testpostpls

You can definitely talk about it. How else would people know not to talk about it? The behavior that the government penalizes is advocating action against the government.

But people don't talk about it. It's enforced socially. That's my point. You don't talk about Tiananmen Square, you don't gawk at Falun Gong protesters, etc. Even many Chinese expats act like this. It's just something people know not to do because they don't want to be seen as a bad person and lose friends, jobs, and so on.

That happens completely outside the government's influence.

Can you find me the law that says it is illegal to talk about Tiananmen Square in China? I'd love to read it.

What actually happens is that when you talk about it, you lose your job, etc. Rarely does the government step in. Which, and correct me if I'm wrong, sounds like what you're advocating as "free speech".

There’s no point for you to see. I asked a question: whether the original poster could see the political climate in Norway realistically scaling.

Maybe they’ve figured out something we in the US haven’t.

The US has 60x the population of Norway on 25x the land.

Honest question: given what you know about politics in Norway, do you personally believe Norway’s complexity reduction through agreement on common standards can scale to a country the size of the US?

Could 60 Norways mutually agree on common standards?

There is a separate high contrast mode under the accessibility settings.

I’ve yet to travel to a country of 330 million people or more with flawless public healthcare. Perhaps you could point me to one?

That really isn’t the truth though. What should be done?

I disagree. I think it’s important to take the time to develop a personally meaningful life philosophy. Too few do. None of us is facing starvation.

The city uses an expanded definition of homelessness that includes people who are "doubled-up" in the homes of family or friends [1]. The survey referenced in the source you've linked counts people dealing with LGBTQ-related issues that, while terrible, aren't what most people think of when they picture homelessness in SF.

The "man shooting heroin on the street" sorts of homeless folks are, in my limited experience volunteering, generally not from SF but some other part of CA.

[1]: http://hsh.sfgov.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/2017-SF-Poin...

It depends—when I was at one of the really visible companies, it wouldn’t have surprised me if as much as a third of the people I screened had lied on their resume. I’d ask folks to write functions to count the number of times the letter ‘a’ appears in a string, stuff like that. Did not need to compile or run.

I had a person break down and confess, and we spent the rest of the interview talking about how their codecademy lessons were going.

Your phone can just use its camera(s) to figure out where it is inside a car.

Yeah, price controls? AFAIK most affluent countries have some form of price controls in place.

The unhappiest people I know are the golddiggers. They cannot escape the feeling that they’re being taken advantage of. That the pie is so big anyways, and they deserve a little more, you know? And oh look, here comes somebody offering just a little more. What kind of sucker wouldn’t want to get paid what they’re really worth?

They’re unhappy because they let other people control their sense of self-worth.

Having that option makes folks anxious about using their mouse when it’s not plugged in.

It is obvious. People will leave wireless mice plugged in all the time out of superstition or worry. Apple’s way elegantly eliminates that possibility. Anybody who wants to plug in their wireless mouse may purchase another.

Heroin feels pretty great.

The problem is that is exactly the case. There are people who love doing heroin, shitting on cars, smoking meth, terrorizing tourists, and committing minor property crimes and acts of vandalism. It takes a certain amount of activism to enable that behavior. That activism is the opposite of apathy.

Some doctors are paid that little in Germany. Here’s an comparative analysis on 2008 data: average net outflows to physicians are higher, but it seems like US physicians may be receiving a substantially larger slice of the budgetary pie https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/full/10.1377/hlthaff.2010....

Germany saves money by paying doctors $70k/yr. There isn’t a clever, low-impact policy shift that’ll save a ton of money in the US. Something really big has to give.

Re photo: the article's photo appears to be a stock photo. https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/epileptology-u...

Historically on built-in iOS apps settings go in the Settings app. With that pattern in mind, it makes no sense to have settings in the app itself because the user would be looking in the Settings app.

Industry user fees? The FDA, while not perfect, has been pay to play for a while.

I owned a Volkswagen. Why wouldn’t regulatory capture be a thing everywhere?

> Wages are a small portion of the total cost of everything.

I think by “everything” you mean consumer packaged goods? There are a lot of other things people spend money on.

Life isn’t fair. People don’t want to catch grief for it. They don’t want to be “gone after.” Part of the draw of hiring from these pools is you’re less likely to get folks who have the hang ups you’ve displayed in your post.

The best candidates dig into product and market and get all the info they need from that.

Blue Cross Blue Shield buys for 100 million patients. How much bigger does it need to get to save money?

I don’t quite understand your point about govt-funded Xprize-like rewards—who is paying for failed research under such a regime? Is a govt-provided IP monopoly not itself an “Xprize-like reward?”

Confirmation bias? Other companies may solve you use case better with context-specific titles, e.g. “directly responsible individual on X.”

Assume the company succeeds. You’ll probably get screwed out of your current “2.3%” unless the founders create investor FOMO, which it sounds like they can’t.

I’d stay in touch with the founders.