123e1daAdfafsdf

Hindsight. Juicero is so obviously a stupid failure now that we know it is. We can't even imagine a world where it wasn't stupid.

Now try to remember a tech/company you thought was stupid that became a massive success. For me, I remember thinking wifi was stupid -- I was a power user, laptops were grossly underpowered circa 1998. Why would anyone need wireless internet on a desktop?

I keep that story in mind because it keeps me humble about hindsight bias.

Does Murdoch (an Australian national) own Fox News still?

Points can fluctuate by dictate from the redemption group. If you follow the points guy blog, you'll see they transfer "points" back into "dollars" by looking at redemption rates. Sometimes, you redeem 1 point for $0.01 in goods; some programs, the effective rate is $0.025. TPG's schtick is to help you navigate that. I imagine those conversion values fluctuate.

Otherwise, I'd imagine one thing preventing this is the lack of transferability in a lot of points programs. Plus, the limited acceptable partners where you can spend them.

I'm sure there are more -- just wanted to start the discussion.

Microsoft's PowerBI product is trying to push out a natural language query processor like in your examples. Have you had a chance to try it out yet?

my 2 cents, you're either going to have to be so successful on your own that people are trying to pry you away from your own goal... or you're going to have to hit it lucky.

Unless you've found yourself "a week late" on dozens of opportunities, I'd just keep trying until you get a reasonable sample size.

Seemed pretty complete to me. This reads a radio broadcast ships identifier from an attached SDR and looks up the cargo manifest in an API.

In one of the recent books I read, I've heard that Newton didn't want his material accessible, as it would keep out the dilettantes. He wanted only a select few to understand a lot of what he wrote, which is part of the reason they're difficult.

(I think it was either Gleick's book on Information Theory, or the Drunkard's Walk, but it could have been any of the half dozen books I've been absorbed into lately)

"In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable." -- Eisenhower

It almost certainly is true. Doctors in the US overprescribe opioids like you wouldn't believe. They do this as a result of Purdue Pharma's super expensive marketing campaign designed to stamp out "opiphobia" -- a term they used for doctors unwilling to write out opiate scripts.

As a side benefit, they re-engineered the "slow release" version of the tablet. Except it didn't release evenly over 12 hours, like it said. Instead, it led to withdrawals towards the end of the period, which taught a user's brain the ups and downs of withdrawal -> high -> withdrawal. IE, it conditioned them to become addicted.

I run mostly direct response campaigns, so conversion focused. Take it for what it's worth.

I would never trust the numbers reported in any ad interface to accurately reflect reality. But, why should I care if it reflects objective reality? I'm only trying to get X conversions for $Y.

For me, building the "fraud" or poor accounting into my economic model is how you play the game. I don't care if FB sends me 500 visits at $1 each, with 20% bots. I just care that I spent $500, for $conversion_result.

People who do branding campaigns may feel differently because they're reporting on how many humans saw their message. I don't think that's a big deal, but I also think branding campaigns are a waste of money anyhow.

Military does cut spouses checks, so there is direct financial incentive to remain married (at least on paper).

Long deployments / remote spousing also leave room for other arrangements. As long as the checks come in, why not remain married in name only?

Suicide is an especially sensitive death classification, and I would assume even moreso in a place like China. What is your opinion on the validity of these data?

Or that you don't know which tabs will be useful until you open them, and your qualification process is multi-pass.

I open a tab as an (internal) signifier that "this might be interesting". I will browse it, and cull the ones that dont fit my interest/mood/timescope.

For me, it reduces cognitive load. I don't keep in mind all tabs that I have open -- that's why I keep them open! To forget about them.

Bookmarks are mentally for things I want to save and reuse. But I'll probably open 40 HN sourced articles (from the main page and comments) per day, and continually cycle/review them for interest/effort throughout the day.

Doesn't a lazy-loaded tab solve this problem?

To me, the problem is that bookmarks are "while browsing, go to a different component that loads the browser tab with what I want".

Tabs, OTOH, are a placeholder for things that I want to keep just 1 step closer.

Saying it that way, I don't think it makes rational sense. But 1 cognitive step to a page instead of two is huge for me.