scottkduncan

Wind works at night. :)

I'm totally with you on priority boarding - I don't get the appeal at all.

All I am saying is that the market responded to our collective preferences for airlines to compete on cost -- and we benefited from this in some ways because costs have fallen over time. It's likely that the $50 you might pay for economy plus would put you even on real terms with tickets/legroom from 10-20 years ago.

It's all in how you evaluate whether it is a horrible product. I consider economy class airfare a commodity and evaluate it on getting me to my destination safely and on time. Delays are obviously still an issue, and I do believe airlines should treat passengers as well as possible (prompt re-booking, compensation, hotel rooms, etc.) when their travel plans have been disrupted due to delays.

I also don't believe there was a historical glory day of air travel. It used to be far more expensive, with far fewer routes. International travel was MUCH more expensive, again with fewer routes. Fatal crashes were more frequent. We all used to complain about how bad airline food was...then they took it away and we complained about that too.

Or Kayak, where you can filter flights by layover time to make sure you don't get one that is too long or too short.

There are also a few great things about modern air travel. For one, it has gotten considerably cheaper (and thus more accessible to a broad spectrum of consumers) over time. It's also amazingly safe for travel in a metal tube at 550 MPH 35,000 feet above the earth.

There are market-based products that would address many of your concerns if you are willing to pay. Prefer a larger seat or priority boarding? Try economy plus, which will also decrease the likelihood of sitting next to a baby and may get you more attentive service. The reality though is that collectively we prefer lower prices and choose flights almost exclusively by this metric, but then gripe about all the ways air travel could be better.

One study on the cost of airfare over time: https://www.aei.org/publication/the-cost-of-air-travel-in-th...

Initial seismic reports are pretty underwhelming for a fusion weapon, so maintaining some skepticism on whether this is a significant new capability is probably merited until we get some radiation data.

I watched (and commented on) this happening to an extremely similar article six months ago:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9322540

This is how to bring about a tipping point - get men to recognize and call out sexism. While this kind of behavior is sadly quite commonplace, attitudes and behaviors can change quite quickly. Just think how much more common it was ten years ago to have "gay" as a widespread pejorative - I almost never hear it now. I think the rapid reduction came from straight people recognizing the offense it caused and starting to call out people who used it.

And we never may hear the stories of those who were actually the greatest spies.

A lot goes back to the EDS acquisition, which seemed doomed almost from the start. A poorly planned acquisition + longstanding internal issues will almost inevitably get you to this kind of outcome.

Admittedly based on anecdotes, the public defenders I have met are highly-educated, committed, creative professionals who typically choose this profession because they see the same structural forces but believe they can make a difference at the individual level. These are not second-tier individuals. If we give them the tools, resources, and support they need to actually do their job then there is no doubt in mind this would be a positive, albeit small, step in the right direction.

I agree this issue is part of the larger trend you're talking about, but we absolutely can start to address the imbalance of resource allocation in the criminal justice system without solving the underlying economic disparities, which are a generational challenge. With growing awareness of inequalities throughout this system, articles like this highlight some simple changes we could make to make the system a bit less unfair. In this case, it's simply a few more lawyers and investigators.

Thanks for this: http://poly-graph.co/vocabulary.html I've gotten hours of conversation out of it.

Also so happy to see that "You Got Me" by The Roots got 6 million streams in 2014. That is the definition of a future timeless track.

Was thinking the same thing, but also for a current cover to catch on there is likely something about the original that still resonates.

One nitpick: "Iris" by Goo Goo Dolls was ineligible for the Billboard Hot 100 for a long time due to their rules that songs had to be sold as a "single" to be counted on that chart. It was #1 in terms of radio airplay for a huge chunk of 1998, so it's not really accurate to say it didn't chart highly at the time.

I haven't considered the economics of salons, but not sure they would have the same low variable costs that allow Classpass to succeed in fitness. I certainly wish the team (and all the other YC companies) the best though considering the guts and determination it takes to give it a shot, and you are correct that I am decidedly not in their target market so I may be missing something about the idea that is gold.

"Vive — Classpass for hair blowouts"

I'm trying to think of a better "X for Y" startup parody, but am failing.

Walking too and from work in DC, the tables are turned. As a man, I'm sweating through a shirt under a couple layers of wool while women have been able to adjust their wardrobes to the weather and look decidedly less miserable. We will need a culture change in to relax dress codes for men in the summer months in DC, but it seems like a natural trend given that environmental concerns, workplace satisfaction, etc., should all be nudging us to slightly warmer office temperatures and relaxed dress codes for men.

Fascinating to just watch this drop down and off the front page of HN despite all the upvotes...

So...insider trading then?

Selling Facebook's stock short would indeed let you bet against the valuation of the Facebook platform, Instagram, and WhatsApp. Keep in mind that markets may be able to stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent.

Timestamp this and come back in three years because we are basically sitting on the tipping point of some clean energy sources (not the one in this article!) becoming cost competitive. Solar and wind are at grid parity in an increasing number of places (Deutsche Bank says 47 of 50 states by 2016) and innovations in financing will be able to pick up the slack if/when subsidies expire.

Not to mention that it's not just the U.S. and China competing in a vacuum. China's real economic threat is on the low-end. As they've boomed and their labor has become more expensive, many foreign companies are re-offshoring elsewhere.

Also let's keep in mind that we have yet to see all the effects of the unprecendented demographic experiment of the one-child policy. They will be dealing with an aging population on a scale never seen before.

Finally, the U.S. has a lot going for it when compared with its developed peers - growing population, attractive to immigrants, and a culture of entrepreneurialism and risk-taking (which Sam seems to think is in decline...not sure I see the same thing).

When China's elites stop wanting to send their children to U.S. universities and find ways to get their capital off the mainland, then I'll worry.

"Gallup defines a good job as 30+ hours per week for an organization that provides a regular paycheck."

Perhaps this definition hasn't caught up with the increase in freelancing and self-employment. Underemployment, particularly among lower skilled workers, surely is an issue in the U.S. but Gallup's approach could be undercounting some newer types of "good" jobs.

Of course the innovation curve has been steep on broadband over the last fifteen years when compared with legacies like electricity and water. It could have been much better though, and many other developed countries have faster broadband speeds at lower prices than we do here in the United States, perhaps owing to some combination of different regulations or more competition.

The difference between the two examples you cited and the one from the article is that both condos and education are investments that are likely to have a positive ROI, whereas renting a couch and taking on debt for other day-to-day necessities will not.

Most gun deaths in the U.S. are not accidents, they are suicides. Then homicides, then accidents.

And I'm not proposing banning guns, I'm challenging the commonly-held narrative that guns "keep us safe." The statistics are unequivocal that they do not.

What a ridiculous article. Yes, in the context of rapidly declining crime rates of all kinds, gun homicides are down.

And yet it's the specter of omnipresent crime that many Americans hold up as the reason we need guns to keep us safe, ignoring all the statistics that show overall gun deaths and gun suicides are far higher in the U.S. than any other developed country.

Keep in mind that fatal car accidents still far outweigh homicides and that sexual assault - whether you are in suburbs or the cities - are far more likely to be perpetrated by acquaintances than strangers lurking in alleys.

Or you know, not allowing more consolidation in the cable industry.

Not that this is the best place to hash out a buy vs. rent argument (the answer of course is, it depends), but there are loads of uncertainties associated with buying. How high will my property taxes go? Will the market where I am go up or down? What will my future maintenance costs be? Will I have to pick up and move to another city unexpectedly? Variability in all of those affects what kind of return you get on buying, if at all.

Then there are the transaction and opportunity costs associated with buying...locking up a down payment, closing costs, broker costs. I'm sure I'll buy in the future when I'm at a different point lifewise, but for now renting works just fine.