rwissmann

Getting timely, accurate data from the insurance companies on this intuitively feels hard. What are the guarantees around those APIs? There are so many path-dependent factors, like outstanding claims, readjudication of old claims, or "revenue optimization" games on the backend.

Happy to connect if it would be helpful for you!

How do you handle the interaction with insurance plan information like accrued deductible? Certainly aims to guarantee the patient responsibility, right?

Love to see innovation in this space!

The challenge of not knowing what other services might end up being done seems daunting from a UX perspective. Hopefully you guys can find a solution.

(I was early on the Data team at Oscar Health, so have more than my fair share of experience with thorny health care pricing data.)

You are actually largely in agreement with the author of the article. It just takes a a while to get there (and criticizes those conclusions from a slightly different angle).

You can get to big numbers on global capital markets, for sure. I was wondering whether you a consulting/VC-style estimate given how specific the statements was: "Smart Markets hold the potential to eliminate that loss" of "at least a trillion dollars annually".

How do you think about it? Let's say we expect half the benefit to come from equities.

>> 0.5T / 125 T = 0.004

>> Smart Markets would need to raise portfolio returns by an average of .4% (net of trading costs) annually.

Exciting implementation of a really cool concept.

> Today's market structure costs institutional investors (and by extension households) at least a trillion dollars annually (and Smart Markets hold the potential to eliminate that loss).

How does one get to this estimate? That is ~5% of US GDP. Everything else was easy to follow - this seemed high, at least intuitively.

ORMs are pretty terrible for anything to do with analytics or data science, for example.

Stalin's military lacked in organization, tactics and strategy due to the purges and was surprised by Operation Barbarossa's timeline, but it was well armed and well equipped. Case in point being the Soviet tank forces, which were much more numerous and advanced than German intelligence had suspected.

The population's ability to bear sacrifices and Stalin's willingness - matched by Hitler's - to sacrifice millions of civilians alongside the soldiers were instrumental, but it certainly was the military - rather than civilian resistance - that ultimately broke the German war machine.

Fairly sure that is indeed a typo, in particular given how F+ is introduced a few lines above.

There has been no large scale war between major powers since WWII, let alone between the world's leading superpowers.

If you want to enact change, you have to use whatever means is appropriate.

In a democratic country that is supposed to uphold human rights, public acts such as these can have a strong positive impact.

In an autocratic country such as china, the impact would be zero. Often, limited engagement can have a better impact.

I agree with everything but the last paragraph.

As much as I would like it to be different, we are still at least one or two decades away from an effective European deterrent against Russian aggression. If only because of our inability to coordinate decisive responses and our unwillingness to pool military resources in a European army, rather than split them into national militaries with incredibly amounts of redundancy and ineffectiveness.

A countries sovereignty has exactly zero to do with whether or not the are foreign military bases on their soil...

They likely already record and store all the necessary data (and more) in order to build out people's listener profiles.

Pools of money is not really a relevant metric. They collect all the subscription premiums and pay a portion of them out according to their contractual agreements.

Pay(artist_i) = 0.7 * sum_j [ premium(viever_j) * ratio_ji ]

is not that much harder to do.

I agree that auditing would be more complicated, but usually one does selective audits anyway. I doubt this would be a show stopper.

The confusion on the receivers' side would increase massively though. As someone else has pointed out, there would be a lot less correlation between #plays and payout.

(To be clear, I have no real opinion on whether this would be a better schema.)

Yes, the article really missed this point.

One could also mentioned some sort of tiered payout scheme or a non-linear minimum after a certain amount of plays plus a percentage above that. Likely something that Spotify will experiment with over the years.

Germany had anemic economic growth about 15-20 years ago. After hard political fighting these sort of reforms were enacted.

Competition is global. Greece is not just not competitive with Germany, but also with China, the US, Japan, Australia, ... . That is the real problem.