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

Tangentially, is is presumptions to see the wave of stimulus checks as the genesis of a UBI system, not named as such, but essentially what we will end up with? Since many times government programs are never rolled back.

Imagine: every 6 months or so, $X gets sent out.


Sounds incredibly unlikely to me. It's also neither universal, nor basic. Which is perhaps healthier in the long run.


Original report: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...

Key info: "Of articles with food industry involvement, 55.6% reported findings favourable to relevant food industry interests, compared to 9.7% of articles without food industry involvement."


But what is the recommendation? I would expect that the practitioners in industry probably are better situated to perform studies than many others. That they only publish favorable findings could also be that they are looking in the more promising to favorable results.

Or, are we implying that they cover up the other results? Believable, but not the only explanation.


If anything, being beholden to a corporation whose success hinges on favorable research findings is a recipe for corruption. Not that academics are free from that, but at least there is less pressure for bias. Of course, unless they are funded by the food industry...


I don't disagree. But, that isn't a recommendation.

So, what is the recommendation?


Don’t believe any research pushed by a food corporation?


That is back in throwing out the full bath tub, though. I am sympathetic to the thought, but I'm not convinced it is efficient.

Would be interesting to see how often the studies can replicate. Are they worse than studies in other fields?

And, to my other point, is this and different from other fields?


I hope it works out!

I tried registering for updates but got a Cloudflare 502. HN "hug of death"?

Once it's sorted out, I'll give it another shot. Quick request: can you please add more details to a faq or something? eg. how much it'll cost for us users, will there be a desktop interface, etc.

Thanks!


Thanks -- I will have a look to see whats going on. We definitely want to have you on board!

There will be a free ad-supported tier for users, along with some form of paid add on, that we are working on now. At the moment, the main consumer offering will be mobile, but if there is interest, of course that is not set in stone.


Should be good now, an annoying configuration issue on a day that we got some unexpected interest! I also think we probably have the signups, even if it didn't display a nice confirmation.


Perhaps include "(soccer)" in the title for those of us in the USA?


The author is from London and the internet is global. Expecting an author to cater to every other culture with everything they do is a bit self-centered, IMO. It should be on the reader to understand that there are differences, not on the writer to make sure every single cultural difference is pointed out. It seems kind of weird to expect him to alter his headline to cater to a country he doesn't live in.

If you were writing an article about potato chips, it would seem kind of silly to expect you to add "(crisps)" in the title to cater to our English friends, so I'm not sure why you would expect that here, especially when the vast majority of the world calls it "football".


In fairness, it's not uncommon to specify "American football" for international audiences, so I don't think it's totally unreasonable. But on balance, adding a parenthetical word into a headline is just a little too much to ask. There's not much harm in bringing in someone who was expecting one but got the other anyway.


That's like saying 'Perhaps include "(France)" in the title' when talking about Paris. Football is well known all over the world and perahps the most popular spectator sport.


I think it's reasonable for someone in the USA to expect that "Football" could refer to 1 of 3 popular games -- American football, soccer, or rugby.


Not the rest of the world's problem you called a game that mainly involves throwing 'foot' ball for some incomprehensible reason.

Are you sure about the name basketball? Don't want to call it sackball or something like that? Or maybe shuttlebasket?

I always chortle at your "world" series too!


I was going to respond with the factoid about the World Series being named after a newspaper, but a Wikipedia check (and subsequent googling) revealed that it's probably false. Not news to you, but maybe of interest to others who, like me, had absorbed the popular misconception!


American Football is actually based on the delineation between sports played on horseback and on foot. So maybe it is an antiquated distinction but it makes sense. Maybe we can rename it infantryball.


Surely it should be called netball, since baskets haven't been involved for more than a century.



> Don't want to call it sackball or something like that? Or maybe shuttlebasket?

What?


Why? Does it really matter what shape the ball is?



The second image refers to the election several times so it makes me wonder if they are trying to see if FB has an effect on how you vote...pure speculation on my part based on their text, of course.


That would require them to record your vote which would probably be illegal.


They can ask you how you voted. Exit polls do it all of the time. This announcement mentions a survey as well.


If it is part of a survey that you are paid for then it's a pretty thin line to paying for actual votes, right?


No, it's not saying you should or shouldn't vote. It's saying that after election day, they will ask you to fill a survey, which is optional. That is literally all the invite is saying. In fact, choosing not to vote would be a valid & extremely valuable bit of information.


WHO you vote for is not public information.

THAT you voted, including in any (and if so which) primary, is.


Right, that'd still be an interesting study.


I'd like to suggest a title change to somehow illuminate the fact that scientists are the ones doing it themselves, not the general public.


There are "non-scientists" who are doing this too, though they aren't highlighted by the article.

Zayner: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-25/one-bioha....

Justin Atkin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjDH6bXF4ow&t=67m47s



Anecdotally, no.

My sister was able to re-open and she had the hardest time convincing her workers to return simply because of this fact.

Some never returned. Why would they?

Has nothing to do with safety or trying to keep people at home.


I don't quite understand how this happens. I'm under the impression that when you are offered your job back, you have to either take it or go off of unemployment.


There's no way to enforce that.


"In Ohio, which has encouraged businesses to report employees who don’t come back to work, approximately 600 employers have already turned in about 1,200 workers, the state’s labor agency said."[1]

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/05/08/workers-u...


Many do not. I know a fellow with his own gardening store where prospective employees refused jobs because their unemployment checks hadn't run out yet. He didn't rat them out, I doubt many did rat because the candidates were so open about why they refused the job.


Sure, employers and states aren't enforcing the rules as much as they could.


You could argue that it is due to Mormonism:

"Deseret was proposed as a name for the U.S. state of Utah. Brigham Young—governor of Utah Territory from 1850 to 1858 and president of the LDS Church from 1847 to 1877—favored the name as a symbol of industry. Young taught his followers that they should be productive and self-sufficient, a trait he had perceived in honeybees."[1]

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deseret_(Book_of_Mormon)


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2025 batch! Applications are open till May 13

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

Search: