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

Is anyone not going to med school because of debt? Not sure what problems this solves.

For the long commitment that doctors make and the debt they take on, they receive basically guaranteed highly paying employment for as long as they wish.

There's also a shortage of medical school spots, we can't create enough doctors.

I think this is probably an attempt to compete with other medical schools for top students. NYU is pretty well respected bit probably loses a lot of candidates to Harvard, Yale, etc.


Perhaps as a back of a line thing - not those about to enter it. It is already infamously grueling. Graduating and being six figures in debt could try the patience of many. "Staying in school in a high stress environment till near my thirties is bad enough without being in debt practically big enough for a house for years afterwards. I'll just go into banking after four years so I can actually enjoy the money while I am young." Whether you want doctors with such am attitude is another question.


Banking and tech aren't guaranteed the way medicine is. Other fields are result based, and it's often easy to get fired and be replaced.

A risk averse person would rather stick to what they know (student life, exams) for a guaranteed reward.

The debt isn't really that much. Probably the average is 200k. You can pay that off within about 1-2 years of residency, and interest rates tend to be low since they're low risk loans for banks to give out.


> The debt isn't really that much. Probably the average is 200k. You can pay that off within about 1-2 years of residency, and interest rates tend to be low since they're low risk loans for banks to give out.

Please try looking at the numbers again. Assuming you pay off undergraduate loans, a private medical school will cost $30-45k a year (not including living costs, so tack on another $30k a year), so assuming ($150-$300,000) will be total assumed debt (not including books, unexpected expenses, etc) during those 4 years. Residency salary is basically stuck at around $50k/yearly for 3-5 years (based on residency type), you can contribute back to loans but there's not a chance you're paying that off in residency. (source: current medical resident)


I mean 1-2 years after residency. Most people taking on debt for medical school don't really see it as a huge risk, it's basically a guaranteed investment.

The big downside of medicine is the time in my opinion. 7 years of prime time, but some of the med students I know are enjoying it. A former classmate said it's less work than undergrad.


We can't create enough doctors because medical school is prohibitively expensive. Universal healthcare and universal higher education go hand in hand.


Wow, you are so confident saying this when you are wrong.

More people want to go to medical school than there are spots open. If you create more spots, you get more doctors. Cost is not a barrier to medical school, loans for this profession are very easy to obtain.


Wow, you are so confident when you provide literally zero evidence to back up your claim either.

Though that's not what I was addressing. I was addressing the criticism of universal healthcare that we'll somehow run out of doctors. The issue is it costs money for a school to run a med school. Making the government pay for it enables more med schools to be built.


> I think this is probably an attempt to compete with other medical schools for top students.

But what do they get from these top students? Clearly not tuition anymore!


Has YC become a meme? Yet another company doing the same thing, and claiming subjective advantages over the competition.

Almost like companies are selected for being part of a story ('poor college student craves mums food') rather than being an actual business.


You can appreciate the willingness to jump and start a business and take it as far as being ready to ship out your product, but I agree this product just seems redundant. It has so many flaws that people have pointed out. Literally the only point the founder made that separated this from the competition was that 'ours tastes better', even though it is way more expensive.


Perhaps I was too dismissive, I wish them the best of luck. Maybe it's actually that delicious.

I'm just surprised to see another food company pop up, it's kind of like the latex mattress boom (Casper, leesa, etc) but those mattresses are ridiculously high margin products.


Think of it not as a shake up, but as a wealth transfer from investors to the proletariat.

It's like how Uber has been giving me $3 rides while it posts losses 1/3 of revenue.

I should send VCs a thank you card, those loveable dummies!


I'm not opposed to wealth transfer from investors to proles, I just wish it was more sustainable.

And maybe in the form of health care and not movie tickets. :)


Hmm I don't think it's that much of a headache to have some PIN code provided to pilots as an additional measure.

These planes aren't cheap, even a small personal jet is in the low millions. A Boeing 747 or similar is in the hundreds of millions.


Airline engineering employees need to power on planes, fire up various systems to test, and even move them around. It's absolutely routine. All the reports I've seen seem to suggest that this was one of those employees. So it seems reasonable to assume that he would have had the PIN or "key" or whatever in this case anyway.


valet mode for aircraft. of course we can never eliminate the risk but perhaps a two key mode similar to launch controls for missiles to do anything with a plane other than low power movement?


You put so much (undeserved) faith in the missile launching crowd...000000 comes to mind.


Other industries have controls that prevent simple passwords from being used. Who audits the missile control groups?


The all zero thing goes back a while when someone in the military was told to put launch codes in and defiantly made them 0. Because God forbid there should be any protection on the most deadly device ever created by man.


Whatever system that you put in place would have to never (or very close to never) have a false negative during normal aircraft operation.

One other commenter here mentions a simple ignition key would have prevented this incident, but there's been at least one major ignition system flaw in cars that caused multiple deaths ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_ignition_switch... ), and the consequences of a failure causing loss of control to a passenger aircraft far outweighs that in a car.

Given the very low rate of unauthorised takeoffs of passenger aircraft, and that this case was an insider who may have been able to gain access to keys/codes anyway, is introducing introducing a new system to aircraft justified?


Yeah, a freakin _ignition key_ would have made this whole thing impossible.


Unless of course as an employee he had access to one.


Well, require that only pilots have access to the key then.


.. which they will promptly hand over to the engineers for maintenance purposes, just as people do with their car keys.


Create a “valet key” which lets the engineer to do what he/she needs to do but doesn’t allow to take off.


And mechanics.


Or let air traffic control diasable any plane while it’s taxiing.


I’m not sure having a remote control kill switch on an airplane is the kind of backdoor that improve security (if any backdoor can, which I’d doubt).


The current "kill switch" technology for rouge airplanes is an F-18 with a few Sidewinders.


Sounds a lot safer to me and sufficient as well.


That's dangerous. Imagine this remote control gets hacked and planes start getting disabled in mid air, or even while trying to take off.

An hard to copy ignition key makes a lot more sense.


Well games are a trendy area and more fun and challenging to work on than most other software...as long as there is more demand for game development jobs than there are open positions, it will be this way.

Unlike screenwriters, whose alternative is making lattes, game developers who get tired of the chase can go work for a traditional tech company.


Majority of people who work on games are not programmers. They are various artists.


How many former game devs are working in your shop?


WeWork is just a gamble on real estate. There are probably instruments with very similar upside and risk as WeWork.

VCs, probably not familiar with the world of real estate, aren't able to see this. They think they're investing in something new, but it's really the same old stuff in a new package that they're paying a premium for.


Soil rights are not a basic human right...

In many countries it is nearly impossible to get citizenship without having citizen parents.

I'm not sure why you would want to give the children of those committing treason citizenship, it could be a future risk if said children enter the same path.


> ... those committing treason ...

Foreign agents who aren't citizens aren't committing treason. That is, unless they defect.


Actually, you don't have to be a citizen to commit treason. There is a notion of 'temporary allegiance' which allows non citizens to be prosecuted for treason.


>not citizens

Well the problem just clears itself up


> I'm not sure why you would want to give the children of those committing treason citizenship

There's a reason that the US Constitutionally prohibited corruption of blood from the establishment of the Constitution and the United Kingdom abolished it in the 19th Century.


If a "spy" has a child in Canada who would not be a citizen but for where they are born, that implies the parent cannot be guilty of treason against Canada as they are not Canadian.

Also, as a counterpoint, applying penalties for crimes to the descendants of an offender has become unfashionable in some circles. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attainder

"The United States Constitution prohibits corruption of blood as a punishment for treason."


Revoking citizenship is not a penalty.

Most countries do not grant jus soli rights, and several grant it only with significant restrictions. This is not a universal human right. Canada has a right to set restrictions on jus soli rights.

Canada already does not grant citizenship to children born to foreign diplomats working in Canada. Spies are working for a foreign government, just not declaring it.

The defense in this case is not arguing that canada's law is illegal.. just that the law specifically says diplomats, and spies aren't diplomats.

It's not clear that simply not declaring your employer makes you immune from the law anymore than not declaring your income makes you immune from taxes.


> Revoking citizenship is not a penalty.

Yes, it obviously is.

> Canada already does not grant citizenship to children born to foreign diplomats working in Canada.

Essentially no country recognizing jus soli does that for essentially the same reason that diplomatic immunity exists (and affecting the exact same set of people subject to diplomatic immunity)—the presence of diplomats in a country is a convenience for both the sending and receiving country, which, in the interest of relations between the two countries, died not have the legal effect that that presence would otherwise have for the individuals. Non-diplomats who are employed by a foreign government within a country are but tested the same way.

> It's not clear that simply not declaring your employer makes you immune from the law

Declaration isn't the point. Non-citizens openly working for a foreign country in non-diplomatic roles aren't covered either. The diplomat's unique status as, essentially, a mutually-recognized extension of the foreign state is the point.


> Spies are working for a foreign government, just not declaring it.

You've changed the wording to fit your narrative. These spies were not diplomats. They had no immunity.


I wasn't using the word "penalty" in a legalistic sense, and I think you are. Something can have multiple causes or effects, so insisting that one of them is the correct one may be beside the point.


Let's revoke yours and see whether you think it's a penalty or not.


The easiest thing to do to reduce your caloric intake is to start cooking...it's very hard to get to high calorie numbers if you are making your own food instead of eating out.

Oh, and when you're hungry eat a meal first then snack later. Don't start snacking first or you can find yourself over indulging in chips to make up for the meal you didn't eat on time.


Cooking your own food is a great way to improve your health and also unplug from technology for a while. Restaurant food is usually way too full of oil, sugar and salt.

Another very healthy way to reduce your caloric intake is to make fresh vegetables the center of your diet and then fill in from there instead of eating the occasional side salad.


When I started to cook I actually gained a huge amount of weight. I've no idea what you mean by being hard to get high calorie numbers. It's as easy as any other way: you eat too much food. It was only when I actually learnt what a sensible serving size was and actually weighing out my ingredients (especially carbs) that I became normal again.


Usually I just throw some meat on the grill and put it in a quesadilla or sandwich with various toppings. I occasionally make a salad, but very very occasionally.

I feel pretty full and rarely take in more than 2k calories a day - I'm not limiting intake in any way.

I've never struggled with weight though, just a few pounds after college prompted me to start cooking.


Director of Full-Stack sounds very awkward, you should think of a better title like Engineering Director or Director of Full-Stack Development.


This applies to all prominent people at any time in history.


Yes. Still, it’s need to be said


Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

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

Search: