anarchimedes

I provided links to the USDA report and it's findings. I provided the link to Lomborgs tweet and in it the referenced links to the findings. In it, he addresses the 10% reduction in emissions argument and show that it is cherry picking the available data. That to me has an element of alarmism in it.

"He has a history of being wrong" - if he does, I have not seen it. and I am open to changing my mind if there is evidence to the contrary - which I have asked you in good faith to provide.

Would you kindly provide evidence to the contrary and not just to what Bjorn has done but also the USDA?

And no, it is nothing like Fisher's contrarianism to the smoking issue. Both links acknowledged that the current global diet has an impact on CI, but tries to find the most likely size of the effect.

I ask because the science and evidence behind this stuff is complicated, and much of what is being said has a huge element of alarmism. I don't doubt that our current diets have impacts on CI, but I would like to see thoughtful analysis determining the effects. I'm sincerely asking this in good faith

I'm curious how the stated article jives with the following research by the USDA [0] into it's current resource and greenhouse emissions and the work done by Bjorn Lomberg and team that showed a modest 2% reduction in total CI globally [1] if the entire population switched to a vegetarian diet.

[0]https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDAARS/bulletins/2...

[1]https://twitter.com/BjornLomborg/status/1058333491623067648

Could you kindly expound on how the incentive example I described would be like a command economy? And how would that be different from the capital gains tax rates we have now ( in the sense the government providing an incentive for investment)?

With regards to: >We can't count on noblesse oblige to do it, and involving the state is how we involve democracy in the process.

I believe it's the democratic part that bothers me - as, and excuse me if this is a poor analogy, like 3 wolves an one sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

I don't want you to think that I am ignorant of the fact that we do need some level of economic leveling for a well functioning society. My concern is how to best achieve that while preserving an individual liberty.

Again, appreciate the response.

Thank you for the response - sincerely. I supposed it is unconventional.

I'm still struck by a few ideas. The first is that economic leveling needs to be done by force through the state. The second being that any new program needs to be funded by the wealthy - also by force of the state.

I would think using incentives would be the better approach? For example, let corporations repatriate overseas cash with a lower penalty and use that money to fund green R&D

Why should they pay more? I haven't seen data otherwise, and I would be happy to admit that I am wrong, but what additional use of public goods and services that are funded by taxes do people making $10M+ use more than other people at the rate described?

If their use of public goods and services are greater that people making less money, is that use at a rate that would justify taking 70% of their income? Sincerely curious....

I'm curios how this compares to what Bjorn Lomborg [1] (with a longer explanation [2]) and other researchers found that going completely vegetarian accounted for a modest decrease (-2%) in energy consumption and (-4%) carbon footprint [3].

I keep seeing articles like this one and wondering if collectively we are low on ideas of how to effectively tackle climate change when the focus turns to exaggerating the effects at the margins.

[1] https://twitter.com/BjornLomborg/status/1058336665788448770 [2] https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/meat-production... [3] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092180091...

I'm all for taking action against climate change, but the 10% number is just pure fear mongering. Robert Rhode at Berkely did an excellent job of showing what the true risks are here:

https://twitter.com/RARohde/status/1067375440661307393

As politicized as this climate change has become, I would hope to see more reasoned responses in the future - but given the current environment of discussion, I won't hold my breath.

(C'mon downvotes!) I thought the idea of paying your "fair share" was in relation to the services provided by the taxes paid. I can take an extreme example that I've tried to steel man to hold up this point: Bill Gates.

Does Bill Gates the man use more taxpayer provided military/healthcare/infrastructure.. than anyone else? Of those things that he does use more of, if he taxed by the volume of those services used (example: water/sewer) and therefore paying his fair share?

What difference does it make if her was born to rich parents? How does that make it right to make him pay more money?

I am asking respectfully and I sincerely hope that you do not take this as an attack.

edit: spelling

This is awesome! Does anyone know if this update will effect the sqldf package in R?

There is some relation between DHT and hair loss [1](Under Biological functions). Maybe it's possible to lower your DHT level to delay male pattern baldness?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrotestosterone

Thank you for the feedback.

I know Python was in consideration some time ago.

https://excel.uservoice.com/forums/304921-excel-for-windows-...

Will you be able to remove or add different widgets (FB/Uber/Maps) on the phone or are you locked with what is pre-loaded?

This is getting very close to what I want in a phone - a pared down smartphone that has the basic utilities for when I am away from a desktop/laptop without the social + internet distractions.

Paging Gwern? [1] [1] http://www.gwern.net/DNB-FAQ

I'm interested in the implementation of this, but do not have the technical background to begin. Would you have any go to resources for a beginner?

I like the dialogue between Hastie and Tibshirani in their statistical learning course from Stanford [1]. I found the accompanying ISL book and c-cran depositories helpful for when I wanted to go deeper beyond the lecture.

[1]https://lagunita.stanford.edu/courses/HumanitiesandScience/S...

It's amazing that you mention this as this was a similar method that I used to quit smoking. When I had the craving to smoke a cigarette, I took off for a sprint (I was younger with an outdoor job at the time!). It both interrupted the pattern, and associated the behavior with the pain of sprinting.

I would also be interested. LeanPub might also be a good shout.

If you have any insight into this, would you mind sharing?

And not everyone is secure enough in the "bread" either.

"An estimated 12.3 percent of American households were food insecure at least some time during the year in 2016, meaning they lacked access to enough food for an active, healthy life for all household members. That is essentially unchanged from 12.7 percent in 2015. The prevalence of very low food security also essentially unchanged, at 4.9 percent in 2016 and 5.0 percent in 2015." [1]

[1]https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/pub-details/?pubid=849...

I like the Tidyverse. My only complaint is that it presents another headache when moving from one language (R) to another (usually Python/SQL). Using the base R functions while integrating loops and functions lessens the fatigue of moving between R and Python.

Agreed. It was the original BB title. Updated.

I was thinking along the lines of the recent payoff for the data breach, the myriad of sexual harassment claims.. etc. Each of those represent a legal risk with a financial impact that, to someone ignorant about the VC space, would make me think twice about the going concern of the business.

Naive question: when does the executive and cultural behavior represent enough of a risk to be a tipping point for investors to completely pull their investment?

I second this! The value of HN is in its users and community. It amazes me how some very toxic subjects are actually reasonably (to a degree) discussed here.

I also really like that the user base, for the most part, requires statements to be backed up by facts and sources. That is something I don't see often enough on the web.

edit: spelling

Could you use T-Mobile's DIGITS and apply that to the watch?

I believe a lot of the carriers lease their towers from companies like crown castle.

http://www.crowncastle.com/

I assume that the "$270/mo" may include any phone financing costs. To your point the $120 per month/4 lines is $30, which could very well be the additional financing costs for 4 iPhones. I'd be curious to see if the total monthly charges drop even further on the plan without taxes and fees.

edit: rdudek below also makes a good point about the insurance costs.