told that I could make a ton using Airbnb instead. That money wasn’t the point was lost on this guest — but thankfully not the many other world travelers I was able to share my local area with.

Airbnb or VBRO offers great experiences on their own, but introducing a transaction turns everyone into a service provider or customer, and brings a set of expectations to both.


Dan Ariely considered this distinction in his discussion of market vs. social transactions:

Described in: https://escherman.com/2009/04/09/social-norms-versus-market-...


Yeah, an herbicide like triclopyr breaks down quickly, but still can bioaccumulate in wildlife and humans need proper protection during application [1].

Also, glyphosate (RoundUp) is debated as far as safety... and unfortunately for Monsanto, they got too cozy with the EPA and trying to ghostwrite positive scientific studies that no matter the scientific evidence one way or another, a jury found them responsible for causing cancer in civil trials. [2]

[1] http://www.npic.orst.edu/factsheets/triclogen.pdf [2] https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2019/05/30/727914874/sa...


At least Norway does: "Norway makes annual payments to Brazil as part of a long-term billion-dollar program to curb the loss of Amazon rainforest to slow global warming."

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-norway-brazil-amazon-idUS...


Why doesn’t Norway stop making use of all that fossil fuel they sit on?


Because that's literally how they fund their entire society? Even with the super high taxes, it's not enough to cover the level of social spending they are trying to maintain. Not to mention that it's also going into a fund for all pensions. In that way, it's great that the government kept control over the fossil fuels and that the money from them at least serves the Norwegian people.


Right, so practical reasons and sovereignty trump environmental consequences. This standard should be applied for all countries.


Because this (or other) fuel is still necessary right now. The way they use the money also benefits the whole country. Cutting down the Amazon is not necessary and merely benefits a small number of farmers.


Also Norway is taking steps to moving away from an oil based economy.

The comparison is invalid. This isn’t about ending existing means of supporting Brazilian society. These are about new measures that will (a) damage the rain forests, (b) almost certainly negatively impact ordinary Brazilians, and only enrich a few well connected folks.

The idea that killing the goose kind of growth will help ordinary citizens has shown to be false time and again in nearly every other nation.


What about the rest of the world? Does Norway’s fossil fuel extraction do any good for the world?


What kind of question is that? What is your intention, I mean?


For more on this, check out the PBS Frontline on child slave labor in an Ohio egg farm: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/trafficked-in-americ...


For those without a technical background: https://news.engin.umich.edu/2017/12/new-quick-learning-neur...


For anecdotes: I've had a HDHP before ACA, started at about $45/mo now up to about $60/mo with an outrageously high $12.5k or so deductible.

I've had two different DPC, one about $45/mo, now with one about $30/mo.

Both combined are still less than I would pay in any marketplace.

It's nice to be able to just see your doctor without worrying what it might cost. A large list of simple procedures are covered, and tests cost next to nothing. It's a health subscription to an actual doctor who can be just as cost-conscious as you are while still incredibly knowledgable and invested in your health.


> Both combined are still less than I would pay in any marketplace.

That might be as cheap as you can get for your out-of-pocket costs in any US healthcare marketplace, but that's one of, if not the most expensive in the world.

Factoring in the externalities is impossible, so it's an unfair comparison, but going to a doctor in Sweden costs ~$10, specialists are $30, and ER visits are $50, and after you've paid ~$120 in a year, all other visits (eg major surgery) are covered. On top of that, overnight hospital stays are capped at $10/night.

It's great that there's a bit of a loophole in the system for people that can afford to have a $12.5k deductable, but it's not for everybody.


I pay 780$/mo for a plan with a $13k max out of pocket. Where on earth are you getting 45$ ?


UnitedHealthcare -- though my plan may have been grandfathered in to be acceptable under ACA.


What state and how old are you? That seems insanely cheap compared every plan I've seen (high deductible or otherwise).


<30 midwest


Is this health insurance purchased via your employer? If so, is your employer subsidizing it?

Double digit premiums sound ridiculous, even for a male in their 20s. As a data point, I'm a <30 male, never been to a doctor with no health issues that I can tell, and my HDHP premium is $310ish, last year it was $275ish, but that's using healthcare.gov so completely unsubsidized, and I have a deductible of $1,500/$2,500 and out of pocket max of $3,600/$6,550 for their tier 1/tier 2 providers, respectively (whatever that means).


Note that GP had a much higher deductible.


Nope - the last workplace-provided insurance I had was my parents.


Notice the 12.5k is the deductible. The max out of pocket is likely much higher.

Since it was grandfathered in it doesn't have to offer all the benefits of the ACA.

I'm not sure if a grandfathered plan can have a maximum payout, but if it does that would explain the low cost.

Years ago I had a plan like this, it was cheap because they'd only pay a maximum 100k per year.


That's exactly what it is, K-Cups of juice, and it's genius. People love throwing things away instead of cleaning.

And like K-Cups, Juicero has already created a system to lock out generic veggie bags past their patent with the barcode scan to check freshness.

The $700 might be worth it if you were able to use your own reusable veggie squash bag, in addition to their premixes. But, it seems like the smart machines themselves might be sold at-cost if they've built out a distribution network for expensive pouches.


$700 is selling them at cost? Seems terribly unlikely


> The $700 might be worth it if you were able to use your own reusable veggie squash bag

Just buy a Juicer - there are plenty on the market.

The point of this is so you don't have to peel the produce yourself, it comes nicely prepacked for you - for a modest extra fee of course.


It's more than not talking, though. It's extreme meditation. If you didn't have to worry about anything in your life for ten days, where to sleep, what to eat next, the next project, proposal, email, significant or insignificant others, where would your mind wander?

I don't think it's feel-good anything, and not claiming to be scientific. I think it's stressing the mind in a way that it's typically never stressed, resulting in outcomes that others have never experienced. And because of that, they want to share it -- as is human nature.


Since voices don't change until puberty -- any kid screaming sounds the same.

And in the vein of special individuals, there are little girls who love and hate insects, and little boys who love and hate insects. Perhaps a more original phrase or analogy would be better: I would scream like a Dryococelus australis being attacked by rats.


> Since voices don't change until puberty -- any kid screaming sounds the same.

Apparently you have not met any. They don't sound anything alike, except maybe as newborns.

> there are little girls who love and hate insects

He just said scream like a little girl, there was no connotation of girls hating or loving insects. Just a sound.


They don't sound anything alike

I don't know about that.

My 3.5yo daughter has a 4.5yo male best friend. When they're running about squealing, it's pretty hard to tell their squeals apart.


there was no connotation of girls hating or loving insects. Just a sound.

There was, however, the connotation that girls are prissy and easily scared.


Where? How? There is no such thing said anywhere - if you made such connection in your brain then well, it's your problem. It's a description of a sound, nothing more, nothing less.


You strike me as the kind of person who literally believes in everything a politician says, and is unaware of subtexts. If you think that all that people say is only the pure literal surface meaning of their words, than that is very much your problem, not mine.

Also, the trope is "run away, screaming like a little girl", not just "screaming like a little girl".


I think this is a general problem with us programmers - we read everything incredibly literally. If you want to read into subtext then please do, but I don't see it. Fortunately I am not interested in politics.


See my additional comment above in this thread.


so you say we can discriminate against children as long as they aren't girls?!


>>any kid screaming sounds the same.

So what is the problem then? If they sound the same, then what difference does it make if he said "scream like a little girl" or "scream like a little boy" or "scream as a child"?


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: