jacalata

Wow, really? That seems unusual - how are you defining "team"? I use it to describe a group of about 7-10 people and I have definitely seen many of them with no women.

Do explain.

Sorry, I tend not to read hn in places I can watch a video. Maybe I'll remember to check it later.

False. If you believe that the best candidates are spread across genders/races and your current hiring practices are overlooking those not in a specific set, affirmative action policies would be raising the bar. You call it lowering the bar because you believe that all the best candidates are already being hired under the current system.

That's not even survivorship bias, that's a single anecdote. By that logic, you can't even argue that being blind is a disadvantage because you are blind and you were successful.

They do? Can you name some examples?

That's not an explanation, and that's clearly someone trying to show off their work that happens to be on your kid (aka use them as an ad), not a friend trying to post a picture of the two of you at a party.

The phrase "doesn't blindly accept x" usually has an implication that the subject is aware of x, so you seem to be totally avoiding the argument being made that Taleb seems unaware of work done on the topics he writes about.

How long does a battery last without a way to recharge it?

Banks saying your mortgage or credit cards or student loan is in default before the city is recovered enough for you to earn if a paycheck again.

It would be lying to say the police "will" tell the judge anything the kid says. That's why they use "can".

It's the same argument. Someone created a system and I'm just doing my assigned part to keep it going without having to decide if it's a good system or not == just following orders.

And then we'll be CA for Cascadia, the newest Canadian province!

My theory is that you are never even going to ask an interesting question if you are going to remain determinedly ignorant of all the questions that have previously been asked and studied.

I don't think this is intrinsically true - a lot of people just don't personally know anyone who desperately needs help. Is it really overall better to be 100% efficient at getting a rich private school a new telescope instead of being 50% efficient at getting people with no safe drinking water a means of access/production of safe drinking water?

Already said in this thread, but to make sure you see it:

> The American Red Cross and the International Committee of the Red Cross are independent organizations, with very different reputations.

What about them? Does org mode handle them better/worse than other formats?

"It looks fine when you use the right viewing tools" is not a plus for a plaintext system

No, they need to please everyone who chooses to see it which means they need to be categorisable before viewing so people can knowledgeably choose not to see it.

Edit: my first response is all too detailed. The broad effect will be that employers aren't encouraged to provide health insurance, and people trying to buy coverage individually may be completely unable to do so because the combination of "no individual mandate" and "no denial for pre-existing conditions" will lead to insurance companies dying and/or premiums being raised astronomically. Or they'll bring back rejections for pre-existing conditions and then if you ever get sick you'll be actually refused insurance after that.

---my original answer:

Here's one example: If the current bill passes, every health insurance plan that offers coverage for elective abortions will stop being eligible for subsidies on December 31. Every plan in California is required to include this coverage, so effectively all subsidies for individually purchased plans in California will end this year. Another: most federal funding to Planned Parenthood will be banned, leading to the closure of almost all their facilities. About 1 million Californians visited Planned Parenthood last year, perhaps you or your partner were among them (more likely if you are lower income). Or perhaps you weren't, but any medical care you needed was better because your doctor wasn't also trying to meet the needs of all those people who did use Planned Parenthood.

Some links which cover these in more detail: http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-sac-tax-credits-abort..., https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2017/03/05/if-feds-strip-planned-p..., http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2017/09/graham-cassid...

What functionality are you looking for exactly?

Because all they care about is that people are given the opportunity? Your question is a complete non sequiter.

It's a little difficult to explain without actually knowing about you. And it's true that if you're not American/don't now or ever intend to live in the US, it probably doesn't affect you.

> What a person did or did not benefit for is up for debate -- even North Korea provides basics --

What

This doesn't assume they'll take a 5 year vacation at all. It's the difference between deciding to become an artist because you know you'll never worry about money, and deciding to study accounting so you can eventually have an accounting job you don't care about that will support your evening art practice.

Kayak, Expedia, booking directly with a hotel...

That's developers boycotting the language, not users boycotting developers of the language.

> Users should simply boycott such user hostile developers and languages

I await with interest your newsletter to "the internet" on how to boycott JavaScript.

I agree that Debian is so different to npm as to make any comparison irrelevant, but you should direct that at the comment which introduced the comparisons, not one that pointed out ways it doesn't work to compare them.

I don't think I have a copy since userscripts died, but on cursory inspection this Reddit script looks like it does similar things - http://userscripts-mirror.org/scripts/review/170091