nohuck13

You've been around HN a long time. You know that responding to tone is frowned upon here. If there are statements in those links you think were twisted just say how.

"ALSO EVERY AIRPORT SHOULD HAVE MOCK EMERGENCY AIRPLANE DOORS FOR PEOPLE TO TRY OUT."

I would pay money for this in the safety amusement park, but in real life way more people would get hurt operating the fake one at the airport than we'd help in real emergencies. Plane crashes where the emergency exit gets operated are so rare they effectively don't happen.

A yep that's a critical piece of information.

For context, "In the 2025 incoming class, this group constitutes roughly one-eighth of our entire entering cohort."

The UCSD report shows some of the questions they asked incoming students.

39% got this right:

    Round the number 374518 to the nearest 100 
    

    Find 13/16 ÷ 2. 
    

    If a=-2 and b=-3, evaluate ab² - a/b 

Thanks, I didn't know that was a thing.

Still it's 3 to 4 cruise ships a month according to that article and, while probably hugely dirty, I would be surprised if the asthma rates of kids in affluent Greenwich and Blackheath are among "the highest in London" because of this.

Levels of asthma in London are highest among kids in the vacinity of the docks where cruise and container ships and moor.

Wait, what? There are no container docks in London. The nearest container port serving London is Tilbury, near the coast. Occasionally a single cruise ship moors in the Pool of London against the HMS Belfast, but that's happening only one this month, for 12 hours on April 7, according to the Tower Bridge lift schedule: https://www.towerbridge.org.uk/lift-times

The base rate is 1.5 to 2.5 cases per 10,000 people per year, according to the article.

This is a press release, though. Whether or not Ofcom is independent, their press release writers are not independent, they are part of Ofcom's PR team, a team that absolutely exists.

Agree, that's why it's a valuable service to make it hard to have skeletons.

You seem to think I'm arguing that they are insider trading. I'm not arguing that!

It's also an activist short seller. They make money by publishing negative research reports on companies they've shorted. It's a valuable service.

The disclaimer amounts to "we're not insider trading and we really believe this stuff" many different ways. Insider trading is illegal so they are scrupulously careful to stay away from MNPI (and want you to know that). Really believing this stuff is important because if they turn out to be wrong, it's sort of ok to be honestly wrong, it's not okay to be knowingly wrong and put out the report anyway to manipulate the stock.

And so paragraphs and paragraphs of

"Reports are based on generally available information, field research, inferences and deductions"

We're not insider trading

"Our opinions are held in good faith, and we have based them upon publicly available facts and evidence"

We really believe this stuff, also we're really not insider trading.

"We conducted research and analysis based on public information in a manner that any person could have done if they had been interested in doing so."

Did we mention we're not insider trading?

Can you elaborate? What is a tax strategy driven small business?

You're saying that if you as an employer find out that someone you hired lied to induce you to hire them, you should be legally required to continue employing them, as some kind of karmic balancing thing?

If lying about you employment history is a protected activity, then if a pre-employment background check catches you lying about your employment history, and you say "no I am salting," that also is protection from having your offer rescinded?

"The government of Vietnam says that up to four million people in Vietnam were exposed to the defoliant, and as many as three million people have suffered illness because of Agent Orange" according to linked Wikipedia article.

Same. I didn't know this was something web pages could collect. Apparently these days only Chrome on Android still supports it.

Found this helpful comment about the background and timeline https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38417192

The battery API was rolled out by all the major browsers between 2012 and 2014 as a way to let web pages avoid doing compute-intensive stuff on low battery, but it was pretty much immediately used for fingerprinting as the battery level number was so precise that if you hit two web pages at the same time, the battery level was as good as a cookie. Firefox and Safari/Webkit disabled it in 2016 but Chrome just capped the precision at two digits.

It's obvious what he meant and he was right.

Too late to edit but 1 in 3.5 should have been 1 in 7 which is double 1 in 14, thanks adammarples. :/

Bah. Thank you. You are right. It's too late to edit.

Also that doesn't mean that 15-20% of people of parenting age are disabled. It might skew elderly.

I'm sure you're right that bad things tend to be invisible to me, the article even has an example of children trying to keep their shopping a secret.

But 1 in 3.5... idk, if you assume households with kids have a couple of kids, that's getting pretty close to saying the median UK household with a 9 to 18 year old has a 50+ hour caring situation. I don't see that being invisible.

Not immediately clear if "caring for family members" includes older children caring for younger children, but that would certainly bring up the numbers.

Suspect this is basically right as well.

As a parent of a disabled child I sometimes feel alone and overwhelmed even with a loving spouse and a well paid tech job. I can't imagine the experience as a teenaged solo carer with no options.

Without quibbling with this basic directional correctness, the numbers in the article are bunk.

"In the United Kingdom, about a million young people under 18 years old spend more than 50 hours a week caring for family members"

There are 14 million people under 18 in the UK [1]. If 1 million under-18s spend 50+ hours caring for family members, and only a few thousand tragic cases are under 9 (as the article claims) then the claim is that something like 1 in 3.5 children aged 9 to 18 spends 50+ hours caring for family members?

[1] https://data.unicef.org/how-many/how-many-children-under-18-...

No, of the 420 suspected chickenpox cases, 20 (4.7%) had herpes.

157 had chicken pox, 47 had enterovirus, and 194 were negative for all four viruses tested.

You mean they didn't have go to stores staffed by real people in London or Delhi or Hong Kong?

"It’s the same story, really: It is a software engineer’s job to build quality software. A scientists job is to solve problems."

That's not the distinction. Good software engineers solve problems. That's what the paycheck is for. The distinction is whether code has to be maintained.

It's the scientist's job to solve a specific problem at a specific time. Who cares if the metaphorical wood rots next winter, the paper's been published.

It's _often_ the software engineer's job to build things that deliver business value over years, evolving and expanding requirements, in a development team, without grinding to a halt under the weight of accumulated complexity.

"Quality" software engineering is just heuristics for keeping the pace of change high over time without breaking things.

Eh, hard disagree.

When I was in high school in a US suburb, if you wanted a pair of jeans, you had to take an hour out of your day, get in your polluting car, drive to the mall, go to Old Navy or someplace staffed by real human beings at all times (and there were thousands of these places stores selling the same live cookie-cutter experience staffed by live people).

Now, the postal service does more work and more clothes get destroyed but how many person-hours does it take for society to bring you a pair of jeans? How many pollution-units? Surely less than it took when everyone had to drive to central place and do a transaction with a person?

"goals: ... replace the second page with a scanned copy ...after it was signed by the examiners... reproducibly."

Oh man, purist side quests like this are exactly how I would procrastinate a philosophy dissertation. But building a complex process for _reproducibly_ handling the once-in-a-lifetime event of accepting your dissertation examiners' signatures is taking it to a whole other level.

"This is true even in places where the speed limit is 85 mph, and the slower end of the flow of traffic is 95 mph."

Where do you drive where the speed limit is 85 mph?

He is citing Harvard University Extension School on his LinkedIn.

He says he regretted implying that he dropped out of Harvard College.

"To get a sense of the language the practitioners use, and how they reason about things."

Isn't the article assuming you already are a practitioner?