maxlybbert

Joined 13 years ago

Karma
1,786
Submissions
1,025
Member since
Aug 23
View on Hacker News

Recent submissions

Comment · 2 months ago
Many wars are simply what you’d expect from violent leaders who realize they can order other people into combat for them. But some wars really are for the greater good. There are definitely militaries that I want to see win, and militaries that I want to see lose.

I realize I don’t have any code that would be of any use to any military. If I did, I don’t see how I could write a license to allow the use of my code by only people I agree with.

Comment · 2 months ago
I’m saying the US won’t implement anything like what other countries implement. I honestly think Philip Greenspun’s proposal ( https://philip.greenspun.com/politics/health-care-reform ) makes sense but has no chance of being implemented. Americans asking for some kind of single payer system are expecting something better than basic health care.

I remember when President Obama suggested “maybe you’re better off not getting the surgery but taking the painkiller” ( https://youtu.be/rin4h4cRs6Y ). That seemed to surprise many of the people who wanted a single payer option. He stopped suggesting that kind of cost-cutting that very quickly.

I also remember when a few people received anthrax in the mail. Every news story said that people who had any contact with the letter had received Cipro to avoid developing an infection. After a couple of weeks, the government actually announced that other (cheaper) antibiotics were effective against anthrax, but it was obvious that no company was going to hand their employees something other than Cipro.

Incidentally, my autistic adult son has Medicaid. I don’t think I’ve yet found a doctor who will accept it. Luckily he’s also on my health insurance.

Comment · 2 months ago
> 1. A number of other developed countries have UHC while also allowing a private system as well - what is unique about the US that other countries' existing approach couldn't work here?

Mainly, expectations. I understand that UHC in European countries doesn’t cover all the things Americans assume it does.

Japan apparently keeps costs down by not using cutting-edge drugs. That’s not going to happen in the US.

The US Congress just isn’t good at keeping costs down.

> 2. ... why wouldn't providers choose to stop serving medicare patients under the pre-2026 system, where giving up medicare patients would be a far smaller loss than in a world where everyone has medicare?

They absolutely do. Many providers don’t accept Medicare. Very few providers accept Medicaid. The payments just aren’t high enough.

Comment · 2 months ago
In the US, hard bread is often called hardtack. The National Park Service publishes a simple recipe: https://www.nps.gov/mana/learn/kidsyouth/hardtack-during-the... . Here's another one from Australia: https://herreshoff.org/2020/04/a-recipe-for-hardtack/ .

The only real question is which kind of flour to use. I'm sure it ought to be whole wheat or a blend of whole wheat and white.

Comment · 3 months ago
I've seen plenty of restaurants with a disclaimer that they have (often unspecified) allergens in the kitchen, and even if the allergen isn't in the ingredient list, it's possible they came in contact with anything in the restaurant. Most people wouldn't have a problem with peanut dust floating through the store, but apparently some people are sensitive enough that trace contamination like that can be a problem.
Comment · 3 months ago
Comment · 3 months ago
I think so.

Look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Year#Annunciation_Style :

“Despite the unification of the Scottish and English royal crowns with the accession of King James VI and I in 1603, and even the union of the kingdoms themselves in 1707, England continued to use Annunciation Style while Scotland used Modern Style. This led to the act being recorded at the time in England as 6 March 1706 (rather than 1707), because in England (unlike Scotland) it fell before the new year began (on 25 March).”

It apparently caused trouble for travelers (from the New Style Calendar Act https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Calendar_(New_Style)_Act_1750 ):

“WHEREAS the legal Supputation of the Year of our Lord in that Part of Great Britain called England, according to which the Year beginneth on the 25th Day of March, hath been found by Experience to be attended with divers Inconveniencies, not only as it differs from the Usage of neighbouring Nations, but also from the legal Method of Computation in that Part of Great Britain called Scotlond, and from the common Usage throughout the whole Kingdom, and thereby frequent Mistakes are occasioned in the Dates of Deeds, and other Writings, and Disputes arise therefrom.”

Although, I think “common usage” in that statement implies that it was common to just do what other countries did, except when filling out legal documents.

Comment · 3 months ago
This is an interesting detail to learn about history. However, like the article mentions near the end, the Gregorian calendar was adopted at different times in different countries. The Anglican Church didn’t trust the Catholics, so Great Britain adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1752 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calendar_(New_Style)_Act_1750 ). And they did their best to hide the fact that they were adopting a Catholic invention: it’s the “New Style Calendar” and they came up with a different way to choose the same date for Easter.

1752 is late enough that Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and others were born before that change.

I think that’s the reason that programming languages tend to adopt the proleptic Gregorian calendar and leave it up to the programmer to figure out when the calendar was adopted in the countries they care about.

Except that countries apparently had to answer various questions when they adopted the Gregorian calendar, and they didn’t all chose the same answers. Ideally, we’d have something like tzdb but for calendar adoption. But I guess the need doesn’t come up all that often.

Comment · 3 months ago
Comment · 3 months ago
I was actually thinking at a different level.

When I drive on the freeway, any time a police car gets behind me and turns on its lights, I have to stop. If I don't stop, I can ultimately be charged with evading arrest, or fleeing police, or some similar offense. I can be fined and even put in jail, even if a judge decides that the officer didn't actually have a valid reason to stop me.

If a police officer approaches me (when I'm not in a car) and tells me that I'm under arrest, I don't have the legal permission to leave. Even if I know I didn't break any laws. Even if I happen to know why the officer wants to arrest me and I know that it's not a valid reason for an arrest.

Why? Why does the law require me to obey without question, especially when honest mistakes that I might make are treated very differently from honest mistakes the trained officer might make? Fundamentally, because we have decided that the alternative is worse.

Do officers abuse their authority? Of course they do. But we've decided that toothless police departments aren't worth anything (and, in fact, lead to more vigilantism and crime). And we've decided that "self help" solutions (e.g., giving people the right to violently resist arrest if the officer is in the wrong, while punishing people who resist valid arrests) are worse.

Comment · 3 months ago
That’s a valid concern.

Of course, the example chosen for the article didn’t involve anybody abusing their authority. It involved police doing what I’d expect them to do. But I’ll acknowledge that if all of the relevant details were different, then I’d also be concerned.

Comment · 3 months ago
Yes, it is true that police have powers that can be abused, and police have abused them.

It’s also true that they have those powers because we’ve decided the alternative is worse. The example used in the article was a case where police did not obviously abuse their authority. If you want to get me worked up about police overreach, you’ll need a different example.

> I do not want to live in a world where random drones/cameras control my every move

How did the drone control anybody’s move in the example? It seems that the drone wasn’t even noticed.

Comment · 3 months ago
Police drive around in patrol cars. They don’t call judges every time they look at other cars. There may be problems with this system, but adding drones hasn’t created a new loophole.
Comment · 3 months ago
I don’t understand the problem. Police saw something they thought was suspicious, took a closer look, and then decided there was nothing illegal happening.

I don’t think there’s a constitutional right to know when you’re being tailed. Or to be notified every time a police officer does a double-take.

Comment · 3 months ago
This is a very common position. But I’ve never understood the argument that police should have to do some amount of busywork for things to be fair.

Warrants aren’t required so the police are sportsmanlike. Warrants are required because interacting with the police can be inconvenient or hellish, depending on the interaction.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton