Live data from Hacker News

Silicon Valley misreads science fiction and undermines democracy

techcrunch.com

221–230 of 294 posts

Re: Silicon Valley misreads science fiction and undermines democracy

#221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more about making a fair assessment of whether servicing a market via private or public enterprises is more or less efficient. What you mention is a comparison between different markets, not a fair comparison of the same market run either publicly or privately. Health care insurance companies definitely "tax" you for their inefficiencies (through higher costs) and they are definitely something you "need to do bu…

Health insurance is so regulated and so intertwined with public policy aims, that ostensibly private health care companies are themselves essentially an arm of the government. Indeed, the fact that I "have to do business with" them is itself a consequence of particularly-complicated government regulation. The American health insurance system is one of the most unpleasant (sets of) bureaucracies I personally have to d…

> I have changed jobs a lot recently which entails losing and then regaining employer-benefit insurance

COBRA is always an option when you leave a job and don't have another one lined up that will give you another insurance plan without a gap.

Yes, it's annoying to have to make the switch in general to a new employer's plan, since your existing slate of doctors might not be covered by your new plan, deductibles reset, and you have to navigate a new-to-you bureaucracy.

> I wish I could just pay for ordinary health care in a way completely unrelated to my job and that my job had nothing to do with

You can, you just aren't going to like the price tag. ACA marketplace plans are open to everyone, even if your employer offers health insurance. You can always decline the latter and sign up for your own plan. Depending on where you live, you might be able to get a barebones plan for as low as $350/mo, but in some markets your cheapest option could be hundreds of dollars more. And that's going to be a HMO-type plan with a high deductible, so you'll be paying out of pocket to the tune of thousands of dollars for anything other than preventative care, and your choice of providers will be limited. If you want something similar to what an established tech company offers (for example), you'll be paying north of $1k/mo in most situations.

(Source: our COBRA just ran out a couple months ago, we don't have jobs that offer health insurance, and I went down this rabbit hole and spent hours researching options.)

> I don't have a grand theory of how best to reform the entire American health insurance system, but I'm in favor of doing so

I'm with you there. What we have sucks. We (or our employers, which we end up paying for indirectly) pay much more for care than people in other developed nations with socialized medicine, and our outcomes are not meaningfully better, or at least not anywhere near better enough to justify the added cost.

> more medical procedures paid for out of pocket at point of use by ordinary people - which is something I try to do right now anyway when I can

That's good that you're able to, but in the absence of an insurance system, and no state-supported subsidy, healthcare would be something only a relatively privileged few would be able to afford in the US.

While our private insurance system does cause inefficiencies that raise the price of care, eliminating it won't solve enough of the cost problem to matter.

I don't think there are better options than some sort of single-payer, government-subsidized healthcare system. Those systems do of course have their flaws (some of them quite significant), but they tend to provide care to everyone more or less equally, with generally good outcomes, and completely avoid the problem of people facing a choice between foregoing needed care and bankruptcy.

Re: Silicon Valley misreads science fiction and undermines democracy

#222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One issue with private, for-profit organizations is their major focus is “creating shareholder value”, which is apparently the modern way of saying “making money”. That, along with competition (if applicable, see below), drives them towards minimizing costs, increasing efficiency, and innovating. Government has the major focus of taking money, and largely spending it arbitrarily. It’s inarguable that the US Federal G…

> That, along with competition (if applicable, see below), drives them towards minimizing costs, increasing efficiency, and innovating. Highly debatable. Not making a profit on paper (or moving it to low tax-environments) is a great way to dodge paying taxes. Innovation is a side effect of competition, not of profit-seeking. Plenty of examples of oligopolies and monopolies where innovation ground to a halt in favor o…

Also, whether an organization (private or public) is bloated and inefficient is often only a reference to what you think the goal of the organization is.

If the goal of the USPS was to turn a profit, then serving rural addresses is inefficient and the jobs and infrastructure to do so is bloat. Luckily that’s not the goal of the USPS.

I hesitate to mention Mamdani in this forum but it seems like he has done a lot to make NYC’s government “more efficient” in many ways. But also many people disagree on who that government should primarily serve.

I feel that a lot of government spending on roads is inefficient and would be better spent on transit systems. Many people disagree with my values tho.

Re: Silicon Valley misreads science fiction and undermines democracy

#223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've seen a lot of bloat, corruption, & massive inefficiency [in government]. To what extent is this due to the public nature of the organisations and to what extent is it just the size of them? Are private organisations of similar sizes free from such bloat, corruption and inefficiency? I feel like people often give "businesses" a pass on this. Government projects that are over budget, especially IT-related ones a…

One issue with private, for-profit organizations is their major focus is “creating shareholder value”, which is apparently the modern way of saying “making money”. That, along with competition (if applicable, see below), drives them towards minimizing costs, increasing efficiency, and innovating. Government has the major focus of taking money, and largely spending it arbitrarily. It’s inarguable that the US Federal G…

Often "minimizing costs" for a for-profit organization means providing worse services to their customers, though.

> would you characterize Amazon as bloated, corrupt, and inefficient, despite being an effective monopoly?

It's funny you should bring this up in the context of healthcare. Amazon acquired One Medical a few years ago. Within no more a year, One Medical got so much worse. Harder to book appointments, wait times increasing, and care team not responding to in-app messages as quickly. (And sometimes being significantly less helpful than they used to be; e.g. "you don't need a recommendation or a referral for a general surgeon since you're on a PPO; just look through UCSF Health's directory and pick one". And this, after I specifically asked for a recommendation, twice. Not to mention most of UCSF's departments will turn you away without a referral, regardless of what kind of insurance you have.)

So I don't know if Amazon is bloated, corrupt, or inefficient, but Amazon acquiring what used to be a genuinely useful medical group made it much, much worse, and I assume that was all in the name of "minimizing costs".

Re: Silicon Valley misreads science fiction and undermines democracy

#224
post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One issue with private, for-profit organizations is their major focus is “creating shareholder value”, which is apparently the modern way of saying “making money”. That, along with competition (if applicable, see below), drives them towards minimizing costs, increasing efficiency, and innovating. Government has the major focus of taking money, and largely spending it arbitrarily. It’s inarguable that the US Federal G…

Stop voting for politicians who keep starting pointless unwinnable wars and you can cut the military budget in half. Boom, 10% of the expenses gone, and $500B less of a budget deficit. Tax some billionaires and it'll be net-positive in no time.

No kidding. Eliminating the federal deficit isn't particularly difficult in mathematical terms; the political will just isn't there, and both Democrats and Republicans can blame the other party when they're in power for out of control spending.

(At least the Democrats seem to be more open to actually taxing to make up for shortfalls, unlike Republicans.)

Re: Silicon Valley misreads science fiction and undermines democracy

#225
post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No learning linear systems without learning how to do linear approximation of systems in a mostly non-linear world. That's why Common Core trains kids on estimation from Grade 2. Instead of adding 12 + 23 = 35, you add 10 + 20 = 30 to get a number close to the right answer. This plants the idea "I can simplified numbers to get the answer if I don't need the last digit, which lets me solve problems faster". Which ge…

It annoys me, though, that there's a prescribed method of estimation, which is hard to remember. I always used to get the "wrong" answer because I picked easier-to-add approximations, even though my estimates were generally both faster and closer. (To use your example, I'd have estimated 35 or 36: the sum of two small numbers, like 2 and 3, is normally about 5; and this sum is a little bit less than (1 + 2)×12 = 3×12…

Yes, teaching and assessment of estimation can get quite dreadful. Wish I'd saved a video I saw years ago, intended as an exemplar of best practices in early primary, where it was clear neither teacher nor students had a clue, all the effort was around attempted signalling of the expected but misguided answers, and everyone was collaborating to pretend that understanding had occurred. Recording a class can be hard, but it was wild.

Re: Silicon Valley misreads science fiction and undermines democracy

#226
post #136
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn’t help that a lot of philosophy is actually bullshit.

Well “a lot” in volume sure, but that feels unnecessarily (maybe ignorantly) dismissive of the core corpus of the field. Find me any field in which there isn’t “a lot” of BS.

There's a lot of BS in most fields. The problem with philosophy is that it has no criterion for separating the wheat from the chaff. All other fields have some kind of external forcing function. In science, its experimental data. In the arts, it's the ability to produce novelty or exhibit skill or attract an audience. In philosophy there is no external forcing function. The only thing that makes a great philosopher is other philosophers saying they are great philosophers.

There are definitely some non-BS philosophers, like Dan Dennett and Tim Maudlin. But really they are more like scientists than philosophers. In Maudlin's case, he's really a physicist, he just happens to work in a philosophy department.

Re: Silicon Valley misreads science fiction and undermines democracy

#227
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn’t help that a lot of philosophy is actually bullshit.

It really depends on what you mean by philosophy. Academic philosophy? Ancient philosophy? Pop philosophy? Self-help content? For a list of topics that aren't bullshit, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is a good starting point. https://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html

Well, yeah, obviously. I didn't say that all philosophy is BS, only that a lot of it is, including a lot of what is included in SEP. But as a source for making the field accessible, SEP is excellent.

Re: Silicon Valley misreads science fiction and undermines democracy

#228
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn’t help that a lot of philosophy is actually bullshit.

mind defending that? I suspect that opinion would only come from one who took philosophy 101 and stopped there. If all you took was philosophy 101, this sounds a lot more reasonable and runs right into the point made by the pos you just responded to

How would you expect me to defend it? It's my opinion. I could give you a long list of things in philosophy that I consider BS, but what good would that do? Do you really doubt that I could provide such a list? The most likely outcome of that exercise would be for you to invoke the no-true-scotsman fallacy and say, "Oh, of course those things are bullshit, but that's not real philosophy." And the fact that I can make that prediction with confidence is my defense.

If you really want my list, since this is HN, I'll start with Ayn Rand and the Austrian school. You can read this if you like:

https://blog.rongarret.info/2013/03/murray-rothbard-was-idio...

Oh, and since this is HN, I'll also invoke an argument from authority and cite:

https://paulgraham.com/philosophy.html

Re: Silicon Valley misreads science fiction and undermines democracy

#229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And there it is, posted on X. BTW, if I owned X, I would also not allow pictures of mutilated people or sexual content. The previous incarnation of Twitter did not allow that either, but did censor right wing content and anything that disagreed with Fauci covid policy.

[flagged]

We've banned this account.

Re: Silicon Valley misreads science fiction and undermines democracy

#230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same with D1 NCAAF athletes. They’re getting millions starting at age 18 from NIL. There’s just no way that’s healthy even if we all agree NIL was the morally correct path forward.

The true morally correct path would have been to take big money out of college sports (not to mention high school sport) entirely. Of course this is now essentially impossible without what I imagine will be extensive rioting countrywide.

How? Charge stadium ticket prices and jerseys at cost?
Post reply on HN