Back in my University days , 1990s, early 2000s (I was there a decade, grad, postgrad all that) I was a fairly regular bar-fly at the on campus student pub. Learned more in that pub talking to academics and other students over pints than I ever did in the classroom.

Around half way through my degree a new face turned up, a man in his early 70s with a polite british accent, Kev, walked up to our table with a jug of beer and introduced himself. We where a pretty diverse lot, so we made a space, and all of us became fast friends.

He had retired a while back, had a career as an industrial chemist that sent him around the world, spent a lot of time in africa, and generally had an almost endless stream of stories to tell. After a few years of retirement, he decided to go and do a chemistry degree again, because when he had retired he felt the world had left him behind in his knowledge., so he went back to scratch to catch up on all the developments the previous 40 years had brought. No intention of working again, but he didnt want to spend his twilight years as a bored retired person with 20 cats and a drinking problem.

He had a blast too with his newfound circle of 20yo friends. Smoked his first joint, discovered the joys of 90s indie pop, occasionally got himself in trouble with the ladies, but generally had a polite british demeanor that got him out of a lot of trouble too. We all knew his morals came from a different era, so we cut him a bit of slack. We dubbed him "The worlds oldest teenager".

I visited him a few months ago. Age finally caught up to him, and I doubt he has much time left. He ended up hooking with one of our groups elderly mothers (that was..... awkward) and ended up looking after her after her son died and she fell to pieces, but its clear he hasnt got much time left. His body is just falling to pieces.

Still, I thoroughly recomend to anyone who's retired to consider going back to university if, or you've got the funds to pay for it. Too many old folks just retire and stop doing anything, and the lack of activity in both the brain and body end up killing them. And don't worry about all those young folks. If your a friendly, fun and active person, chances are all those young folks will adore you for your stories and wisdom, and you get to have a second youth.

While I think the high end models are actually very impressive, the one on top of google search results is a drooling idiot and regularly just makes up nonsense. Just yesterday I searched for information about radiation suits on the "Dune Awakening" game (very fun), and it utterly hallucinated a big bunch of nonsense about it being 3 piece, with exchangable breathing apparatuses and the like. None of that is true. I *think* it was cribbing details from Fallout. (It mentioned "Radaway" tablets, which are from fallout) but it was so matter-of-fact about it being part of the Dune awakening, and clearly the results bellow it on the search directly contradicted it. Its not a good implementation of generative AI.

I suppose, but that's nothing like the world we live in. In our world, food is abundant at never-before-seen levels. Agricultural productivity has not only matched but significantly exceeded population growth. Unless climate change or some catastrophic event has large negative impacts on food production, directly or indirectly, it seems unlikely that the human race will ever again experience significant food scarcity.

I think it's more likely that approximation is necessary to complex, higher-level thinking, and that produces a certain form of error which is therefore inherent in all intelligences capable of it. This can be improved by adding subsystems that compute more precisely, just as humans do, using processes and equipment to augment their intellectual abilities, ranging from complex computation engines to pencil and paper (Einstein said "My pencil and me are smarter than me").

If they're still using VMWare's licensed software, are they a former customer? I think the answer depends on the details of the license and purchase agreements.

I think they'd argue that the audit is a condition of the license to use the software, which the customer already agreed to and which was not tied to an ongoing support contract. Depending on the details of the license agreement, this could pass legal muster.

It still seems like a stupid move on the part of Broadcom, alienating their customer base in the hope of extracting a few more fees. I wonder if they've decided that their virtualization business is soon going to be eaten up by OSS anyway, so they have to get what they can while they can.

This claim doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

You need to actually look at the data here. Much of US healthcare is non-profit, at least on the provider side, and the for-profit provider institutions don't make that much money. People naturally then assume it's the insurance companies that are making out like bandits, except they're all publicly-traded so we can see exactly what their profit margins are and they don't remotely explain the high cost of healthcare. At worst, the for-profit model adds 5%, and there's no real reason to expect it to add even that. In most industries, for-profit is more efficient than non-profit, because it turns out that the competitive drive for profits drives costs down.

Again, look at actual numbers. What you'll find is that this explains basically nothing. Yeah, they have high salaries; take those and spread them across the patient base and you're talking about maybe 0.001% of healthcare costs -- and then only if you assume that these high salaries represent a pure loss, that an administrator getting paid a tiny fraction of that would the job just as well. If you assume that at least part of those high salaries are payment for services rendered, then the CEO salary overhead is even smaller.

Again, the pharmaceuticals are publicly-traded and they break out what they spend on advertising. Is is a lot in absolute terms? Yes. Is it a lot relative to the total amount of money we're talking about? No.

I'll stop here, but the same applies to everything else you mention. Yes, there is some waste due to the for-profit model, but it actually isn't that big. Our drug costs are high because we fund most of the research, because we can afford to. If we found a way to stop doing that, a lot of drug research would stop. Whether you think that's a good thing or a bad thing is something you have to decide. Personally, I think we get a lot of value for that money.

It feels like you should be able to point to just one thing and say "That's why healthcare is expensive in the US!" but you can't, really. The root cause is actually a lot of different things, and most of them have their roots in regulation (and, specifically, the way in which we regulate), rather than in a for-profit model.

If you want to make US healthcare both very cheap and very good, but only for those who can afford it, you should do the hard-eyed libertarian thing and go full-on for-profit, including removing the legal requirements that doctors treat people who can't pay, and eliminating Medicaid and Medicare and all of the complexity and cost they add. Also, make competition nationwide -- make provider and insurer licensing federal so states can't impose different requirements, and set up nationwide medical and nursing licensure processes that eliminate the ability of the AMA to artificially restrict supply. Quality would go up and competition would drive cost down for probably 70% of Americans. The other 30%, however, would be screwed, hard. Well, maybe 20%, or 15%, because prices would come down, making healthcare more affordable for everyone but free for no one.

But because we as a society will not leave the poor completely without care (not even free ER visits), the libertarian pure-market approach won't work. So, instead, we should go the other way and offer a national single payer option. This would not make healthcare cheaper by itself, but it would enable regulatory pressure to begin chipping away at all of the many sources of high prices. It wouldn't ultimately make healthcare as efficient, cheap or good as a pure market-based approach, and likely wouldn't make it as cheap as what other countries pay, but it's the best we're likely to actually achieve.

Look, this isn't complicated.

1. If you're going to claim you know what people should do to be healthy, you should have both formal education and experience in the space.

2. If you're going to be an administrator over a health organization, formal education and experience in healthcare are a very good idea, but what you really need is to know how to be a good administrator.

RFK Jr. wants and claims to be able to do #1, but lacks the knowledge, skills or experience to do so.

If RFK Jr. wanted and claimed to be able to do #2, that would be fine. He's maybe a little out of his depth in such a large and important organization, but if he could bury his ego and work hard at it, he could probably do it reasonably well. But the overriding requirement to do it well is to listen to his subordinates, who are experts in the field, while he's a lawyer with no medical or scientific training. But obviously he won't do that, because he thinks he does know better than the experts, i.e. he is trying do do #1, which he isn't qualified to do.

True, though note that Google does have all the data needed to brute force that password, so make sure it has plenty of entropy. I recommend "correct horse battery staple".

Yeah, but then you have to drive an ICE, which sucks. Slow, noisy and smelly.

Sure, but if the judge thinks its just some shit-ass nonsense suit, like he seems to, technically true, but stupid on its merits, he may well be inclined to deny costs to spank the plantiff for wasting the courts time.

I doubt it'd happen. It'd be a significant concern for the anti-trust cops (and even if the current US admin doesnt seem to have a problem with anti-trust behavior, the europeans are quite capable of raining hell). More to the point, it doesnt sound like Gabe has any interest in taking Steam public or selling it. Its a strangely organized hyper-flat company that seems to run more like a worker-coop than a traditional heirachical company and thats how Gabe likes it. And its making him ridiculous money. He's got no motivation.

Er, word perfect command sequences I mean. ^C ^V ^X etc. Still waiting for that morning coffee to kick in, and this ridiculous website still hasn't got an edit button.

Well yeah, but this is intended for windows where a lot of old timers muscle memory is msedit.

On the subject of good linux ones, check out "micro" if you get a chance. Its in a similar conceptual space as nano , simple editor, not really designed for big coding jobs, but great for quickly editing a config file or whatever, but its got a few modern affordances.Wordpress style command sequences, and works great with a mouse in a way nano never quite managed to pull off well. Sure I'll still use Emacs (and I suppose most folks would use vi) for bigger stuff, but its become my daily driver for quick config file edits on servers and stuff.

True, but if the EVs have decent range (say, 300 miles), a reasonable commute (say, 40 miles) and there's a fast charger in the area, it's easy enough to make sure you never get into a situation where an overnight power outage will keep you from getting to work. Just hit the fast charger whenever you're out and about and your remaining range has dropped below 100 miles, just long enough to get it back above 100 miles, which will only take 2-3 minutes This won't happen often for most people, less often than they have to visit a gas station now.

If there's a multi-day outage this becomes more problematic, but we're well outside of what's common now.