Probably because in order to get it passed they had to have some cutoff because there was some people who would argue against it being free for everyone.

HN poster responds: "You have 0.18 kids under 6! That seems unlikely!"

Am i missing the joke? ChatGPT tells me 3% of 100 is 3, not 0.18.

When I first read it I thought wait, 3% of 6 is 0.18, but then I realized no I'm a dork because 6 is the age of the kid, whereas the number 100 is written as a word hundred, hence I decided to write "HN poster responds:" with quotes around my first non-coffee aided thought because I thought it was funny. I guess I should have just made that full statement, but I do have a tendency to rather oblique communication strategies.

on edit: basically because I thought hah, this is the kind of mistake I always see poor tired folks make on HN and making the dumb comment and here I am making it!! This is a classic moment!

Off topic: what are you trying to signal by saying chatgpt helped you with arithmetic here?

Is it supposed to give more weight to what you are saying?

.18 is 3% of 6. This might mean something, but I don't know what.

10 months out of six years is 0.14 so it isn't quite prenatal benefits.

What happens if an unborn baby has rights to go to preschool, but the birthing parent can't?

Is an unborn child a US citizen yet?

the next number in the sequence 3, 6, 18 is 72, but I doubt it means anything.

I think the joke is people trying to figure out why 0.18. I, personally, enjoy it.

You’re missing something if you asked ChatGPT that.

No, they have their irony fully deployed, not missing anything.

nah, it just means you get 18% of childcare costs paid.

I mean theoretically brainf*ck is, but I'm pretty if you were to find satirical programming languages they would be satirizing development itself or a type of development (object-oriented, functional), and this is satirizing a purpose of development.

I've said it before - about MS. But if you move enough Danes off American IT the rest will follow, I think once you have a 30-40 percent move then within less than a year a landslide, maybe quicker as it is now tied up with patriotism.

hmm, why is it flagged now? Went to 178 points, lots of engagement, someone must have been mad. wonder why?

I mean it sounds sort of if you know what the second order effect of damage to plants and ground water will be if people salt their driveways? I would think you sort of need to run the test in production to see which way is more beneficial.

is it your contention that once anybody becomes sufficiently skillful with a technology they will come to love it? And thus stating that one does not love the specific technology demonstrates the lack of skill?

maybe saving money they used more - in other words Jevon's paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

thus perhaps leading to more global warming

>The healthier items in America should be a baseline instead of pricing out people.

what percentage of people on Ozempic etc. are poor enough that they would be priced out by healthier food?

I'm not sure I get why everything above France would be rendered uninhabitable? The coldest place inhabited by humans year round is Oymyakon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oymyakon

Temperatures are generally above 0°C in summer, -50 approximately in winter.

Will an Ice Age actually be worse than that?

I would expect somewhat better, although maybe not much. I might expect Denmark and Southern Parts of Sweden and England to reach 10 degrees in Summer, and -20 in Winter. But that is of course just a guess on my part so I am certainly willing to hear that I have guessed wrong.

If the Earth's atmosphere gradually disappeared over the next 10-50 years would that be okay because humans live in the ISS?

Last ice age had a km thick ice sheet going down to Berlin.

Yeah but I would think that is still survivable, unless it comes like that one dumb movie in which the ice age is a super quick one and everything happens in the space of 24 hours approximately.

Of course I'm thinking survivable with the magic of "technology" and maybe I'm adding wishful thinking into this science fiction scenario here, but I'm not sure if the result of the new Ice Age will be the same as the last one.

Survivable is a strong word. We can survive for a long time huddled around breeder reactors. IMO the better question is how many of the affected people would try to migrate to better areas and how much firepower they bring with them when they’re not welcome.

You'd need to pull habitations up by a couple meters each year for a few decades if that one km of ice sheet builds up gradually :D Probably survivable, but inside yurts instead of fully furnished flats with amenities.