that's not the job of a company. companies are suposed to be profit centered, their purpose is to make money.
what you're talking about is the role of government. govt should be supporting policies like you are suggesting, by for example allowing for universal basic income or uniersal basic land or services, etc.
Why? This is asserted throughout this HN thread as an obvious truism, but it seems precipiced on some dramatic right wing free market concept of how the world works that I can't tell is coming from the libertarians of hacker news, or is some kind of USA concept.
Why should society let the concept of a company exist if it is actively detrimental to society at large, for the gain of a very few?
The biggest limiting factor is user acquisition. Just because you can build a competitor in a weekend doesn't mean you can easily acquire a user base. it's dam hard to get users even if your product is twice as good and your giving it away for free!
there are still tribes in the amazon that have very little money, like the hazda. they may not call it retirement but they don't need to go to the office everyday.
Serious question, what makes us so addicted and dependent to money that we can't imagine any way of life without a lot of it?
Here is the crazy thing, I went carnivore after I retired because one thread that worried me about shitty insurance is the risk. Now, I'm pretty sure if I only eat meat and work-out, then I might not even need insurance. Like, my labs are phenomenal.
By taking away the fear and the addiction, I've got a level of calm and control of my life that makes me realize the "modern world" is deeply sick.
Cancer happens all the time and your immune system deals with it. Look into the recent evidence of how keto deals with cancer. I'm telling you, I live in a world without fear and it is awesome.
I'm well aware of keto and cancer. I spent 5 years in ketosis, I trained semi professionally as an athlete (4 hours a day at a professional MMA gym), I spent years helping people get into keto and lose tons of weight and improve their health.
Keto helps with some cancers that are powered by glucose.
It does nothing to help with any other forms of cancer, of which there are plenty.
i think you can get a pretty decent prius from 5k to 10k and a fantastic nearly brand new tesla model 3 for 17K. That's what i did. it was 8 years old, practically brand new, FSD prepaid included! it drives me to work and i only paid 17K for it!
you don't need to eat ramen. there are many cost effective options out there: oatmeal, beans, rice, you could grow your own fruits and vegetables, etc.
and as for the medical disaster: heart attack and stroke are actually preventable with a plant based diet (keep your LDL under 80 and you'll vastly decrease your chance of a heart attack). i know a lot of people will hate on that, but those are the facts and any evidence based nutritionist can tell you this.
isn't it just one more step up the hierarchy. 10 years ago most developers have forgotten how to code in machine language because you didn't need to know it. Now, we're jsut going one step higher.
this is misleading because they're not comparing apples to apples.
the insurance companies are looking into all the details I'm sure to be able price the risk accordingly. Lemonade is putting their money where their mouth is and it's pricing FSD miles at 1/2 the rate of manned driving. that's because FSD gets 1/2 the number accidents per mile.
I think the discrepancy here is that almost all these crashes would not have resulted in an insurance claim, e.g. backing into a pole at 1 mph -- this is not enough damage to report for an average driver.
That said, really bad numbers for an autonomous system which is supposed to be way better than humans.
It depends on what part of the car is crumpled, dented, scratched, or misaligned and what your deductible is. It doesn’t take much body work to hit $250, $500, or even $2000.
> that's because FSD gets 1/2 the number accidents per mile.
I call bullshit and I bet Tesla is quietly paying Lemonade.
FSD is primarily used on highways, and the accident rate on highways is significantly lower per mile which results in FSD appearing to have a lower accident rate per mile.
Meanwhile Musk has a trillion dollars riding on them hitting 10 million FSD subscribers[1], so (past behavior being the best predictor of future behavior) he's obviously going to be committing whatever chicanery is required for him to get that money.
FSD automatically shuts off and relinquishes control to the user in an emergency. I bet the real number of FSD accidents is far far higher, but they're using this loophole to claim it's lower than it is. If you call them out on it, they just hide behind their "the driver must be in control at all times" legal shield.
>>> "Still, Wednesday’s report also shows that not nearly as many jobs were added in 2025 as thought and last year will go down as the worst year for hiring since 2020, or since 2003 outside of a recession."
Almost no jobs were added net and the few that were, were all in health care, 131K i think the article said.
what i find interesting is that unemployment percent still looks low. is it accurate? even if it's wrong, shouldn't it be correct on a relative basis? why isn't this number climbing?
US Unemployment statistics have a number of flaws, including not capturing people who are underemployed (taking any low paying job to try to make ends meet instead of working in a higher paying field they are qualified for) and not capturing those who are no longer searching for a job
I agree that the most-commonly reported 'head-line' numbers can be misleading, but more detailed statistics are available. One of my favorites is the labor participation rate: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CIVPART
The second point is hard to quantify. If I just give up searching for a job and live off savings or government assistance, but I would take a job if I could find one, I should probably count as unemployed even though I'm not actively searching for a job. But if I am choosing not to look because I won't take a job, I am technically unemployed by the strict definition of the word but I don't count for what most people care about when thinking about the unemployment rate.
Underemployment is already reported and is distinctly different so I don't think it's fair to say that not counting someone at Burger King who has a Master's degree as unemployed is a "flaw."
>If I just give up searching for a job and live off savings or government assistance, but I would take a job if I could find one, I should probably count as unemployed even though I'm not actively searching for a job.
The current definition makes sense because it's linked to an overt action that can be objectively determined. "Not looking for a job but theoretically would like a job" gets into all sorts of issues like "I want a job as a king if it landed on my lap...".
The US tracks six different unemployment metrics plus overall
labor force participation rate. You’re talking about U6 and/or labor force participation rate.
Just because U3 is the measure typically quoted doesn’t mean the others don’t exist.
But I think in this case an aging population can hold down the official unemployment rate, even when there are no new jobs outside services for the aged.
They separately report people who are on unemployment insurance, but the headline unemployment numbers come from a survey of potential workers, which will capture recent graduates.
Source: 15 years ago I was one of the people they surveyed. Every month for a year they called me, once a month, to ask what my employment status last week was, if I was actively looking, etc. (It was all synchronized around one week a month, but I don't remember which one it was they cared about.)
What stops it from being a more useful metric is that it doesn't account for someone who was employed with benefits five or ten years ago, but today has some crappy gig economy job with no health insurance. They show up as employed either way.
> Almost no jobs were added net and the few that were, were all in health care, 131K i think the article said.
I wonder what those folks in health care are doing, because (once again) after dealing with the US healthcare system, it seems like it's about 1% doctors, 10% other staff and 90% useless billing/scheduling/collections, designed to extract the maximum possible amount of money from a patient and provide the minimum amount of care.
More jobs being added in health care seems to be an indicator for it getting even worse.
Native population is declining (and prime-age workforce is retiring), and the Trump admin has been extensively working to reduce the size of the immigrant workforce.
So the unemployment rate is staying low, but the absolute number of workers is flat or declining.
what you're talking about is the role of government. govt should be supporting policies like you are suggesting, by for example allowing for universal basic income or uniersal basic land or services, etc.
reply