Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | somecontext's commentslogin

According to this graphic https://www.hunterurban.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Car-L... 57.3% of children (0--18yo) are in a household with a car. There's a weighting issue here, but I'd still bet that most families in NYC have a car.


Well 57% is most, although that doesn't account for having multiple kids in one household.

Either way it's close, and the closer you get to Manhattan the higher that number goes. Remember, there are over 8 million people in NYC, and over 12 million during the work day.


Here's a reference, as well as other options: https://worldgo.ca/understanding-your-airlines-meal-options/


My understanding is that people would mostly try this approach when the samples are periodic/regular.


Of further potential interest: This paper cites an earlier paper by Keogh and Lin with the provocative title "Clustering of time-series subsequences is meaningless", available online at https://www.cs.ucr.edu/~eamonn/meaningless.pdf


Here's the abstract of this earlier paper:

> Given the recent explosion of interest in streaming data and online algorithms, clustering of time series subsequences, extracted via a sliding window, has received much attention. In this work we make a surprising claim. Clustering of time series subsequences is meaningless. More concretely, clusters extracted from these time series are forced to obey a certain constraint that is pathologically unlikely to be satisfied by any dataset, and because of this, the clusters extracted by any clustering algorithm are essentially random. While this constraint can be intuitively demonstrated with a simple illustration and is simple to prove, it has never appeared in the literature. We can justify calling our claim surprising, since it invalidates the contribution of dozens of previously published papers. We will justify our claim with a theorem, illustrative examples, and a comprehensive set of experiments on reimplementations of previous work. Although the primary contribution of our work is to draw attention to the fact that an apparent solution to an important problem is incorrect and should no longer be used, we also introduce a novel method which, based on the concept of time series motifs, is able to meaningfully cluster subsequences on some time series datasets.

Several commenters here seem to ask "okay, so then what's the right way to cluster windows of timeseries??" Perhaps the final sentence of this abstract suggests a solution in that direction?


The suggested solution is look at motifs: windows that are highly similar when trivial matches due to window overlap are excluded. If you take this to its logical conclusion, you end up in the Matrix Profile rabbit hole. https://www.cs.ucr.edu/~eamonn/MatrixProfile.html


What makes this a rabbit hole? I've looked into it before but not deeply, is it tricky to use in practice for a non obvious reason?


If you were to compute it the naive way, that would be slow, but with increasingly sophisticated algorithms developed over a series of twenty papers, you can get massive speedups. Lots of clever tricks to enjoy! Though I guess you can skip the scenic route if you want and just read the first and last papers.


Absolutely mindblowing. A strong claim, but they present very strong arguments. Thanks for sharing.


In case anyone was curious, the Internet archive on my parent commenter's link shows large dozen egg prices of: $7.90 March 2024, $7.50 November 2023, $6.50 February 2023.


Oh good thinking! So in line with the sibling commenter, they’ve gone up some, but not a crazy amount, with most of that increase happening prior to the outbreak. And still cheaper than Vital Farms prices mentioned by others elsewhere in the thread.


> totalling almost $2 billion. The LAPD's budget for one fiscal year is larger than most country's GDPs

In case anyone was curious, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi... suggests that ~17 countries have a GDP of less than $2 billion per year. Seeing as how there are 193+ countries, this means that the LAPD budget exceeds the GDP of fewer than 10% of countries. (The median country GDP is ~$50 billion per year.)

For some extra context: while these 17 countries include some very poor countries, the primary reason that they have such small GDPs is their small population. Their combined population is approximately the same as the city of Los Angeles.


> Moreover, there's no good-faith way to call [Medicare] "welfare".

For some context, Wikipedia says:

> In the United States, depending on the context, the term "welfare" ... can also include social insurance programs such as unemployment insurance, Social Security, and Medicare.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_spending#United_States


No. Not in the context Rayiner meant it, where there's policy discretion about who gets it, the way you might apply work requirements to SNAP.


I don't think "policy discretion to deny" is what the word "welfare" means.

But in any case, Medicare is literally denied to prisoners, which is an example of ... denying welfare benefits for antisocial behavior?


The entire thread is about the discretion to deny services.


In case anyone is curious, the $1 is the increase in the maximum SNAP benefit per month for an individual, from $291/month to $292/month. (The increases for larger households are similarly small.)

This is not the actual increase of the benefit amount. In particular, it appears the cost of living adjustment this year is 2.5%. I have been unable to find statistics on how many people/households actually receive the maximum amount, but I don't have a particular reason to believe it is large. (The average benefit amounts are significantly below the maxima.)

Tldr: the average SNAP benefit amount received by people has increased and will increase by significantly more than $1/month.


In case anyone was curious, the following text is from the section of the article discussing "violent crime":

> Burglary is generally considered a property crime, but an array of state and federal laws classify burglary as a violent crime in certain situations, such as when it occurs at night, in a residence, or with a weapon present. So even if the building was unoccupied, someone convicted of burglary could be punished for a violent crime and end up with a long prison sentence and “violent” record.

The article does not state this explicitly, but it suggests that someone who burgles a residence at night with a weapon should not have a long prison sentence, if the residence turned out to be unoccupied. (Perhaps even if it was occupied but the occupants were not "physically harmed"?)


> There were millions of years without ice caps even

In case anyone was curious, this is a significant understatement. It is currently believed that the Earth had no ice caps for its first 2 billion years, before the Huronian glaciation, and then again no ice caps for another ~1.5 billion years.


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

Search: