Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | mrobot's comments login

medicare.gov has an estimator in its plan comparisons. You put in your prescription drugs and it tells you how much it will cost for the year for different part D (drug coverage) or part C (medicare advantage + prescription drug coverage) plans.

Do no use it. It's always wrong. It can completely mess up your whole year. I once picked the cheapest advantage plan based on that and it was completely incorrect, i ended up paying outrageous prices.

You have to actually look up what each plan says in its terms (what tier is my drug and how much do i pay for that tier) and calculate a cost for the year. You can find negotiated prices for the pharmacy / company pairing at q1medicare.com. Or you can call the sales department of the different advantage or part D plans.


Does the paywall on the archive page mean we cannot archive theintercept? : https://archive.is/Lqfyr


Unsetting 'max-height' on `#u-s-military-makes-first-confirmed-openai-purchase-for-war-fighting-forces` reveals the rest of the article for me, so it's there, just hidden.


I was confused because the reference counting in the "Why Koka" part (section 2) of the book [1] seemed mismatched, so i looked it up in their reference counting TR [2]. It turns out it uses a seemingly novel approach to reference counting where any function you pass a reference to is responsible for decrementing and possibly freeing that reference. If you need to pass a reference to two functions you have to dup it once.

This makes it possible for fold to free all the Cons cells as it is mapping over it. The reuse analysis is cool, too, with in-place updates of structures that won't be referenced again.

[1] https://koka-lang.github.io/koka/doc/book.html [2] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/perceus... (see section 2.2)


I'm wondering how private models will diverge from public ones. Specifically for large "private" datasets like those of the NSA, but also for those for private personal use.

For the NSA and other agencies, i am guessing in the relative freedom from public oversight they enjoy that they will develop an unrestricted large model which is not worried about copyright -- can anyone think of why this might not be the case? It is interesting to think about the power dynamic between the users of such a model and the public. Also interesting to think about the benefits of simply being an employee of one of these agencies (or maybe just he government in general) will have on your personal experience in life. I do recall articles elucidating that at the NSA, there were few restrictions on employee usage of data and there were/are many instances of employees abusing surveillance data toward effect in their personal life. I guess if extended to this situation, that would mean there would be lots of personal use of these large models with little oversight and tremendous benefit to being an employee.

I have also wondered, with just how bad search engines have gotten (a lot of it from AI generated spam), about current non-AI discrepancies between the NSA and the public. Meaning can i just get a better google by working at the NSA? I would think maybe because the requirements are different than that of an ad company. They have actual incentive to build something resistant to SEO outside of normal capitalist market requirements.

For personal users, i wonder if the lack of concern for copyright will be a feature / selling point for the personal-machine model. It seems from something i read here that companies like Apple may be diverging toward personal-use AI as part of their business model. I supposed you could build something useful that crawls public data without concern for copyright and for strictly personal use. Of course, the sheer resources in machine-power and money-power would not be there. I guess legislation could be written around this as well.

Thoughts?


Also this now: "Fast-spreading HIV variant doubles rate of immune system decline" https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/02/1111372


[flagged]


It's always nice to see these little inflammatory tidbits dropped by accounts that made their accounts two minutes before posting. Gee, I wonder why you felt the need to make a throwaway account?

The link you posted is a big fat clickbait nothing burger. It cites a "what if" article from 2020 about adenovirus-based vaccines, which aren't related at all to mRNA vaccines. I haven't been able to find any reputable studies that agree with this shitty Forbes article.


What is up with the privacy policy and data usage? The app store information says this:

--- App Privacy

The developer, Wikimedia CH, has not provided details about its privacy practices and handling of data to Apple. For more information, see the developer’s privacy policy.

----

... then you click the link for "developer's privacy policy" and it goes to a 404 at http://www.kiwix.org/impressum/

... then you go find the privacy policy on the website at https://www.kiwix.org/en/legal/privacy-policy/ and it says:

"This privacy policy applies to the website www.kiwix.org only. It does not cover our subsites like wiki.kiwix.org or download.kiwix.org."


You use Kiwix offline. You download a Kiwix database of the content you wish for.

If you can get the app and the database on tor, then you're golden.


Hm. But the privacy i was interested in was the privacy during app usage... What data is Wikimedia CH collecting about me and why won't they say?


What we need is positive privacy rights that are very well thought out and firm in preventing legislation such as this from even ever surfacing, as what's proposed in this policy should just be illegal in the first place. These privacy rights would go against what both Silicon Valley and NSA/CIA/Pentagon want, so we need a movement to fight it. I don't think i believe anyone with any power (including Silicon Valley big wigs) are actually opposed to any of this garbage.

Anyway, I'm sick of just being reactive to this anti-human garbage. People need to get clued in and slay the demons instead of building stuff for them.


In the United States, Capitol Police also polices mean tweets. There are videos of people being confronted at their homes by California Highway Patrol, acting for capitol police, after they sent out mean tweets about some politician.

Not charged with a crime, but almost weirder in a way.

Edit: story is here: https://badnews.substack.com/p/capitol-police-sent-cops-to-a...


Not mean tweets, but threats. And the laws around threats against politicians are...weird.


I remember a Republican senator sent the FBI to a person's home (to threaten him) because of his negative tweets about a public company's finances and its CEO, who was the senator's friend.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/sen-johnny-isakson-called-fbi-o...

That CEO is now in jail because the tweets were 100% accurate but the Senator was never punished.


Here is a video from RT about this "invasion". It contains Zelensky's reaction to the western media's fearmongering: https://twitter.com/RT_com/status/1487395105023528960


>Here is a video from RT

Here's a line that instantly disqualifies one from rational adult conversations about anything to do with Eastern Europe.


Why? So you are refusing to look at an information source with real quotes by the leaders involved if it isn't from one of your CIA-staffed western big-name news sources?

Hm, maybe i am not the one who is disqualified here.


I'll take non-CIA-staffed eastern small-name source too, as long as it's not literally the official propaganda agency of the regime that's in the middle of planning the fucking invasion being discussed. I don't think that's a very high bar, personally.


> I'll take non-CIA-staffed eastern small-name source too, as long as it's not literally the official propaganda agency of the regime that's in the middle of planning the fucking invasion being discussed. I don't think that's a very high bar, personally.

Ya, so... you have a choice between the official propaganda agency of the US (the so-called "free press" all marching in lockstep), or the propaganda of the person responding to a completely made-up "imminent" invasion. The second propaganda source is in agreement with the person who is literally the president of the nation whose "imminent invasion" is in question.

There is no imminent invasion, only a deliberately provoked one.


And they didn't invade Crimea. Or Georgia. ... right.

Why tankies insist on defending a homophobic, right-wing dictatorship in Russia is just beyond me.


You've completely glossed over the root of it here. The lie that Russia is going to invade Ukraine is the "Saddam has WMDs"

Every time the US media talks about an imminent "Russian Invasion", or suggests that they are not the ones instigating the war, they are indirectly instigating war with Russia by lying.


Russia currently has troops on Ukrainian soil. They invaded 8 years ago, and the invasion has not ended.


The current lie is that there is a threat of a new invasion. Not even Ukrainian leadership agrees with this, but it doesn't seem to affect planning in the United States.

"They invaded 8 years ago"

hm ok. Do you know what a US color revolution is?

https://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/2014/03/11/pierre-omidyar-c...


Most of the countries have two or two choices, align with Russia/China, or align with the West.

Back in 2017, 69% of Ukrainian wants to join NATO[1].

It is Putin's own fascination that Ukraine should go back to Russia that starts all this mess[2].

Even if US has sponsored the color revolution, so what? Between two evils, choose the lesser one.

[1]: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-nato-idUSKBN19V12... [2]: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181


Lesser of two evils applies when there is a dichotomy of two likely outcomes both of which you see as evil.

In this case, the United States can simply not invade. Then there will be no problem.

The problem is that Jen Psaki is going on television and telling the country a bold-faced lie. It is just a lie, that is all there is to it. Russia is not the aggressor. The United State is the aggressor.

No US invasion, no evil.


Amazing. It's like you live in a parallel universe where the US, not Russia, is preparing to invade by amassing a hundred thousand troops, issuing insane ultimatums, dehumanizing the enemy daily on its propaganda outlets, etc.


Unless you are living in parallel universe.

Russia invaded Georgia in 2008 and created puppet state Abkhazia and South Ossetia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War

Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine in 2014, US was not involved. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Ru...

US also not involved in the war in Donbas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas

If you cannot provide proof, then what you said are flat out lie.


Lie?

So are you saying these satellite images are fabricated?

https://www.wsj.com/video/series/on-the-news/satellite-image...


Yes, the framing of the high budget web military propaganda from the effectively state-run military news source is based on lies.


Please provide proof that the satellite images are lies.


> by lying

And well... By giving far right proxy forces in the Ukraine arms and training, so the proxy forces can then be used for clandestine operations and hopefully (so nato/us/UK think) instigate a Russian military response to which they can scream casius Beli and create more unrest in the entire area


> far right proxy forces

armed forces of a country with a democratically elected civilian government



Russia already did invade Ukraine. It has been taking Ukraine territory and waging war on Ukraine for years now.

Last time Russia took over Ukraine, they genocided millions; It wasn't that long ago, either.


Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: