HN user
I actually agree with you on this. I think those robots are going to be a huge danger for society and everyone (not only children).
But nonetheless I was pointing out that using the "Think of the children" as an argument is a push to emotions rather than a more rational thinking.
Ah yes, Think of the children! [1]
taking kids from parents should almost never happen. Every family should be able to raise their kids as they wish.
I can only see a couple cases of clear abuse where this should happen.
But intelligence should NEVER be a reason to take kids from parents.
This is so dystopian. Next step is to take your kids if you don't have the right opinions or political views?
I had exactly the same experience. I was in a public school full of assholes and teachers that couldn't care less about any bullying taking place. Those few years were probably the worse years of my life.
I grew significantly and became a different person when I was moved to a different school.
I still think it taught me a lot about the world and how people really are. I really lost a lot of faith in humanity in those few years and still see the world as cynical in which all people are in it for themselves.
Did it make me stronger? Maybe. But also I wish I could see the world more positively as a lot of people that have been shielded from those experiences seem to do.
Underrated comment because I have seen exactly the same thing. Us as parents don't have as much nurture on our kids as we would like to think.
the issue is that your Tesla cannot be "too far off" as you seem to indicate. it needs to be right absolutely every single time.
One successful ride is easy. 10 successful rides is still easy.
100k successful rides without a serious incident? Way more difficult.
And that's why those anecdotal reports over a couple ride mean absolutely nothing
Tesla is not competition to Waymo.
There are 10 other companies that are currently testing without a driver. Those are competition.
Tesla so far is a gimmick of self-driving with a safety driver that takes over once in a while. That's where Waymo was more than 5 years ago.
By extending your statement you are essentially saying that the credentialed experts have a monopoly on knowledge in their fields? As anyone else reading a paper probably think he understands but actually doesn't? What a weird take.
The knowledge is out there. Yes there are a ton of bogus papers and a ton of bad research. Not everyone got the critical knowledge to figure this out but I also don't think this is only reserved to the "experts". They are also subject to groupthink and other political pressure to think a specific way.
At the end of the day, do your best own research and work with your "expert" to agree on a solution.
Pushing back on people reading paper is an anti-intellectual take (to use the same wording as another poster below).
sorry but your take seems to be the anti-intellectual here.
You seem to think that the educated class got a monopoly on knowledge on that field, yet after that claim to know that experts are wrong all the time. The anti-intellectual take is to give up on trying to understand as much as you can in a field because you don't have the right credentials to do so. Yes, medical papers are not that complicated to read.
That doesn't make you more competent than your doctor. But it probably makes you a better advocate for yourself than your doctor is.
My point is: Don't discount yourself reading papers and doing your own research. Then work with your "credentialed experts" to come to an agreement. Don't ever think that the "experts" got your best interest at heart.
Believing my "research" is better than my specialist's education is a path back to the dark ages.
Doing your research should not be in competition with your specialist's education. It should be complementary as yet another source of information.
I'm not saying experts are wrong but I also don't think they are particularly always right. They are human and they have strong groupthink. They will agree and disagree with some takes based on their personal or political beliefs.
Sorry but strong disagree here.
I have had a lot of Spinal and sleep issues. I have read almost all new literature on this niche subject and I have brought to my spine doctor some new therapy and treatments they had literally no idea about. Those treatments have changed my life.
As an engineer I read a lot of deep technical paper as my day job. Medical papers are comparatively relatively simple. The most complex part being usually the statistical data analysis.
We have pushed to a whole generation of people that only the "experts" can have opinion on some fields. I encourage everyone to read papers and have opinions on some of those subjects.
We are in 2025. That type of gatekeeping needs to go away. AI if anything, is going to really help with this as well.
My experience as well. SSRI and other similar drugs for anxiety remove a strong signal to your brain and bring other issues or signal.
But the issue is that nobody wants to really look at the cause. We are all trying to treat the symptoms with those quick-fix pills.
The cause is deep in our society. We are too stressed, lost touch with each others, work on meaningless jobs (or downright negative jobs for society.. if you work at Meta or TikTok, yes your job is in fact a negative for society).
I have also been on a journey for the last 5 years on working on myself and bringing those things back in my life and I have been feeling better than ever: - A lot of outdoor time and exercise. - Take the time to build a community of friends that genuinely care for each other - Work on some projects that you feel help humanity and each other (or volunteer). - Build things you are proud of. Build a legacy
All of those removed almost all anxiety and depression. It is not an easy journey but I'm shocked how few people even consider making those changes
The main issue I see is that the anxiety pill is a way to treat the symptoms, not the cause.
Do you think that there is a way to treat the underlying cause and not the symptoms?
Not that I agree or disagree with the underlying claim but a call to "credentialism" to dismiss someone's opinion is not as strong in 2025 as you think it is.
The last few years have been a proof that even the "experts" are following strong political or personal ideology.
Also we don't live in the 18th century anymore. A lot of knowledge (especially around medicine) is open to the world. People can read papers, understand research etc.
Weirdly enough the US is actually amazing for dentistry.
With any insurance you get 2 cleanings every year fully included and most routine fillings are almost completely covered. Easy to find appointments everywhere
My experience in Europe has been that it is super difficult to schedule anything. Waiting time of multiple months for new patients.
Hmm sure, but there must similarly be things that are denied right?
I lived in both systems. In a single payer system, the state essentially decide what is allowed and what is not. And with the state as a single payer, they also go back and forth on price with the hospitals.
It still is a better system overall but there is no places where you can just spend as much as you want on healthcare without some type of centralized supervision.
> if you rent then you're already indirectly paying for that.
Quick note: People repeat this non stop ("The cost is passed down to the renter"). This has been proven false many times. The cost to the landlord is mostly irrelevant to the renter. Rent is set by offer and demand in a particular market. Just try to increase your place 1000$ above market rates because "Maintenance and taxes", your renters will move. So it obviously doesn't work like this.
is it really cash-flowing $1-2k a month after you account for repairs, taxes, fees, realtor fees, closing fees, bad tenants (which will always eventually happen) and all the time you spent managing this?
The tax advantage are really marginal since 2016.
160k$ invested in the SP500 gives you on average 16k$ a year compounding fully liquid with zero management.
Yes the place should appreciate at 3% a year historically. But even that doesn't make up for it.
I think you make good points.
The main difference that struck me between the EU and living in the US is that by default EU citizens will assume good intent. I see European protests as interest groups that need to show that they are still important once in a while.
In the US, people will assume bad intent by default for politicians. This will lead to a ton more push back and scrutiny
I'm a European citizen and I disagree.
Compared to the US and a lot of places in the world, Europeans generally care less and have more trust in their government. There is a general sense that elected officials generally do what is best for the people. This leads to less scrutiny and push back in general. Definitely way less than in the US.
You are right.
As a European that lived in the US for a long time, a big difference is that there is also a lot of "European Conformism". You don't want to be seen as the weird one protesting things if nobody else does it. It's just easier to go with the flow and accept things.
EU citizens have way too much trust in their government and elected officials. A lot of people here just assume officials act in the interest of the population and most people don't really check or care to understand in detail those type of proposals.
And unlike the US, very few people are going to push back based on "freedom" and "my rights" which is unfortunate in my opinion. This lack of pushback is why those types of proposal even come to be.
The Dutch being frugal is well-documented and well-known [1]. Are you suggesting we should just pretend it is not the case and act as if we all thought exactly the same way? This article is only relevant because it takes place in that exact culture.
[1] https://www.moneyonthemind.org/post/how-the-dutch-handle-mon...
Agreed.
This article seem to be centered on Dutch culture (Which I have discovered the hard way is one of the most stingy frugal culture you could ever imagine).
Again, the back of the napkin math you do doesn't work. Educate yourself and search online or on this thread. A ton of people agree with me and the math once you dig deep.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/upshot/buy-rent-cal...
We don't need to agree. You seem happy to think you came ahead financially, good for you.
it's a complicated calculation based on a lot of factors. Not only mortgage/rent difference, hence the calculators that are available.
Sure but almost never close to zero. And how much are you really going to save when they go from 6.5% to 4.5% in 10 years? While most of the interests will already be paid?
Hell, most people will not even want to live in the same place in 10 years.
Honestly this sounds like yet another argument from a realtor to push prices irrationally to all time high.
Generally you are right. VHCOL (Seattle, SF Bay Area), HCOL (California,...) and MCOL areas are better for renting and LCOL areas are better for buying.
There are two factors really:
- Rent to Buy ratio (or as you put it, rent compared to the mortgage)
- Speculation on house price growth.
Exactly. Real estate is highly emotional and irrational.
I personally know a ton of people that are keeping a house and renting it out at a loss (because of the market rate), because they cannot seem to emotionally agree to sell that house. This happens way more with real estate than with anything else. Half of the time they don't even realize they are losing money, the other half of the time they don't want to know they are losing money.
So take a bad deal now with the promise of maybe refinancing in 10 years. If that even ever happens again. And most of the interests are being paid upfront.