Interesting - from the article ...
“A person making the decision not to yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk is acting with the knowledge of potential penalties, ranging from a traffic ticket, to a civil tort lawsuit for injuries, to potential jail time,” Koopman said. “In California, a computer driver can’t even get a meaningful traffic ticket yet and is certainly not worried about going to jail.” (With a new law, they can get only a “notice of noncompliance.”)
That said, many hobbies cost more that $3750 per year, and that $3750 is a worst-case scenario. He might even make a profit, and hone skills that might make him a fortune.
I've given up on all these bookmark things, just automatically save page text to PC . Have a simple tool I can quickly search theses files. That's it for me. Years ago, pinboard started well, but the developers ignored support requests is its fatel problem for me.
Google reveals the CEO who died and other United Healthcare executive's are being investigated for insider trading, enriching themselves by many millions. (And conversely, others must have lost millions. ) Also being investigated for fraud.( I thought this may be possible cause for murder, but it appears not. )
We don't have to retcon subtle rationales onto the murder; the guy wrote a manifesto. It was bad, and dumb, as writers from both ends of the political spectrum and points between have observed.
His actions touched a nerve. If you want to try and smear the alleged manifesto, go ahead, but I don't think you'll be changing many minds. And by the way, there's no shortage of "writers from both ends of the political spectrum and points between" who broadly agree with its points.
Luigi is more popular than Joe Biden lol [0]. 60% of New Yorkers would acquit him [1] (100,000 sample size).
Your second link seems to be fabricated. I'd guess it's an invention of AI. A survey of 100,000 people is extremely large, and would be quite expensive to administer, and its source as given as "PoliticsVideoChannel", a twitter account with 200,000 followers. There's no link to the survey. My guess is, if it's based on anything, the Twitter account ran a poll which got 100,000 votes. That's quite different than a survey of 100,000 New Yorkers.
The social media section gives quotes from several accounts that I don't think exist. Like, it's the only result is you search "@JusticeSeekerNYC".
Given you were talking about people being duped by a fake manifesto I am not sure why you'd share this link.
I don't think anyone who has been on the internet the last couple weeks can argue in good faith against Luigi's broad popularity across left and right; that's why I didn't put effort into verifying the source. I still ought to have tried a bit harder there though.
Sure they will. We now have actual polling about him. He is extremely unpopular. The number we were working from upthread was 15%, and I found (real) polls where Hitler did better than that.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev had noisy fans on the Internet! Rolling Stone put a glamor shot of him on its cover. People misread Internet fandom as popular support constantly. There is nothing too stupid or repellant for the Internet to create a fandom for it.
No, you just tried to imply that the "real" manifesto was somehow difficult to dismiss. That's the one I was referring to. It's obviously easy to dismiss --- it literally dismisses itself at one point, saying that other people understand the problems better than he does. I'd be interested in what led you to think it was strong.
"The poll, conducted by PoliticsVideoChannel". Heh.
> It's obviously easy to dismiss --- it literally dismisses itself at one point, saying that other people understand the problems better than he does.
That's a failure of both logic and reading comprehension on your part, I'm afraid.
It's honestly odd that you'd think this to be true. It reads as if you're a little too keen to find a 'gotcha'.
The alleged manifesto outlines that while there are more knowledgeable experts on the corruption and greed at play, who have been opining for decades, no one has taken action and the problems have remained. To reinterpret this as it "dismissing itself" is far from justified.
> I'd be interested in what led you to think it was strong.
I never said it was strong, or implied such. I said it wasn't as easy to dismiss as the proven fake manifesto, and I said that many people broadly agree with its points.
As an academic essay, or as a finished draft to try and justify murder, it has serious flaws. However, I think that if it were as easily dismissed as you insist, then at least one of the mainstream news organizations would have published it.
The manifesto claims that our health care system is responsible for our lower life expectancy, which is trivially falsifiable; the causes of the gap between US life expectancy and the rest of the G8 (spoiler: cars, guns, heart disease) are well studied. In fact, when it comes to the treatment of illness, we outperform.
That is his central claim. He murdered someone over it. It's luridly false.
> The manifesto claims that our health care system is responsible for our lower life expectancy, which is trivially falsifiable
No, it isn't. If you want to claim that all of those numbers are explained by heart attacks and guns, then you need to ask yourself how many of the gun deaths are due to poor mental health resources, and how many of the heart attacks could have been prevented with more equitable and affordable healthcare.
And if you still believe it's so "trivially falsifiable", then why do you think most Americans (and the rest of the world, for that matter) believe otherwise? US healthcare is undeniably a global laughing stock. We are the poster child for why capitalism in healthcare is an evil and stupid idea.
Our system works well for people with either a looooot of money, or premium insurance through their employment.
It doesn't work so well for the hundreds of thousands forced into medical bankruptcy each year, or the diabetics dying because they can't afford insulin, or the 27% of Americans who skipped medical care because they couldn't afford it last year [0]. 27%! That's utterly indefensible. No society can long withstand such stress.
It doesn't work so well for non-white infants dying in childbirth at shocking rates, or the families left destitute due to over-costed end of life care. Try telling the people who had their lives financially ruined because someone called a $4,000 ambulance for them that we outperform in healthcare.
Etc, etc.
> when it comes to the treatment of illness, we outperform.
On a dollar per dollar basis? Nope. To all citizens with any approximation of equality? Nope. If you have a high 7 figure net worth? Sure; glad you're alright Jack - but don't expect America to believe you when you say the system works.
I think we have more gun deaths because we have vastly more guns than other countries, and more car deaths because we drive a lot more. I think researchers broadly agree with me. But you do you; this doesn't seem like an especially promising discussion.
Yeah, most of the world sees that as a mental health issue. "Gun nuts" is the term most often used.
And, over half of all gun deaths are suicides, so I stand by my statement that better mental health services would greatly reduce the number of gun deaths.
> and more car deaths because we drive a lot more.
I didn't say anything about car deaths. That was you, and I didn't take issue with it. That said, the fact that road safety has fallen so far over the past couple decades doesn't speak well to our collective mental health.
> I think researchers broadly agree with me.
This is at least your fourth distinctly misleading appeal to authority in our short chat.
> you do you; this doesn't seem like an especially promising discussion.
No, the stat I am working from is "homicides", not "gun deaths"; I'm just inferring that guns drive those homicides.
I will leave you with this: our health care system has the same structure in basically all 50 states. But CVD outcomes vary wildly among states: Minnesota, California, Massachusetts, and Colorado have outcomes that exceed those in the rest of the G8, while Oklahoma, Mississippi, and Alabama are so bad they drag the whole country down. Health insurers in Oregon and Rhode Island don't function differently than they do in Alabama.
No part of our life expectancy gap has anything to do with health insurance.
> No, the stat I am working from is "homicides", not "gun deaths"; I'm just inferring that guns drive those homicides.
If there's a huge, outlying number of homicides, but there's even more suicides by gun death, does that sound like a mental health system that's working? It's so weird that you'd think this strengthens your case somehow.
> our health care system has the same structure in basically all 50 states. But CVD outcomes vary wildly among states
As you would expect, because:
1. Not everyone in every state has equal access to coverage. States like Alabama and Mississippi have higher rates of uninsured people.
2. Wealthier states with better public health systems invest more in preventive care.
3. Poorer states may have fewer resources that discourage routine doctor visits. A hospital in Massachusetts might have state-of-the-art facilities and specialists, while rural hospitals in Alabama might lack funding or staff.
And, there's lots of other variations by state which could affect CVD outcomes; diet, smoking rates, pollution etc (which often lead back to healthcare, and access to it).
> No part of our life expectancy gap has anything to do with health insurance.
I urge you to reconsider this stance; not just because it's deeply wrong, but because it ignores and enables some really evil stuff. I've given you all the pieces you need to see that, because I know that you have all the intelligence necessary to put them together. I do hope you put them together.
No, it isn't wrong. The difference between the approaches we have here is that I'm looking stuff up, and have actual information in front of me, and you're defending a narrative. If your narrative was supported by the facts, I'd be defending it too. I don't care about insurers. But it isn't; attacking insurers is problematic not just because murder is wrong (it deeply is), but also because it's not fixing the problem.
[life expectancy gap causal statistics]
[national health expenditure]
Two useful searches for you.
Insurers are simply not where the costs in our system come from. In fact: if you allowed Medicare to enroll patients of all ages, its administrative efficiency statistics would quickly regress to those of private insurers, for mathematically simple reasons.
It is though. It’s deeply and profoundly wrong; blatantly wrong; a child could see that it's wrong; every other country in the world can see that it's wrong; and most Americans see it as wrong despite deacdeas of unanimous corporate propaganda.
That’s why there have been many books and documentaries about how US insurers are a huge problem. Luigi's manifesto even called two out by name: Rosenthal [0] and Moore [1].
It would have been nice to see you acknowledge the weakness of your last argument instead of responding by accusing me of "defending a narrative" (that's called 'projection' btw). Asking me to google vague phrases is an even weaker line of argument.
> Insurers are simply not where the costs in our system come from.
Do you realize how many times now you've just stated something as if it were fact when there have been shelves of books written demonstrating the exact opposite? It's not normal tptacek, and intellectually incurious in the extreme.
This particular statement of yours is so obviously wrong it's hard to imagine where to begin: Where do those billions in profit come from? Why was the DoJ launching an antitrust investigation against United? Why were there credible accusations against Brian Thompson of insider trading? ... If you want hundreds more examples, try reading a book about this topic: Maybe 'Delay, Deny, Defend', or 'The Price We Pay: What Broke American Health Care—and How to Fix It'. There are dozens to choose from, and you don't seem to be able to even acknowledge that they exist; it's almost spooky.
At the very least, please, try to acknowledge that actually there might be something very wrong here. Plugging your fingers in your ears, and making outrageous and aggressive claims as if you were delivering mathematical proofs with certainty, is really disappointing stuff.
You aren't so much arguing here as stomping your feet and saying you're right. I don't care what a Michael Moore documentary says. Here is actual data, and it backs up my argument, not yours:
There are other problems in US healthcare as well, yes. As if anyone said that there isn't?
And having moved on without comment from "proving" your position that insurance companies have "no effect" on life expectancy (?!) by comparing CVD across states, you're now "proving" it by posting physician's salary data across countries??
You point-blank refuse to look at any data, books, examples or documentaries which shows they are, not even the sources specifically mentioned in Luigi's manifesto... But pointing out the books and examples which show they are in fact killing people makes me an ideologue committed to a narrative, while you love "the data"?
... Wew. I haven't felt this gaslit here since someone tried to claim that detonating thousands of pager bombs, murdering and maiming children and healthcare workers, wasn't a war crime or a violation of the Geneva Convention.
The causal factors for the life expectancy gap between the US and the G8 have in fact very little do with our health care system, and the (manifold) problems of our health care system have in fact very little to do with health insurance. In fact, if you isolate the health care system, and don't try to six-degrees-of-Kevin-Bacon every inequality and equity problem in America onto the health care system, we actually tend to outperform the G8.
Don't take my word for it. The manifesto itself says that the guy doesn't understand any of this stuff. Didn't stop him from murdering something. A first, I think, in murderer manifestos!
> The manifesto itself says that the guy doesn't understand any of this stuff.
Now you're just flat lying. That's not what it said at all, and in fact I explained this to you only hours previous.
Here's what the alleged manifesto said:
> Obviously the problem is more complex, but I do not have space, and frankly I do not pretend to be the most qualified person to lay out the full argument. But many have illuminated the corruption and greed (e.g.: Rosenthal, Moore), decades ago and the problems simply remain. It is not an issue of awareness at this point, but clearly power games at play.
This is some of the poorest debating I've seen on HN in a long while. I really don't know why you think it's okay to make shit up like this, and then repeat it long after you were patiently corrected. Who do you think you're going to convince this way? Do you have that low an opinion of the crowd here?
It's rarely mentioned because it's irrelevant. He wasn't shot because of the insider trading, and the insider trading doesn't morally justify the shooting.
RE :....Was not shot because of insider trading ...." This could have certainly COULD been a motivation - as some claim to have lost many millions $$$. However , now the accused guy caught - and his motivation claimed to be discerned by his notebook ... Insider trading and fraud accusations if proven in court , show he was dodgy and other in company also dodgy as others suffered BIG losses , claimed in media articles.
Which is weird, because whenever there's a high-profile police shooting the media goes out of their way to dig up dirt on the victim to morally justify the shooting.
From the article [ https://www.economist.com/united-states/2023/04/20/rural-ame...] another use for these mini trucks - "A couple of years ago Jake Morgan, a farmer who lives just outside Raleigh, in North Carolina, realised he needed a new vehicle to get around his property. "
Vehicle known as a "quad bike" is a popular vehicle used by farmers in my area - ie a Farm Quad bike , All terrain vehicle (ATV). To get around all the different types of terrain on a farm ...
Sadly, ridiculously expensive for fairly limited cargo utility, no doubt due to their ATV heritage ($30k will get you what is essentially a posh ATV that is simultaneously an extremely janky vehicle by kei truck standards.)
reply