Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 146 posts

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#101

Post by vidarh »

meowface wrote: post #57
Avshalom wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feels like the central controversy is that Sanborn has to auction anything off for medical reasons.

True. The central problem described in the article is that he has cancer and doesn't want to go bankrupt from the medical bills. I'm not a socialist and am broadly pro-capitalism, but for decades I've held a firm belief that healthcare should have a public option and people should have the ability to get high-quality medical care for $0, no matter how realistic that would be.

The father of universal healthcare by way of a state supported insurance system was Bismarck, who was far right by modern standards, and argued for it based on Christian morality, not socialism, though he was "accused" of being a "state socialist" over it, and embraced that label because it fit well with his struggle to limit the growing appeal of the actual socialists.

In European history, a lot of welfare reforms subsequently came down to Christian democrats (typically centre right to right by European standards) or cooperation between them and socialists and social democrats.

This just makes the US situation weirder - by the time socialists and trade unions gained much real power in Europe, universal healthcare was mostly already uncontroversial and settled or close to it as a result of the support of Christian groups on the right, with a couple of exceptions such as the UK, where the right wing rhetoric leading up to the NHS got pretty extreme.

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#102

Post by vidarh »

buckle8017 wrote: post #68
meowface wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True. The central problem described in the article is that he has cancer and doesn't want to go bankrupt from the medical bills. I'm not a socialist and am broadly pro-capitalism, but for decades I've held a firm belief that healthcare should have a public option and people should have the ability to get high-quality medical care for $0, no matter how realistic that would be.

The simple reality is that advanced medical care is expensive. Access to advanced medical care can either by gated by one person's wealth or by the average wealth of many people. At the end of the day though, someone is paying and the only way to actually cost reduce is too have worse treatment.

In most of the world, private treatment is far cheaper than equivalent private treatments in the US. To the point where even to a high cost location like London, it can be cheaper to fly to London from the US to have things done at a high end private hospital.

Medicare+Medicaid in the US costs about the same person taxpayer as NHS costs per UK taxpayer. The NHS could be better, but we get universal care for a similar price than what leaves most Americans still needing private care to have any cover at all.

That strongly suggests that the US could at a minimum do far better at providing cost effective care - both public and private.

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#103

Post by vidarh »

dingnuts wrote: post #69
meowface wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True. The central problem described in the article is that he has cancer and doesn't want to go bankrupt from the medical bills. I'm not a socialist and am broadly pro-capitalism, but for decades I've held a firm belief that healthcare should have a public option and people should have the ability to get high-quality medical care for $0, no matter how realistic that would be.

there wouldn't be any way to compete with tax pre-paid $0 point of sale health care, so there would be no option. the term "public option" is a weasel word. there would be no private option because nobody is going to choose to pay out of pocket in addition to their taxes that already pay for care. advocate for whatever but use honest terms. you're advocating for a single payer system and there's no evading that.

The UK has both universal healthcare and private options that are far cheaper than the US.

Most universal healthcare systems coexist with private options paid separately. Some are provided by private healthcare providers, and then too tend to coexist with privately paid services.

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#104

Post by vidarh »

carlob wrote: post #90
riffraff wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fwiw, a lot of European healthcare has both a public and private option. You may pick the private options because they are "better" in some ways (e.g. more modern clinics, shorter waiting times, or sometimes just better care) which still leaves some wealth gap, but usually means no one goes bankrupt to cure cancer.

Usually the medical part of it all is strictly worse in the private sector (at least in my country) because the public system has a pretty strict competitive exam to get in, whereas profit driven private companies hire the cheapest doctor they can get. Not everybody realizes that and they often fall for the single room in the hospital. Shorter waiting times is definitely a thing though, especially for non life threat…

In the UK a large proportion of the doctors are the same. Sometimes even using NHS operating theatres, or with NHS trusts running the clinics, as they are allowed to run for profit services to supplement their budgets...

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#105

Post by koolba »

hiddencost wrote: post #74
koolba wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> True. The central problem described in the article is that he has cancer and doesn't want to go bankrupt from the medical bills. What bills? He’s 79 so he’d have been on Medicare for the past 14 years. Sure there’s the Medicare premiums, but that’s peanuts.

You're deeply confused about the average American experience.

No, I’m deeply confused why he would have massive medical bills when he’s covered by Medicare. Medicare covers 80% of bills and Medigap plans cover the other 20%. I think some recent changes obviate their need too by capping the annual out of pocket to (I think) $2,000.

I don’t think he has any such bills. From the article:

> He has said he intends to use the proceeds to help manage medical expenses for possible health crises, and to fund programs for people with disabilities.

He doesn’t need the money to pay for some treatments for himself. He wants the money to give it away to others.

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#106

Post by KingMob »

buckle8017 wrote: post #68
meowface wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True. The central problem described in the article is that he has cancer and doesn't want to go bankrupt from the medical bills. I'm not a socialist and am broadly pro-capitalism, but for decades I've held a firm belief that healthcare should have a public option and people should have the ability to get high-quality medical care for $0, no matter how realistic that would be.

The simple reality is that advanced medical care is expensive. Access to advanced medical care can either by gated by one person's wealth or by the average wealth of many people. At the end of the day though, someone is paying and the only way to actually cost reduce is too have worse treatment.

> the only way to actually cost reduce is too have worse treatment.

This is absolutely incorrect in the American system. Insurance companies introduce massive amounts of overhead for little benefit. Every study comparing them to Medicare finds that Medicare is way more efficient.

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#107

Post by KingMob »

ProjectArcturis wrote: post #49

It seems to me that if a puzzle has gone unsolved for 35 years despite many very skilled people trying hard to solve it... It is not actually a good puzzle? Like, here - here's a code that no one will ever solve: ITIWKSMNDIWKD WJSIKWMWMSONQ Turn that into a sculpture and put it outside the CIA.

Pretty sure I cracked it:

B-E-S-U-R-E-T-O-D-R-I-N-K Y-O-U-R-O-V-A-L-T-I-N-E

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#108

Post by olelele »

lostlogin wrote: post #96
dyauspitr wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about maximum out of pocket maximums? All expenses are capped at like $15k per year right?

> capped at like $15k per year right? That’s a lot of money for most retirees.

for a majority of ppl on earth even

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#109

Post by znkr »

vidarh wrote: post #101
meowface wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True. The central problem described in the article is that he has cancer and doesn't want to go bankrupt from the medical bills. I'm not a socialist and am broadly pro-capitalism, but for decades I've held a firm belief that healthcare should have a public option and people should have the ability to get high-quality medical care for $0, no matter how realistic that would be.

The father of universal healthcare by way of a state supported insurance system was Bismarck, who was far right by modern standards, and argued for it based on Christian morality, not socialism, though he was "accused" of being a "state socialist" over it, and embraced that label because it fit well with his struggle to limit the growing appeal of the actual socialists. In European history, a lot of welfare reforms s…

Bismarck was afraid of workers unionizing and transformed a working healthcare system owned by workers into a state owned one. That move significantly reduced the utility of worker unions, which was the goal behind it.

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#110

Post by wredcoll »

createaccount99 wrote: post #94
buckle8017 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simple reality is that advanced medical care is expensive. Access to advanced medical care can either by gated by one person's wealth or by the average wealth of many people. At the end of the day though, someone is paying and the only way to actually cost reduce is too have worse treatment.

The actual reason is that you'll have people going to see the doctor because their cheek's itchy (they're lonely, or clueless).

This is such a minor concern in the grand scheme of things but the solution is empowering nurses and doctors.
Post reply on HN