skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Good question. Someone else pointed out that _all_ societies have benefited from destroying the environment. I get the feeling they were pointing this out to argue that "we" (modern day Americans) don't really need to feel responsible. "Everybody does it, so it must be okay."

Not quite. What I was getting at is this argument is usually presented in the context of blaming the West generally or the United States specifically for various atrocities, and gently eliding how the societies which were aggressed upon were usually no different from a morality standpoint: it was simply a matter of who got to who first with a bigger stick in their hand. Not "everybody does it, so it must be okay," just "everybody does it, so casting blame on a specific group is, paradoxically, unfair."

For that reason, our responsibility to properly safeguard the environment and to ensure the rights of all people cannot be dependent on one nation or culture atoning for some crime their ancestors allegedly committed in the past. That just builds a never-ending tower of recrimination and anger. It has to be simply our obligation as human beings to each other, right now, today.
That is a laughable definition. Let's just define our favorite economic system as "the system where the best things happen".

Capitalism is merely a kind of economic system where the means of production are controlled privately for the purpose of profit.

Observed consequences of capitalism are commodity production, competitive markets, sophisticated financial markets and instruments of debt and credit, wage labour, capital accumulation, and rent seeking.
> that's not really a valid challenge

The number of small community banks and credit unions in the US is huge. There are over 381 Registered Credit Unions in New York alone. There are easily tens of thousands of small banks across this country.

http://www.cuna.org/Research-And-Strategy/Credit-Union-Data-...

No really, if you think its a valid or easy business model, then start your own. Literally tens of thousands of others have already done so.
Here's a recent paper that did take on that issue:

http://www.mit.edu/~mrognlie/piketty_diminishing_returns.pdf

> Recent trends in both capital wealth and income are driven almost entirely by housing, with underlying mechanisms quite different from those emphasized in Capital.

If the paper reads too academic, here's an accessible write-up:

https://medium.com/the-ferenstein-wire/a-26-year-old-mit-gra...
Can you elaborate on why you'd rather be poor today than rich 20 years ago (~1995) ?
>Its like razing a child

Spelling may be unintentional, but it's still accurate: sometimes you gotta tear down your code to build it up again stronger and more elegantly.
I've been meaning to look into it for a while, but so far I haven't found the time. On the other hand, I am under no pressure.
This isn't really AI. This is just speech recognition. I did something similar back in 2011 http://m.smh.com.au/digital-life/mobiles/aussie-hacks-siri-t...

Props for having a go at making this a company, I tried to do this with ninjablocks.com best of luck!

Happy to share lessons learned.
Traditionally speaking, one of the bigger arguments for functional languages is "embarrassingly high parallelism" because they tend to simplify many issues that writing imperative languages concurrently can bring about
Sadly, humanity hasn't improved at all really. American and British forces weren't shy about intentionally slaughtering
over 1,000,000 civilians in WW2.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World...

Caesar wrote proudly of the punishment he dealt out to tribes, but he didn't do it out of any particular cruelty. He could rationalize it as saving lives in the end, in a way that most people would agree with, given the same context. The same way most Americans justify dropping nukes, firebombs, and missiles on women and children. The way Trump justifies the idea of killing the families of terrorists.

People can always rationalize killing civilians by claiming it saves more lives in the end. This exactly the argument that Hitler, Caesar, Roosevelt, and Churchill (among others) used.

> Hitler with the idea of poisoning the poisoners suggested: "If at the beginning of the War and during the War twelve or fifteen thousand of these Hebrew corrupters of the people had been held under poison gas, as happened to hundreds of thousands of our very best German workers in the field, the sacrifice of millions at the front would not have been in vain"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stab-in-the-back_myth
Heh. I literally search for and report vulnerabilities in my downtime to recharge between development cycles. It doesn't feel like contributing, especially since most of the problems I find can be found via grep. :/
Introducing React Refetch
>If many economists predicted a recession on that scale, we would have many rich economists.

Its kind of inflammatory. Using your logic: If many economists predicted a healthy economy and housing market, we would have many poor economists. I mean, if you have a vast body of evidence you can present that proves this is the case by all means present it.

Here is just one example:

US Federal Reserve Chairman, Alan Greenspan, has gone on record and said he knew of the impending housing bubble in 2005. I think even the most blind economists could have predicted a devaluation in average housing price at $x0,000/house (I really wish I knew that actual average price homes fell by), at 100M homes that is an evaporation of $x,000,000,000,000 of wealth, now from an economists point of view whether that suggest a imminent recession, I don't know, but to me that is unprecedented.

Another:

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2010/apr/16/goldman-sach...

Essentially, you had Goldman taking direct payments from a fund to sell the fund's toxic loans to Goldman clients.

Home loans are traditionally solid investments (very low default rate), so the fact they were being chopped up and sold the way they were is clue number 1 the sellers knew to get rid of the asset whereas historically these were coveted investments. Its a tiny fine but there was a fraud charge and $1B fine.

The catch is you can't simply flood the market, or the market will react. So the toxic loans were sold slowly and steadily for as long as possible. There was just so much bad debt that when the market did catch on the institutions were still holding a massive amount of bad debt...hence the bailouts. Its not like they didn't want to get rid of them sooner, but trying to get rid of it all at once would have been counterproductive.
Disappointed by the twitter only sign up but I am still going to join because I like the idea.
We're very much an AI company, and that's the focus, but the product will roll out in stages. The foundation is built on a home-made NLP engine that's pretty flexible. That said, NNs are only used for speech recognition currently. With a relatively stable NLP engine we're focused now on device integration to control the majority of IoT products our customers might have. We're implementing some learning and pattern recognition models but it will take some time before those come close to resembling any true "intelligence".
> I'd rather be poor today than rich twenty years ago.

This makes it sound like rich people 20 years ago had it pretty bad... What did technology add to their lives aside from convenience?
What do you intend to say by this?
I'd rather be poor today than rich twenty years ago.

Try volunteering at a soup kitchen sometime. You will rethink this sentiment.
It actually takes a bit to keep this running with rock solid reliability. For example when a registrar calls Verisign they get replies almost in an instant as there are people sitting by 24x7 to handle and clear up any issues that come up. And the uptime, with the exception of planned maintenance (which can run from 45 minutes to several hours) is near 100%. This isn't like calling godaddy or fighting with Google or Facebook if you have a problem.

Does Verisign make money? Yes. Do they have a right to make a profit? Yes. How much? Not up to the public to decide this it's up to their customers. Their customers are registrars, not the public. Their contract, fairly negotiated is with ICANN (and their registrars).

What's interesting is that you don't hear much about the price from large portfolio owners but from people who seem to think that nobody has a right to make a profit and all costs need to be driven out of any existing system which most certainly needs to be disrupted.
>Whether or not the browser supports source maps is irrelevant if you don’t have access to the original code

Sourcemaps can embed the original source inline, though of course that is a decision made by the author and they can decide not to make sourcemaps that way. It is more likely that the end-user doesn't have access to the source maps anyway.
300 shares = 75 shares per year times $750. That's $55k/yr.

That's a yearly bonus. Worth around 15k/yr.

105 + 15 + 55 is $175.

Signing bonus is around 20k. Divide by 4 and you get $180.
I have little to no experience with houses that size (I live in a condo), but I understand the concept and the market segment, yes. It mentions that this functions locally, so I take it there's a server involved, that I imagine is some decent portion of this cost?

You may wish to find some way to clarify that market segment in your marketing, I think a lot of HN visitors might assume this is going to be a $99 hub or something similar. We need to see that value represented, because we are definitely going to dig up that price tag. ;D
Yes, I have. My experience was good. It's easy to install, configure, and maintain, and it's rock solid. But it's not the only tool in my toolbox.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xL7t5rV4J8Q

Just sayin.
I was poor for the first 7 or so years of my life. I've moved to a new city with nothing but a few hundred bucks keeping me from homelessness. The condition isn't permanent, or at least, it doesn't have to be.
yummyfajitas is using the Pizza and Froyo examples from the post they're replying to. I don't think it is fair to grill them on the technicalities of those specific examples.
>patent and copyright protection

Seems legit.

>the financial sector

Seems legit.

>the pay of CEOs and other top executives

Seems legit.

>and protectionist measures that have boosted the pay of doctors

Wait a second...

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/_ZPUIbpPl1ME/SwLM3Q8Nl6I/AAAAAAAAA...

I looked in the paper and he doesn't seem to address this, he just complains that doctors earn more than in other rich countries. He also doesn't mention that doctors in the US have to pay enormous malpractice insurance premiums when comparing them.

So who is Dean Baker and why does he hate doctors?
That picture kind of breaks my sense of perception. When I first looked at it, I entirely mis-categorized the scale, and thinking it was looking North from San Bernadino, I was able to place the lakes and landmarks in order for it all to fit, and it pretty much worked, my mind easing over unrecognized characteristics as places I'd not been.

Then I read the article.
FAQ states that Open Hunt is just temporary. Probably to draw people in.
A market economy redistributes capital according to demand. I don't really see how capitalism is necessary to achieve that from a market.

I take capitalism to mean a market economy in which capital is traded as private property in a manner where the property holder gets to extract rents from ownership.

As a contrast, I've been thinking of a system where property laws are altered so that property rights imply rent going from the propery holder, not too. I think this can be done in a manner so that the market manages to distribute capital to where it is needed, even more effective than the current system, while also have a few interesting side effects toward social justice and welfare.

Land value taxes are the obvious example. But take copyright. What if those rights could only be claimed as long as you pay for them? It could for example make it much easier for streaming services as either there is an entity paying for the exclusive right, whom you could negotiate streaming rights with, or there is none, implying the work is in he public domain.
Citation needed. Your assertion is completely baseless. Even in the event where it was in fact true, altering your behavior towards the person based on your expectation of what they might do based on statistics is the very mode of sexism.
> "For computer software, patents together with copyright protection are the entire price of the product."

That doesn't ring true. Software is sold in far more complex ways that in no way benefit from the copyright regime. That could mean software consulting and support for open source projects, or it could mean advertising and IAP-supported free-to-play games. Both are extremely lucrative.

You might want to call in-app purchases something that corresponds to copyright. I think all that matters is what is enforceable (ask the movie and music industries). That game services have figured out how to make the enforceability of copyright irrelevant by centralizing hosting and matchmaking is the far bigger story.

Put another way, the researchers bring up removing patent regimes on drugs in order to save money and reduce rents. That's only because of the peculiar way that drugs work—it doesn't necessarily make sense. Jana Hunter, an indie musician, had this great phrase: "If technology provided loopholes for free food and shelter, that’s what we’d be arguing about." [0] But technology only provides loopholes for some free stuff, like music and drugs, and we can't just decide that property rights can be ignored when they're cheap to exploit (like copyright or patent infringement).

On the other hand, we will just, in a Darwinian way, end up in a world where the technological loopholes intrinsically don't exist. This happened in commercial video games, and it happened so quickly only because of enormous ingenuity, an extremely competitive market and a complete disconnect from the conventional political process (ever heard of a video game studio lobbyist?).

If you want to improve wealth distribution, messing with the mechanics of how things are bought and sold, as always, isn't going to get you very far. Maybe just raise taxes, you know?

[0] http://lowerdens.tumblr.com/post/34308869231/on-spotify-and-...
Rent-seeking is relatively agnostic of any particular economic order. To some extent, the Marxist-Leninist planned economies were nothing but that.
> I'd rather be poor today than rich twenty years ago.

Poor today means homelessness or working several jobs. Rich in 1995 meant flying around the world and eating really well, great company...lap of luxury, really.

You must really like your iPad.
I am curious is this a big problem for you personally, the charge for domains? How many domains do you own?
PC-BSD is "the Ubuntu of BSD" – a preconfigured GUI, a GUI app "store" etc. If you can install OpenBSD, you don't need it.

FreeBSD on the desktop is not a pain!
Well I really dont want to critize GNOME developers for working on free software, paid or not. But GTK is still perceived as a more universal toolkit than "just GNOME" and this might be a time-consuming surprise that hits application developers

furthermore it is still advertised like this as well (from gtk.org):

What is GTK+, and how can I use it?
GTK+, or the GIMP Toolkit, is a multi-platform toolkit for creating graphical user interfaces.

Where can I use it?
Everywhere! GTK+ is cross-platform and boasts an easy to use API, speeding up your development time.

from my point of view, this is not exactly true anymore ..
He likely thinks it's good to let "our kind" get the rewards of "our work", instead of "another kind".

People may disagree, but it's a perfectly valid opinion.
What with the pro-drug posts here all the time. I'm guessing that most of the HN audience is American. Is it common among techies in the U.S. to experiment with psychoactive drugs, hence the interest and knowledege? Please, do not mention Steve Jobs acid experiences.
I plan to use this too. It's weirdly inspiring to see how quickly this came together, how much support its getting, and how the bitter HN community energy can be harnessed towards a constructive solution to a problem.
> I was going to mention Unix “cat” but forgot.

> Wildly simple - it takes at most one argument.

That is asinine. Why would a program be called ‘cat’ if it can’t concatenate multiple files?

Also, his “grash” program is seriously deficient in the handling of signals – it completely ignores the issue. There are many subtle issues with signals which have to be handled correctly when writing a shell: http://www.cons.org/cracauer/sigint.html
> We get candidates (HFT) with a CS degree from MIT or something, with 15+ years of industry C++ experience as a senior software engineer...

Sounds like your expectations are part of the problem.

Why do you expect someone 15 years out of university, working in the now enormously wide software space to have your pet questions memorized? C++ is well known for being too big and needing to be subset(-ed). And, why not realize that such a person could become an expert in those questions in less than an hour of googling and reading?

The bigger problem is that companies are not willing to invest even four hours of training into employees!
What with the pro-drug posts here all the time. I'm guessing that most of the HN audience is American. Is it common among techies in the U.S. to experiment with psychoactive drugs, hence the interest and knowledge? Please, do not mention Steve Jobs acid experiences.
Thanks for letting me know. Feel free to share this fact with all the other people crying for their free speech being taken away.
You know, I hear this quit a bit but I really don't like this position because it ignores all the very real issues and seemingly justifies the current state of things through some strange "the greater good" lens.

Sure, we are better off as a percentage, because we now have 7 billion plus people in the world. 20 years ago there were only 5 billion... but the actual numbers of people with poor living standards is, I would venture, actually higher. There were only 2 billion in 1927...

As to your original point that little improvement in living standards being a "myth caused by lamp-posting"... I don't know how you can ignore the actual numbers regarding lack of living standards reflecting productivity gains for the lower-middle class... It's not a myth at all, it's a fact that we work longer hours, for less pay adjusted for inflation, with higher-costs of living.

The industrial revolution was supposed to be about giving man the time to pursue more noble goals, but instead it became a notch in the capitalists belt of exploitation of the workers.

In short, I think your post is nonsensical.
> The number of small community banks and credit unions in the US is huge.

Which is completely irrelevant to the issue of the regulatory difficulty of starting a new one today.

> There are easily tens of thousands of small banks across this country.

No, there aren't, and the number is dropping over time.

http://mercatus.org/publication/small-banks-numbers-2000-201...
> I'd rather be poor today than rich twenty years ago.

The most generous restatement of this that I can imagine is, "I'd rather be middle-class today than rich twenty years ago." Because poor is poor. Not knowing where you're going to eat next, not knowing where you're going to sleep, not having money for formula or diapers, there's no time where that's good.

But even with the generous form, I still disagree.

Having a Blu-Ray player and a flat screen today... versus a Laserdisk and a Projector twenty years ago... An Android today... versus a Car Phone back then... A house today... versus 4 homes, one of which is overseas back then... Hell, you can't fly a Concorde today.
Our Berkeley Data Science Capstone Project: Rap Analysis
I didn't say rent seeking only occurs in capitalist systems, only that it is a consequence of the premises.
Exactly. It is a complex system built from scratch from the days when it was Network Solutions which evolved into Verisign and had a contract with the US Government. Which by the way no other company was interested in at the time.
Putting data in a volume in a Dockerfile
Spoken Word Poetry, deconstructed
I'm sorry but... if you were a senior software engineer in Sacramento (a metropolitan city) and asked for 200k at intel, hp, oracle, apple, etc., someone would quietly hang up the phone hahaha. A laughable amount is even closer to 150k if it wasn't a tech giant ie. Sutter, Blue Shield, Proctor & Gamble, PG&E, Franklin Templeton, etc.

Lead, architect, principal... they may not hang up but I would expect a double take and a "let's be realistic."
There is no need to call join more than once in a work stealing pipeline, join is the terminal operation. In other words it rather similar to future.get(), it is a synchronisation point; which yes is amdalhs law target.

Futures and workstealing parallel execution are two techniques that work hand in hand.

Practically it can't be compared with C++ annotated OpenMP for loops, which have an implicit join at the loop termination. In a parallel data flow system like Rayon there are no implicit joins, only explicit as required. join() in this system is more like return dataflow as show in the presentation you link too.
My First Death Threat (2004)
Certainly you can think of it this way, if definitionally, it is a kind of a "rent" to be so lucky to be in any situation where you can get paid vastly more than the average.
Enabling support for MathML (Chromium)
All good points. With Josh, we're targeting large homes with complex environments. Our goal is to make it super simple to set up, configure, and use Josh. While Echo + IFTTT + a Wink hub might not sound too complicated to someone on HN, it's far too hacky for a 10,000 sq ft home where the average home owner doesn't want to understand what's truly going on.

We're also focused as much on home monitoring and access when you're away from the home as we are on control from within. It might seem subtle, but the number of times you want eyes and ears and the ability to change the environment of your home when away is super important.

The longer term play which will take some time to realize is all about AI. We see Josh as an invisible companion that grows with you, understands natural language, and can interact with the connected devices around you.
Rails 5 beta 1 now available in rubygems
Thanks! Would love to chat, alex@jstar.ai
I wasn't grilling yummyfajitas over the choice of examples, I was supporting the point made in the post they were responding to (and rejected in their post) regarding the example.
The central problem of a free market is also its greatest strength: it relies on the people making the purchases to decide what constitutes a good product or service. It asks us to vote with our wallets.

This works best when the individual educates him/herself about each purchase.

However, when individuals make purchases based on popularity rather than merit, or based on what they're used to, their ability to vote with their wallet suffers.
And when producers begin to settle into a position of comfortable mediocrity, when they refuse to compete and improve, they also hurt the consumer's ability to vote with their wallet.
Advertising and IAP-supported free-to-play games, if they did not have copyright protection, would be IMMEDIATELY hacked to not have advertising or IAP.