6502nerdface

A difference in maintenance costs is not necessarily a consequence of disinvestment... it could simply be that lower performing schools are more likely to be urban, and in urban areas everything related to the construction and maintenance of buildings, whether old or new, is more expensive (not to mention admin salaries, etc.). Or it could be that plus what you say for a double wammy at some schools. I'm just brainstorming reasonable seeming hypotheses that you could imagine trying to rule out with the right dataset.

I wonder if another factor could be:

- in higher performing schools, parents fund a number expenses directly through a very active PTA, so those expenses don't show up in the school's official spending per pupil, while

- at lower performing schools with less active and more impoverished PTAs, those same expenses must be funded by school budgets, driving up their official per-pupil spending.

GP was probably referring to the closed rulesets: https://www.snort.org/products

I considered "they" but worried that it could be parsed as coreferential with matrix12's "they," so I used he/she which, because it is singular, refers unambiguously to the previous speaker, matrix12 himself/herself.

He/she means the Soviet astronomers called themselves cosmonomers. Like astronauts and cosmonauts, har har.

Yeah it depends whether you count all of the infant deaths in the average.

> This process was short-circuited immediately for those of us who went into tech. It’s the new gold rush; you really can go west and seek your fortune. Remarkable times.

> it’s completely unfair to those still trapped in that life who weren’t lucky enough to adore computers.

I must confess that after being picked on throughout middle school and high school for being a nerd, I totally reveled in this observation well into my young adulthood. Revenge of the nerds, baby... the gentle computer geeks are the ones getting rich and living well in fabulous places, while the mean, popular kids never left the hometown and are worse off than their parents' generation.

Eventually I realized that this was still thinking like a kid.

And today it's Generally Not Used Except by Middle Aged Computer Scientists.

This plotline sounds familiar to me, too. I hope someone will remember the author... are you thinking golden age SF, 60s/70s?

We need to begin with a more modest interim goal: http://www.pavethehudson.org/

Best accompanied by https://masterbootrecord.bandcamp.com/album/c-defrag

...or selling a live feed of airline KPI estimates to quantitative hedge funds and market research companies?

Especially for purposes of monetizing YouTube videos.

Hey man it's that or Thunderdome.

A while ago, Two Sigma Investments open-sourced its own curses-based internal tool for pretty printing tabular data: https://github.com/twosigma/ngrid

Also "proof reading" and "100 proof whisky".

> The best solution would be if the US introduced mandatory passports or other forms of ID cards with smartcard capability, similar to the German Personalausweis. [...] This would entirely kill ID fraud at the source.

So, does Germany not have ID fraud anymore?

This makes me appreciate the tough spot that Apple is in:

> both the UK and the EU are moving forward on bills that mandate online service companies proactively look for and report CSAM. Indeed, I wouldn’t be surprised if this were the most important factor behind Apple’s move: the company doesn’t want to give up on end-to-end encryption — and likely wants to expand it — which leaves on-device scanning as the only way to satisfy governments not (just) in China but also the West.

I wonder how the recovery of stolen artworks plays out with insurance. If a museum's (or ultimate owner's) insurance company pays out for the theft, and then a decade later the works are recovered, does the museum (or owner) have to return funds to the insurance company? What if the museum is not in a financial position to do so... could they be forced, ironically, to sell the recovered art?

I guess someone could argue that it only costs $150 because of the ads. Windows 95 cost well over twice that when it was launched (inflation adjusted). Maybe in the same way that airfares are way cheaper than they were in the 90s, but with much crappier included service.

TFA blames "big pharma's stranglehold" for high insulin prices, but interestingly the cheapinsulin.org explanation [1] seems to be much more about "big insurance", with pharma companies basically forced to kow-tow if they want their products to be covered.

[1] https://cheapinsulin.org/high-insulin-prices

What's remarkable is that archive.org apparently embeds some kind of full-on Winamp emulator for demonstrating each skin.

In the spirit of sharing related work, there was another Show HN post about 7 months ago for ESQLate, which seems similar: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22073037

I think vim became so popular because its only real competitor is Generally Not Used Except by Middle Aged Computer Scientists. ;)

My understanding is that in Dowling v. United States, the Supreme Court specifically ruled that the very section of US code to which you link does not mean that copyright infringement is theft:

> Since the statutorily defined property rights of a copyright holder have a character distinct from the possessory interest of the owner of simple "goods, wares, [or] merchandise," interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The infringer of a copyright does not assume physical control over the copyright nor wholly deprive its owner of its use. Infringement implicates a more complex set of property interests than does run-of-the-mill theft, conversion, or fraud.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowling_v._United_States_(19...

Well, the "law" is more than what's written in statute; you have to merge that with case law. My understanding is that in Dowling v. United States, the Supreme Court specifically ruled that copyright infringement is not theft (specifically in reference to the section of US code that you link to, no less):

> Since the statutorily defined property rights of a copyright holder have a character distinct from the possessory interest of the owner of simple "goods, wares, [or] merchandise," interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The infringer of a copyright does not assume physical control over the copyright nor wholly deprive its owner of its use. Infringement implicates a more complex set of property interests than does run-of-the-mill theft, conversion, or fraud.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowling_v._United_States_(19...

Twelve years later, is there still no accepted explanation of how they form?

It appears to be a reply to this 2003 paper in the same journal:

> Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma related to gravitational challenge: systematic review of randomised controlled trials [1]

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC300808/

I wouldn't even call it intrinsic value because it's not like you can convert bitcoins back into the energy used to produce them.

> For the future you should say "piqued my interest".

Classic example of a common eggcorn. More details at https://eggcorns.lascribe.net/english/86/peak/