Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | marricks's commentslogin

> I do think we are in a situation where everybody knows that healthcare costs need to come down that doctors and medical professionals are spread too thin

The problem is over optimization AND lack of people. As soon as there's an excuse for less staff because we have "digital record keeping" we're going to have less money and even less staff.

Having in person or remote notetakers is a great entry level job to do before you become a doctor. It could be boring but at least the terms are familiar and you get to know the person you're working with.

It's not like healthcare is an impossible problem to solve that needs more tech, we just refuse to spend money on people and (inexplicably) cannot help but dump tons of money into tech.


> The problem is over optimization not lack of people or resources. As soon as there's an excuse for less staff because we have "digital record keeping" we're going to have less money and even less staff.

At least in my area, it seems like lack of people is a problem. Sometimes it's lack of people because the pay is too low, but more of it it's lack of people because the pool of qualified people is too small. And increasing pay increases healthcare costs, and healthcare costs are already very high. If digital tools allow the available staff to see more patients while delivering the same level of care (and without burning out the providers), then that means more capacity and less times people want to see a doctor, but can't. Similar arguments for same number of patients ans greater level of care. If it's more patients, but worse level of care, then it becomes tricky.


The lack of people is too low because the organization tasked with accrediting new doctors has a financial incentive to its current members to keep the pool of doctors low.

Holy wow, I meant to say lack of people is the problem. Edited to reflect that.

I don’t necessarily disagree with you here. However, there is a timing concern. Training doctors takes too long and the boomers are aging now.

The best time to fix that was 20 years ago. The next-best time to fix that is today.

But we're still not doing that, and that's a huge oversight. (Or is intentional, to protect the doctor-training to hospital-slot pipeline cartel.)


Like... this has things that AI will seemingly always be terrible at?

At some point the level of detail is utter garbo and always will be. An artist who was thoughtful could have some mistakes but someone who put that much time into a drawing wouldn't have:

- Nightmarish screaming faces on most people

- A sign that points seemingly both directions, or the incorrect one for a lake and a first AID tent that doesn't exist

- A dog in bottom left and near lake which looks like some sort of fuzzy monstrosity...

It looks SO impressive before you try to take in any detail. The hand selected images for the preview have the same shit. The view of musculature has a sternocleidomastoid with no clavicle attachment. The periodic table seems good until you take a look at the metals...

We're reconfiguring all of our RAM & GPUs and wasting so much water and electricity for crappier where's Waldos??


No, it won't be. I did indeed get the same problems when trying to generate my own image for it.

However as someone who's mucked about with local image generation as well - I'd say that this is a problem with their implementation, it doesn't resolve fine detail because majority of requests it won't matter/it drastically increases compute requirements.

With local image generation bad features/incorrect fingers/disfigurement etc has been solved for a long time.

I think their new process involves multiple steps including sketching/fleshing out the idea before adding detail. The step that would fix this would be outpainting or similar to tile based upscaling.

From what I understand of image generation models they also struggle with fine detail in general because they aren't really trained for that. However for each tiny chunk of a detailed image like that there's nothing to say they can't allocate a 500x500 chunk for it to work in as its "idea/reference space" and then transpose that into the main image being generated - i.e. generate image features separately rather than all together.


AI will seemingly always be ...

You do realize that the whole image generation field is barely 10 years old?

I remember how I was able to generate mnist digits for the first time about 10 years ago - that seemed almost like magic!


> why would the US concede?

Because it has no way of achieving its objectives.


I don't think that has stopped anything so far, but I appreciate your optimism.


The US has mostly achieved their objectives (as best as I can tell - the strategy isn't exactly coherent) - Iran has much less missiles, and much less ability to produce them.


If there was any outside visible thread of reasoning for this war it was "Iran seems like it could have regime change" and I haven't heard anything saying they're more likely to have a different form of government.

I doubt the revolutionaries sympathizers within Iran liked their children being murdered or infrastructure getting destroyed. All the US has done is a repeat of the same thing they've done for half a century: start a war and immediately get more enemies within the middle east. Perhaps the only change is now the US's allies are distancing themselves faster and further than ever before.


There was a lot more - since mid last summer the US and Iran have been talking. There was some progress on nuclear issues. However Iran refused to discuss their ballistic missile program or funding for the likes of Hezbollah. Just based on that alone it is no surprise that the US got fed up. However you have to pay a little more attention to see that even though it is public.


Sometimes you want someone to do something, but you don't have authority to order them around, and you are bad at persuasion and dealmaking, so you don't get what you want.

If you're not ok with walking away at that point, maybe put a better offer on the table?


I fail to see a better offer. Support for those trying to kill jews is not something I can accept. I don't like any option for dealing with it, but walking away is still evil.


I can't speak for you, but for me, as a jew, killing innocent people just to get what you want is bad, even if they aren't jewish. Support for genocidal wars of conquest (like russia's and israel's) isn't something I can accept.

Additionally: supporting the killing of innocents, war crimes, genocide, etc, just because the perpetrators are jewish, is eviler still. Israel's actions make all jews (like myself) look bad, and puts us at risk around the world.

Maybe try diplomacy instead? And no, diplomacy doesn't mean "take our offer with no changes or we will kill you all". It means recognizing that israel isn't better than other countries, it means treating others as equals, it means you don't get to boss around co-equal countries, and it means giving first if you want to receive.


More accurate to say that the US is not willing to pay the price to achieve its objectives I think (depending on who/when you’re asking what exactly the objectives are of course).


[flagged]


Iran was little threat to the US before the US attacked. Now the US likely has earned itself more decades of terrorists, while simultaneously losing its military and political support from other countries.

If the US objective was self destruction or massive face plant, it is certainly getting closer to its objective.


I’ve had no spam calls. Mission Accomplished.


This ignores the possibility that we have set their nuclear program back to starting from scratch.


It ignores we already had that, in 2016, with experts from all over the world doing inspections and agreeing it worked. Then Trump blew up the deal against the wishes of the rest of the free world, claiming he’d make a better deal, which he got zero from. Advisors, both hand picked and military, told him this would be the outcome, which he ignored.

We have not set their program to zero. They now have, and will continue to have, people trained in the knowledge of how to rebuild it. They now have massively more incentive to do so. Countries in the region now have more reason to help. Countries the world over have more incentive to contain US idiocy, as yet again we screw their economies for made up reasons.

As do their allies, and the raft of allies the US has lost over this idiocy will hurt US for decades, likely never to be repaired.

This is why Iran has won. The US has so destroyed brand US that it’ll never regain trust anywhere, economically, militarily, or morally.


> It ignores we already had that, in 2016, with experts from all over the world doing inspections and agreeing it worked. Then Trump blew up the deal against the wishes of the rest of the free world, claiming he’d make a better deal, which he got zero from. Advisors, both hand picked and military, told him this would be the outcome, which he ignored.

1) JCPOA was in effect for barely more than two years. Iran's nuclear work prior started way back circa 2000. It was killed before we can say anything about its effectiveness.

2) IIRC, JCPOA didn't prevent Iran from developing nuclear tech. It only limited capacity. They were free to do all the R&D they wanted.

3) Iran was doing weaponization work prior to the deal which they didn't disclose. So taking them at their word on the subject is probably not a good idea.

Trump pulling out from the deal was dumb, because it probably was slowing weaponization down, but the idea that the deal was stopping Iran from developing weaponization tech is not supported by the aims of the deal itself.

> We have not set their program to zero. They now have, and will continue to have, people trained in the knowledge of how to rebuild it.

Very close to it. Lots of facilities were destroyed, and I believe a majority of their scientists were killed.

> They now have massively more incentive to do so.

Debatable. I can see it going either way.

> Countries in the region now have more reason to help. Countries the world over have more incentive to contain US idiocy, as yet again we screw their economies for made up reasons.

Nearly all the countries in the region want Iran gone. They are a destabilizing force for all their neighbors.

> As do their allies

Iran has pretty much 0 official allies. Their only allies come in the form of "we hate the US too, so we will help you be a thorn in their side"

> This is why Iran has won

Won what? If that's winning, then I'll take losing.

> The US has so destroyed brand US that it’ll never regain trust anywhere, economically, militarily, or morally.

This remains to be seen I think. Honestly, if Europe kicks us out I'll be happy personally. I look forward to the day the US isn't running the oceans as a toll road for the globe and everyone handles their own backyards. I think we are far enough past WW2 that the world no longer needs a nanny.


4 years as an provisional deal was done earlier. All us intelligence agencies agreed and testified to congress that Iran was not working towards a bomb as Trump ripped up the agreement. They were all wrong or what?

>This remains to be seen I think. Honestly, if Europe kicks us out I'll be happy personally. I look forward to the day the US isn't running the oceans as a toll road for the globe and everyone handles their own backyards. I think we are far enough past WW2 that the world no longer needs a nanny.

Pretty rich to day this given what US is doing now.


You are ignoring the fundamental difference between the JCPOA's goals and the argument here. JCPOA was not a denuclearization agreement, it wasn't even a "no atomic bombs" agreement. All it did was limit centrifuge count, and enrichment density. Iran complying with those was mostly useless for the goal for the goal of preventing them getting an atomic bomb. It was effectively a stalling maneuver, one that would have partially expired last year.


Or it was working, as intel agencies seems to agree on, and set the stage for future agreements and getting Iran on a path of normalization.

Instead Trump ripped it up and then got involved in yet another useless zionist middle eastern war that only seems to have made Iran stronger and further destroying US reputation.


"It was working"

I'm trying to discuss what that means, because I think that's where we are disagreeing.

What does that mean to you?

To me (and it's crafters) the JCPOA "working" meant slowing Iran down temporarily.


Comparing their progress towards building a bomb under and after the agreement? We know they followed the agreement with minor discrepancies, and when sanctions started they started breaking it. With no diplomatic agreement and sanctions in place what should Iran be doing? Might as well build a bomb then.


> Comparing their progress towards building a bomb under and after the agreement?

Well yeah, like I said, it was a stalling maneuver. It slowed things down.

> We know they followed the agreement with minor discrepancies, and when sanctions started they started breaking it. With no diplomatic agreement and sanctions in place what should Iran be doing? Might as well build a bomb then.

Well yeah, they were doing that before and during the JCPOA. Why wouldn't they do it after?


Weird, just a few days ago he said we needed two more weeks of war to destroy their nuclear program.


Maybe the US military is aiming for a greater level of confidence in order to say "definitely destroyed" than some random guy online needs in order to say "possibly destroyed"?


All those ships stuck on either side of the Strait of Hormuz and their insurers would beg to differ.


For the sake of peace... yes ;)


The most deadly attack on US soil from the Middle East didn't come from nukes.

How sure are you that we're reducing net total future threats in the Middle East under Trump?


To whom, and to what? A military threat to the continental US, sure. To US allies in the region, and to the global economy, it appears Iran is a much bigger threat than we were lead to believe, and still are. If anything, they're justifiably more emboldened now than ever.


If you keep picking fights with someone don’t be surprised if they learn how to fight. There’s literally a line in Sayings of Spartans about teaching your enemy to fight by making war with them.


Then why was Trump threatening their annihilation prior to accepting the ceasefire around their proposal?


You must not be paying attention…

So far, Trump said that the Straight of Hormuz closed is cutting off China’s oil supply and isn’t important to the US, the US doesn’t need allies, but after Trump got zero help from Europe he then proceeded to ask China of all countries to help in the straight?!

Knowing people travelling near and through the Straight, Iran has all the cards. “Iran is of little threat” doesn’t hold water when the US can’t even send ships though to protect container ships


I don’t think the US signed up to protect Chinese or Indian ships through the Strait. Also, it’s not blocked.

https://www.citriniresearch.com/p/strait-of-hormuz-a-citrini...


Someone was saying "can we just not with April fools" this year because everything is so grim and dire in the world... but I think this is such a perfect level we need. I could go for more whimsy like this.


I'd of said I had limited appetite for April fools gubbins this year too but this still made me smile :)


This one was good. It was pretty low-stakes and not anything that would impact anyone. For a while there, companies like Google were announcing products that sounded like a good idea, but turned out were just them trolling everyone over things people had been requesting for a long time.


Their heyday of good jokes was also when they hadn't produced any ads and seemed like an underdog. "Don't Be Evil" days.

Vibe-wise they all feel closer to Raytheon and I sure as fuck wouldn't want to see an attempt at a whimsical joke from Raytheon.


Nothing like throwing in the towel before a battle is ever fought. Let's just sigh and wearily march on to our world of AI slop and ever higher bug counts and latency delays while we wait for the five different phone homes and compilations through a billion different LLM's for every silly command.


> i paid $599 for this disappointment. the thinkpad cost me $180 on ebay like seven years ago and i think it’s mocking me now.

The guy is comparing a $200 ebay thinkpad with linux compared to a macbook with a modern operating system.

They're not the target demographic, I can tell you right now schools and (non-tech) parent's aren't going to buy their kids ebay laptops with linux on them.

You might as well say the neo sucks because a 6 year old m1 ebay macbok is a better deal. It's apples to oranges.


The Thinkpad also likely cost far more than $600 when new. Even a several-year-old flagship laptop is going to be superior in some respects than a brand new laptop designed and produced to cost as little as possible.


Aircraft carrier speed... 33 knots or about 35mph[1]

Boeing 777 speed 554mph[2]

So about 16x!

[1] http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-028.php

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_777


Honestly pretty crazy, although that must be the max speed. The carrier was going about 10 mph in this case (per Strava).


They don't normally go that fast from what I understand. That is their top speed in reserve they can use for evasive maneuvers, they don't want to go faster than their support fleet or deal with the high maintenance running at threshold will cause.

It's like when you drive your car you're not normally redlining it since that will kill the engine if you do it all the time.


100%, a product can't be just good and succeed now. Market's expect something to be "the next thing" or become a failure.

Also, price is always going to be an issue. The US spends billions and billions of dollars supporting the meat industry. The fact meat is cheap is a political choice, which makes direct plant based substitutes a tough financial proposition.


Are you saying you and all your devs are doing light development work? That was the claim you're attempting to refute.

Light development for me is some node programs and a php server. If light development suddenly means 3 docker containers our world sucks IMO. People shouldn't need multiple operating systems to develop, that feels crazy wasteful.


Docker overhead is practically nothing, so running 3 docker containers should be well within the "light development" bracket.


What the heck is going on here, something cannot be light and use 20gb of memory.

Is LLM driving the RAM shortage or is it hacker news commenters convinced they can't run a single git client without 20gb of free memory.

I am a web dev doing what I'd consider light dev work and the biggest memory hog running for me right now is 2gb for Figma.


What takes 20GB memory? I dev on a 2015 i5 and run multiple docker containers all day without issue.


Isn't docker overhead a full VM unless you're running Linux natively?


Normal door bells are pretty great and have less overhead and maintenance...

All tech puts it's best foot forward, some of it's really nifty, but a camera on every street corner is always going to pose more risks than it's worth IMO...

It's work to go back to the old ways but I think this is one we step we should really all take.


I think your take on cameras is legitimate, but from my home office I can't hear my doorbell if I have the door closed or if I have music playing at even a low volume. Installing a smart doorbell that notifies me when rung was a significant upgrade over the old doorbell.


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

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

Search: