MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by magicloop | 2025-04-09 20:12:45+00:00
Sadly this is not the case in relation to EU laws.

In the US system of law, it is based on codified "rules". If you follow the letter of the rules you are fine - no fines.

The system of regulation at play here is the EU digital markets act. These laws are based on the effect of your actions, not the specific actions you undertake.

If the effect of the steps you take produce unacceptable outcomes, you pay fines even if you follow the requirements. The converse applies as well. If you ignore the rules but the outcome is in the spirit of the laws, then no fine.

The idea is to avoid malicious compliance but the cost of this is ambiguity in interpretation and also the market response to your actions might be genuinely surprising.

Here is a technical example to highlight the problem:

Apple were asked that you should allow independent browser technology implementations. They did this (to allow Google's technology to be employed as an example). But due to practical complexity they could not make progressive web apps work on iPhone (since they would need to route through the API which can be provided by Google's browser technology). So to comply with the rules, Apple disabled full screen PWAs and instead allowed them instead the web view area inside a browser, not full screen like a native app is experienced.

The EU regulatory body said revert that, and allow PWAs despite their own rules being then violated (as it would be using only Apple's browser technology) because the effect of allowing PWAs is a competitive marketplace for native app alternatives (web apps).
by James_K | 2025-04-09 20:12:49+00:00
> the likely feedback effects on the broader economy that a universal rollout would have

It's interesting to describe as "likely" something for which there is no evidence. This is an actively anti-science belief. It seems to me as if you really don't like the idea of UBI and so are saying that, if it actually happened, the effect would be the opposite of what experimental data shows. This is pretty clearly biased.

> (increase in the money supply)

There is no effect on money supply if this is funded through taxes.

> Some things just can't be tested ahead of time empirically.

You can gradually expand the pool of people receiving UBI to see how these effects scale. Begin in one city, then increase to a larger region, then do it nationally.
by jsdwarf | 2025-04-09 20:12:56+00:00
You could study various subsidy regimes during the COVID-19 pandemic to answer this question. Some regimes subsidized resouces like energy, whereas other regimes provided something like an universal basic income (ubi) to small businesses/freelancers who were unable to serve their customers during lockdown. Austria was on the ubi side and we had huge problems with Inflation afterwards
by seizethecheese | 2025-04-09 20:13:15+00:00
> For the primary comparison of any vitamin D versus placebo, the intervention did not statistically significantly affect overall ARI risk (OR 0·94 [95% CI 0·88–1·00], p=0·057; 40 studies; 61 589 participants; I2=26·4%).

Okay, so the 95% confidence interval is reduction from 0% to 12%, but since this barely is on the other side of p=0.05 the conclusion is fully that the claim is not supported.
by nisa | 2025-04-09 20:13:25+00:00
It would be a just a hefty fee for most EU companies and not much more. From what I've seen Azure is pretty popular in most bigger companies and smaller shops and websites use often AWS or Google cloud. Microsoft Windows and Office is also everywhere - it would be a tax on European business with little effects on the USA because moving away from big clouds won't happen because there is no realistic alternative.

Last I've looked "Lidl Cloud" from Schwartz-IT that is often mentioned as alternative is basically managed Kubernetes for more than double the price of Azure/AWS before rebates. They have that idiotic meaningless TÜV button on their websites and unfortunately it's not technical excellence but rather a trap for boomer CEOs...

Europe missed that boat unfortunately and I don't see that changing soon. Hetzner/OVH and so on only provide bare metal or virtual machines for little money but there is no European cloud with serious IaC and managed services that are stable and battle tested as far as I know.

Changing taxation rules is the interesting topic but unfortunately EU countries are competing on that and that would destroy the business model of countries like Luxembourg or Ireland - I'm all for changing it and it would be better in the long-term but it's probably impossible to pull off at the moment.
by chris_va | 2025-04-09 20:13:47+00:00
This really does not seem like a balanced take, e.g. it does not address the main question of inflation destroying whatever value might be created.

If we redistribute money (which is a proxy for scarcity) to a small number of people, it is hard to observe the aggregate effect on the rest of the economy. If we redistribute money to everyone, we reduce the value (e.g. velocity of money increases without a commensurate change in economic output), so there would be massive inflation. It's possible that the continual massive inflation will cost less than the stability created by UBI, and it's possible it could be the extreme opposite. So, it would be a Grand Experiment, like Communism, and like all grand experiments it could end very poorly, and these studies do nothing to address that.
by root_axis | 2025-04-09 20:14:06+00:00
Maybe not all of them as individuals, but them as a public. It's not just a fluke of the last election, over the past two decades the u.s. has given control of all branches of government to Trump.

Beyond that, IMO, the public doesn't really care about tariffs. Right now there is a lot of noise because this kind of capricious threat/application of tariffs is something new, but the tariff chaos will become boring background noise in a few months and people will move on to the next thing.
by mediaman | 2025-04-09 20:14:09+00:00
This only seems to be an issue if the marginal cost of building is too high to expand supply, though, right? Otherwise if people have more money, they bid up housing, then new stuff gets built, and supply profits decline.

Of course, restricting supply is a problem. I also think this logic might break down in tightly restricted areas that are already vertically built out - Manhattan, for example, because costs per housing unit tend to follow a U curve with respect to height, where they decline with density but start increasing again at very high density, but that's not an issue in most places.
by mananaysiempre | 2025-04-09 20:14:16+00:00
Notably, not the first time this legal fiction has been used, but I don’t really get what the previous uses were for. E.g., for the 2021–2022 Congress, section 7 of the War Powers Resolution[1], as well as House rules[2] XIII clause 7, XXII clause 7(c)(1), and XV clause 7 (all of which require something to be done within a prespecified number of either calendar or legislative days) were all suspended[3]

from 2021-01-03 to 2021-01-28 by HR 8 [4], from 2021-03-13 to 2021-04-22 by HR 118, from 2022-08-01 to 2022-09-30 by HR 1289, from 2022-10-03 to 2022-11-11 by HR 1396, from 2022-11-21 to 2022-11-28 by HR 1464, from 2022-12-22 until the end by HR 1529,

which looks like vacations, campaigning and such? I’m not really sure, but it’s evident the formula had already been out there and was not a momentary fit of insanity and/or legislative genius (the Congress before that one used it too, for example), I’m just not sure what it was used for before.

[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1546

[2] https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-CLERK-RULE-PAMPHLET-...

[3] https://www.congress.gov/quick-search/legislation?wordsPhras...

[4] https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-resolutio... (mutatis mutandis for the others)
by markus_zhang | 2025-04-09 20:14:21+00:00
I always think, instead of UBI in $$, UBI in items is a lot better. This alters the social-economic reality more dramatically than UBI in $$ but I think it is a better option.

So basically, instead of throwing a bunch of $$ to everyone every month and hopefully inflation doesn't happen, give everyone a basic condo with a reasonable number of electrical appliances in an UBI apartment (being UBI doesn't mean low quality, it should mean reasonably good quality but without those fancy stuffs), send everyone food package every week, free library card, free online university admission (they don't have to take them if they don't want to), etc., and maybe a bit of $$ just for entertainment and such.

However, I think it's more important to help people to find meanings in their life. If I get UBI but feel lost, how do I find a sense of belonging? How do I find meaning in my life? Sure, if I'm smart or if I'm affluent, I might get into some really meaningful and well paid jobs, but UBI does not magically give people more job, it merely gives them more time to figure out -- and a life of time is not enough without guidance and help.

To help people find belongings and feel "being useful", the government can also encourage volunteering, mass infrastructure maintenance projects, and promote many other activities, so people can earn some pay, learn some skills AND find meaning in their life.
by ozmodiar | 2025-04-09 20:14:33+00:00
The state gets more power over you without UBI (assuming a social safety net of any kind already exists) - without UBI it needs a larger apparatus to decide how to distribute funds, and it can pick arbitrary reasons to cut off your funds. Under UBI administration would be far simpler and cutting off your income for political reasons would be far more noticeable, since it's supposed to be universal.
by csomar | 2025-04-09 20:14:45+00:00
Yeah... if that was their reasoning then they are as dumb as a sack of rocks. The rates went up further after the tariffs pause today.

> Instead of being seen as a safe haven, U.S. debt itself started to look shaky.

No shit. Having an inconsistent policy because of clear incompetence (xx Dimensional chess) is a very bad sign for the world largest economy. At some point this will hit the bonds which is the foundation of this economy.
by palmotea | 2025-04-09 20:15:11+00:00
> then we should change society

> that is my point

You're letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. Realistically, you're not going to change society to give people "money and purpose" without a job. Fixating on an unrealistic goal takes focus away from more realistic ones.

I mean, for a least a century people have been proposing using productivity improvements to increase leisure time and distribute goods more equally. And in that time work demands have increased (e.g. going from one full-time worker in a typical household to two).
by svat | 2025-04-09 20:15:39+00:00
In fact in these slides from a 2011/2012 talk, Sedgewick talks about exactly this, even going as far as to draw a contrast between "TCS" and "analysis of algorithms" (the "scientific method"): https://sedgewick.io/talks/#algorithms-for-the-masses = https://sedgewick.io/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/2011-12AlgsM... onwards.

(Also touched upon briefly in https://sedgewick.io/talks/#lasting-legacy-of-flajolet = https://sedgewick.io/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/2013-14Flajo...)

His point is exactly that, often researchers care only about worst-case analysis and asymptotics, which is not necessarily a useful scientific analysis of how long an algorithm is expected to take on a machine as a function of the input size (which was the original motivation for Knuth etc to develop the field).

The same authors (but ordered as Sedgewick and Flajolet!) also have a book called An Introduction to the Analysis of Algorithms; there's a course website at https://aofa.cs.princeton.edu/home/ and videos on Coursera (https://www.coursera.org/learn/analysis-of-algorithms) — it is advanced mathematics but less advanced than the Analytic Combinatorics book.
by A_D_E_P_T | 2025-04-09 20:15:47+00:00
> My conditions for you:

> At least 177cm tall (hug dynamics, you understand.)

Hahahahaha

Also, this is some kind of interesting scam you're running here. Why do you need to go to San Francisco to find love? Why do you need a >5'10" tech nerd, when you can just as easily find a local "stranger" in any city?
by redfern314 | 2025-04-09 20:15:56+00:00
In no way does it set a dangerous precedent. Fortifying flour and iodizing salt (both of which could be termed a "medical treatment") were huge successes, with universally positive results and at virtually no cost. Mandating something like this should be done cautiously (in either direction), but fluoride isn't the first, only, or last example of it.

The only difference is that it's rather harder to avoid fluorinated water than iodized salt if one is so inclined, which raises the bar for proof of efficacy and preponderance evidence that it does not cause harm (which has been provided by others in this thread).
by wging | 2025-04-09 20:16:57+00:00
I don't think your approach is bad, nor is it in conflict with the advice in the article, at least in spirit. You aren't (I think) describing a situation where your untested guesses end up in a released product, or in ill-founded advice to colleagues. (Both of those actually do happen.) Forming and testing hypotheses is valuable, building on unfounded assumptions is a very different thing.
by SketchySeaBeast | 2025-04-09 20:17:57+00:00
And as you get closer to retirement start moving them into more fixed income. I don't know if the same options are available in the states, but in Canada Vanguard, Blackrock and others offer broad market index funds that have risk profiles that you can move through as you get close to retirement, allowing you to slowly pull out of equities and move into bonds. You shouldn't be 2 years from retirement and still 100% into equities.
by piva00 | 2025-04-09 20:18:13+00:00
I'm starting to subscribe to the idea this was blatant market manipulation.

Trump is only out to make money, the guy never had any other thought in life since money gives him status, fame, and power.

It's a grift, as any other of his grifts, but now he can manipulate the whole stock market with his power.

There's nothing else that I can rationally come up with to explain this absurdity.
by TeMPOraL | 2025-04-09 20:18:13+00:00
> Well the study at least answers your second point, it shows that people are enjoying their work more, and that they change jobs more often (ie take more risks) and stay as employed as before

As GGP said, this doesn't compare. There's even nothing magically non-linear about it: people stay employed, because they know the UBI study will only last a few years, after which they'll need to get back to normal. It makes no sense to interrupt your career for it, as the "hole in your CV" will just turn into a severe and compounding disadvantage in lost years and experience.
by serviceberry | 2025-04-09 20:18:28+00:00
I don't think capital has any special attachment to real estate specifically. It's just that we have policies that essentially require your money to be invested into something (because inflation); and we turned real estate into a safe investment asset through policies that create perpetual scarcity.

You can probably come up with policies that penalize real estate investments, but (a) it will just cause the investors to chase some other asset class, instead of redistributing wealth; (b) unless scarcity is addressed, it's unlikely that housing prices are going to drop. Landlords extract profits from the assets they hold, but they don't cause there to be fewer homes or apartments available.
by snickerbockers | 2025-04-09 20:18:46+00:00
if tariffs are applied based on the date of departure and not the date of arrival you can definitely get away with falsifying the date. And on the off-chance you get caught you feign confusion on account of the rapidly fluctuating circumstances and the customs guy lets you just pay whatever you owe without sanction because he has a million other people saying the same thing and even if he can tell you're lying he really doesn't care anyways.

I have a friend who had to get something shipped from Australia to Germany via freight, he told me intercontinental freight shipping generally takes multiple months if you aren't Wal-Mart/Amazon and you aren't willing to pay out the ass for express handling.

>The foreign factory system is already in place for those that use it

ah but there's the small kernel of genius within the corncob that is trump's insanity: which foreign factories do you use and who will they take the shipment from and and wait fuck he just gave a 90-day extension less than a week in, will the factory let me have my money back if i cancel?
by 9rx | 2025-04-09 20:18:51+00:00
Even if we assume manufacturing does bring back high quality jobs: The people still have to leave their low quality jobs they are currently doing to fill those jobs. Which means the American people are going to have to give up something. Which probably means things like their Big Macs, with a return to home cooking like in the heyday of manufacturing.

A win from a health perspective, perhaps, but going back to the age where people didn't do anything other than spend all their free time maintaining their home life probably isn't what people are dreaming of.
by muzani | 2025-04-09 20:19:41+00:00
Malaysian here. Uptalk is used more to turn a sentence into a suggestion. Something like "Hey, there's one dim sum left," to suggest that I'm taking this but you can challenge it. I could see why ChatGPT would adopt it. It's trying to be polite.

Often it's in a tonal particle, "One dim sum left meh." But it's possible in trying to artificially combine tone and text, the uptalk is moved up.

But the tell tones of a Malaysian accent is it's clipped. Instead of "I don't like that idea," it becomes "Don't like it." ChatGPT may be written American, so as an accent, it would sound closer to, "I- don't like, that idea."

And sentences often end in an elongated manner, "I wrote that is essay you wanted~". The elongated ends are quite common in many SEA accents as well, especially Thai.
by palmotea | 2025-04-09 20:19:42+00:00
>> It's not a reasonable place to start.

> Why not? If it works it works. Not everyone is concerned with receiving the award for best programmer.

Ok, that clarifies things: programmers who avoid reading the docs to guess, or follow the "Google search, stack overflow, paste in the first answer" cycle are mediocre programmers. If they don't want to be good programmers (which what the article is talking about), they can keep doing what they're doing.

> If you are not capturing "why" in your tests, what are you testing, exactly?

You can't capture why in code. Your tests are a demonstration of the "what."
by Cthulhu_ | 2025-04-09 20:20:08+00:00
Those are federal services, that's not the same as UBI. The premise of UBI (in my limited understanding of it) is that, especially in more socialist countries, you can get rid of a lot of programs that support the poor / sick / etc in favor of a system where everyone gets the same amount, and the bureaucratic systems in place that check to make sure people are entitled to these benefits can be dissolved.

For example, I live in the Netherlands which according to Americans is a really socialist country; if you lose your job from getting fired, you are entitled to unemployment benefits. However, only if you prove you are actively looking for a different job, if you don't or can't prove that, you get shorted.

There's the dole (bijstand), but a lot of counties put a lot of conditions on there; some even told people to grab some tools and get to work on maintaining the public spaces as part of keeping their benefits. Which is employment, which should mean they get a contract and wage, worker's rights, etc.
by niemandhier | 2025-04-09 20:20:09+00:00
Nope. Well maybe, if trumpism continues.

Point is: The best and brightest go where they think their life will be most fulfilling. Up to last year that was California for tech and New York for culture.

Even the Chinese think china is oppressive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tang_ping#:~:text=Tang%20ping%...
by zawaideh | 2025-04-09 20:20:12+00:00
I’ve had a similar line of thought.. basically what you are proposing is sort of a voucher system. But, here is where my mind went, what if it is implemented as a bunch of tokens issued via a blockchain or even through a central authority. They can be freely traded if needed and prices can go up and down, but regardless of the price, there is a set number of them that get issued.

Similarly, you can get issued tokens/rewards for doing needed work.

I’ve wanted to spend more time thinking through this more thoroughly and flesh out the idea more.. without ever having the chance to
by mananaysiempre | 2025-04-09 20:20:20+00:00
House Resolution 211 of the current Congress[1]:

> Each day for the remainder of the first session of the 119th Congress shall not constitute a calendar day for purposes of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622) with respect to a joint resolution terminating a national emergency declared by the President on February 1, 2025.

Referring to 50 U.S.C. 1622(c) [2]:

> (1) A joint resolution to terminate a national emergency declared by the President shall be referred to the appropriate committee of the House of Representatives or the Senate, as the case may be. One such joint resolution shall be reported out by such committee together with its recommendations within fifteen calendar days after the day on which such resolution is referred to such committee, unless such House shall otherwise determine by the yeas and nays.

> [and so on and so forth with fairly stringent time limits all the way through the legislature]

(As somebody who’s never been to the US—come on, am I the only one who finds legal questions like this to be basically irresistible RTFM bait?)

[1] https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-resolutio...

[2] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1622#c or https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:50%20section:...
by sschueller | 2025-04-09 20:20:34+00:00
The rich are exposed to all the chemicals in the environment and food just as the poor are. With the EPA being gutted and regulations being removed this will only get worse. The biggest issue is proving that it is a case when the effects take decades and studies are torpedoed by industry. Your only hope is to compare with nations that have stricter regulations but you then always also have other factors.
by mantas | 2025-04-09 20:20:37+00:00
Born in USSR and growing up in then ex-USSR I’ve pretty good experience of arts created during USSR period and both official and underground artists.

But yes, maybe some delusional USSR loving academics in west wrote some BS study how awesome life in USSR was. Which is very funny because those people would have ended up in KGB blacklists if they were on the other side of the iron curtain.
by cadamsdotcom | 2025-04-09 20:20:40+00:00
It helped that I worked from a clear roadmap. After the first feature I was on a roll so I just keep chugging!

It'd be rare to write this much on a single day - after lunch I was exhausted.

This codebase is on a mature stack - in particular, postgres and mature DB migration frameworks like alembic.

I've learned through this process that as long as you get the data modeling basically right, everything else can be fixed as you proceed through testing your own work, from checking each little UI feature does what the code claims, all the way to end-to-end.

Imagine you can do massive refactors just by asking the model a few questions, what does that unlock?