skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Family wealth is typically lost within 3 generations.

As the saying goes:
“When a person with money meets a person with experience, the person with the experience winds up with the money and the person with the money winds up with the experience”.
> International bandwidth is hugely expensive in Australia, everything goes by expensive undersea cables

I have heard this quite a bit, but why is it hugely expensive for this reason? Is it because of the maintenance of the undersea cables or recouping initial construction costs?
The bay area is an interesting example. Prices are skyrocketing from demand, but part of the reason why supply has been so slow is that demand has been so sudden. San Francisco has always had a high quality of life, but it did just fine until the tech booms. The majority of people now moving to SF are coming for economic reasons. Would UBI reduce these motivations, easing pressure on the local rental market? I don't know.

SF definitely demonstrates that the price of food will go up if there's enough money floating around. But you can still get a burrito for $6 if you know where to look.

But the more interesting possibility is actually that we don't increase demand. You have the unemployed, who will go from having no income to having income, and demand from them will certainly rise for the necessities. But for the large middle swath, perhaps this will not add to their spending, but instead provide a means for people to take longer vacations, stay home with children, or create artwork more adventurously. Perhaps this will, rather than increasing demand generally, provide flexibility sufficient for the middle class to feel safer in spending more time in ways that build social ties, benefit the community, and create cultural value that is insufficiently valued in the current economic regime.
There is nothing much to research, because the concept contradicts to the most basic principles of ecology, economics and sociology.

The first principle is that a population always outgrows its resources. As long as one create conditions to sustain a life it will start to reproduce exponentially. Rabits in Australia is a classic example.

The second principle is the scarcity principle of economics. Everything which is easily available loses its value by definition. Any amount of free money would be factored out by increasing of the prices, as if you move the zero on a scale.

The third principle is of social hierarchy. Each society forms a hierarchy to be sustainable. It is so fundamental, that we never think of it, but there is no flat societies even in animal kingdom.

Again, basic income is just moving a zero on a scale. Prostitutes will not switch to living on that income, they will merely rise the prices, because prostitution is social phenomena much more than economical. The food market will adapt accordingly, so the only food one would be able to buy will be a synthetic crap made out of cheapest substitutes - this is how markets work. Same would happen with housing. Land is a scarse asset and the most ancient status item and a source of income. Free money will change nothing there.

And, of course, there were lots of experiments since the beginning of time - all these socialist or communist utopias which failed the reality checks - they crashed and sunk down after a collision with economical and social laws, which are as unalterable as the laws of physics.

Simple models doesn't work. There is no other way of sustainable ecosystem exept self-regulation due to competition over scarcity of resources. It is very naive and dangerous assumption that human intelligence could beat laws of the Universe or evolutionary forces. The mess we are in is the best evidence.
Daily Deal – AmazingBestBuy.com
What What else can you ask for
Suppose you go to Bob's trivia emporium in your browser and a MITM inserts malicious javascript content into the response.

Looked at another way: Is there any reason http should not be secured with some sort of privacy and integrity check?
I replied to @mrits because @mrits was presenting virtualenv as replacement for using pyinstaller to manage the installation of non-OS-managed Python versions (which @cowsandmilk was talking about).

I'm unsure how what I said:

> If you want another Python, then you need to install it yourself (somehow) and then point virtualenv at it.

Differs from what you are saying:

> 'virtualenv -p /usr/bin/python3.5 venv'
Free wifi is becoming more prevalent over here (at least in Melbourne), but it's nothing compared to a lot of the major cities in the US for example.
Yeah, actually I get that now as well. It seems to work fine if you google "bmj clinical evidence wisdom tooth" (without the quotes. Sorry about that...I didn't realise it was behind a half-assed paywall :)
Judging on the verbiage of that splash page, it sounds like this is a utility that does nothing more than reset one's settings back to normal, while deleting, or at least disabling a majority of add-ons that may be primary contributors to the crashing, erroneous start pages, and "ads you can't get rid of".
Yes, but when you've been doing 2-4 a week for most of your life, it still seems like a godsend. (My reasons for headache (long story short, celiac) are completely different but that part of my story is similar.) I clock in at maybe 1 bad one a month now and I usually know what I did to screw up.
The joke is that Windows doesn't do self-cleaning like the Mac does and Windows machines often come installed with bloatware that is frequently harmful to the correct functioning of a personal computer.

Also Macs don't get viruses as frequently. I'm not saying they're less susceptible but it does happen less often.

(see: any recent COTS Windows PC, especially Lenovo)
That does surprise me. Chrome is a cross-OS application, it runs on Windows/Mac/Linux, right? And things like extensions are all internal to the browser. Why is a scanner for bad settings and bad extensions bound to a single OS?
I'm pretty sure preimplantation diagnostics are in many cases done with next-gen sequencing these days.

Also even accepting the idea that GWAS studies for IQ yield real and useful results (a claim most people I know in the human genetics field find highly dubious) CRISPR isn't a panacea.

I posted a more detailed description above, but in short CRISPR causes a massively disruptive amount of damage in a cell. It does it very accurately, but a double strand break is definitely a Big Deal for a cell. This means it only works when you've got lots of cells to play with, a near-impossible task with human embryology.

CRISPR is an unbelievably useful tool for research and a huge advance, but it's not the Solution to Human Genetic Engineering. We're still a long ways from that.
Your kung fu is better than the kid in the article. How did discover that splitting the trip was cheaper?
I can relate! I had ear aches nearly every week or it seemed like it when I was a kid in the 70s it was really bad. I got to like the taste of the orange Aspirin tablets my mother would crush them into some sugar.

When my father stopped smoking all my ear aches disappeared.
Not all countries have feminine gender, just check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatherland
By default virtualenv links to the Python interpreter that you point it at (when you create your virtualenv). I'm unsure what method you would use to include the Python interpreter install in the virtualenv directory (other than creating a normal virtualenv, and then copying the files in after the fact).
The gap that I see in this approach is everyone has a different definition of what is a nicety and what is a necessity.

To go with your tobacco example, I personally don't believe that tobacco should be considered a necessity. (Though I have no problem with Nicorette / nicotine gum being in that category, which could be used by someone unable to buy cigarettes to satisfy their craving.) Someone else may have a different definition of a necessity vs nicety altogether.

It's much simpler IMO to just give people ordinary currency, and let them decide how to spend it best.
Probably due to the fact that no two Starbucks are more than 3 blocks apart in the US :P
I suspect it is variable from patient to patient (and possibly dentist to dentist). I had one removed a few years ago, and it was done in about ten minutes and left me with no discomfort post-surgery. OTOH, I have friends who've had ostensibly similar work done which took much longer, and they had some discomfort for a few days after the procedure.
One of the nice things about Java is it didn't force a specific web browser on the user.

If you presented something to me that required Chrome, I would leave. I don't use Chrome and I do not wish to.
Additionally, I think we need some evidence that playing video games is a waste of time, since there are indications that it is not[1].

1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FktsFcooIG8
This is a wonderful achievement! I wrote and sold a Go playing program for the Apple II in the late 1970s, and I have had the privilege of playing the woman's world champion and the champion of South Korea -- so I have some experience to base my praise on.

I never thought that I would see a professional level AI Go player in my lifetime. I am taking the singularity more seriously.
Huh, "planetary system" wouldn't been my first choice. By analogy, if a solar system is a system about the Sun, a planetary system would seem to me to be a system about a planet e.g. Jupiter and its moons.
My comment was quite joking in nature.

> I hope github does make public a official reason tomorrow

I do too, but, mostly I find post-mortems quite interesting to read.

If your services are at some 95% uptime or lower, you're doing something (serveral things) very wrong and its probably not that interesting to me.

Getting from 95% -> 99% you probably did some interesting things there.

Going into multiple .9s beyond that, you're likely doing quite a bit of interesting stuff but what I find more interesting is where you went wrong. Figuring out not just where you went wrong, but, what your incorrect assumptions were and WHY they were wrong. "We believed X could never fail because of Y, and even if X did fail, it would not cause production impact because of Z!"
Note that by my specific definition above, it doesn't really matter what's a "necessity"—that's just a cute flavor-word. They're really "inelastic-demand dollars."

And my point was that even UBI falls over when someone gets their UBI taken away by a fine. Starving is starving.
Categorizing candidates beyond just buzzwords, integrations with other common tools/sites, general applicant tracking issues through full process, effective mail lists/merges. I've used a few systems but none that I've seen seem to entirely "get" agency recruiting needs, so I've typically bought based on cost and tried to modify as much as possible or used several tools where one great one would suffice.
FaceBook, PayPal and EBay’s Q1 Earnings Reports
I work remotely for past four years, and I totally agree with this. I still go to the office for occasional meetings and events but there is not that much pressure for it since most of my team is remote.

I worked for a lot of companies for the past 15 years, but this is the first time I find it hard to change my job - because working remotely is amazing.

I wish more companies were open to letting people telecommute. I had office based position offers that paid twice what I make but I am never trading that for the ability to get out of the room and hug my daughter. And the productivity argument is still there, it is just not the sole reason why remote rocks.

One of my other favorites: Work is very stressful sometimes, so I go out to a different room and punch my training bag a few times. Instant stress relief - try doing that in the office!

P.S. If you are reading this and are considering hiring for a remote position, drop me a line, I am a sysadmin with a fair bit of coding and extensive networking (Cisco) and teaching/mentoring background, living in central Europe, and I grok programming and web development.
Been there. Done that. No backups.

Recovered all the data by using open file handles in /proc/.

Not a fun two hours.

Shit happens. Live and learn.
> This isn't shady, it's so the founding team stops worrying about money and focuses full-time on the company.

Uh, no. It's so that the founders won't sell the company at a mere 4-5x rather than then 20-100x that the VC's want.

If it was genuinely about the company, they'd let all the initial people take some stock off the table. Instead they only allow the people who could sell the company to take stock off the table.

Big difference.
>>I can't imagine how many jobs will be replaced when AI gets to the point of near-human levels of learning.

Let me tell you there is no point in resisting the inevitable. In fact if anything preparing for it makes it easier when it actually happens.
High-value human attention, but not High-value human attention 24/7.

Sure, if we want to subsidize stay at home parents for young children that's a reasonable choice. But, pushing daycare out of reach of most low income family's pushes people into poverty which also has significant long term negative impacts on those same children.
Look at the 2-body gravitational system -- let's say Earth-Moon. Let's put our non-rotating reference frame at the barycenter. At any given moment, Earth has a definite position and velocity, and the Moon has a definite position and linear velocity. If we know these positions and velocities (and masses), we can derive anything else we'd like to know about the system. Including its angular momentum.

This would also be true of any system such that the size is large enough to render the quantum spins statistically close to zero.
Definitely think it would be interesting to see YC Research's take on economics research, but I'm left wondering, why would someone want to take this position? As opposed to, say, entering an economics PhD program and studying the problem there. To be clear, I don't mean to spark an academia-vs-industry (or whatever YC research would be categorized as) battle. I don't know the field of econ research well and my prior would be that more perspectives and approaches to the issue would be helpful in studying the problem. What I'm interested in what would someone personally want out of doing this research but without the support of collaborators in a more formally collegial academic setting or the reputation and pull of an established think tank.

To be clear, I'm not trying to argue that taking this position is a bad idea, I'm just trying to better understand the opportunity and why YC research might be a better decision than a more run-of-the-mill PhD. I'm ever so slightly skeptical, but mostly just curious.
For Firefox users, I recently did the following: follow the instructions here http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?p=8494865&sid=37... and run SpeedyFox, which on Mac is I think just a SQLite cleanup tool.

But, it made a huge difference. Deleting all of my history older than six months pegged one of my CPUs and made FF unusable for about 20 minutes, but that, deleting all my cookies, clearing the recent download list, removing a couple of rarely/never used addons, and running SpeedyFox seems to have helped a lot. So speedy now.
So you set up a factory that "leases" it's manufacturing capacity to any paying company then start 10-100 corps that are all just coincidently making replicas of the same car and all "leasing" the factory in sequence.

I mean I don't know why you'd do that but it is the obvious work around
Semantics. Isn't that all basic income is? That money is coming out of the pockets of people making income. That income is coming from the pockets of employers.
* This is enforced by only permitting certain sellers to accept necessity-dollars, and only on certain transactions.

there are so many reasons why this wouldn't work. The whole point of UBI is that you are not creating a judgemental system by which certain products are or are not reified by the system. Would tampons be covered by UBFS? Let's say then we allow for UBFS to cover female menstrual products. Would cups then be covered? Why or why not? How would you validate a product as being "for a given use"? How much political maneuvering would be required to get a permit for a product?

* inelastic demand (as found by the BLS during CPI calculation)

Pray tell how does one measure demand elasticity[0]? And if you're entrusting the BLS to do this, will they apply fudge factors? Why or why not? Who gets to influence the BLS to get the 'stats right' on their

* You can't tax or fine anyone in necessity-dollars

one word: Arbitrage.

[0] usually a merchant does this by dicking around with the price.
Wasn't the engine due to tougher emissions regulations? I thought that it was supposed to have something better, but ended up stuck with what it got because the original plans wouldn't have passed emissions by the time they actually started producing the car.

As for being polite, if the buyers have the disposable cash for it, who am I to judge what they buy? Most cars are luxury purchases to an extent. Almost nobody buys the minimum necessary. It's just a matter of how much unnecessary spending you do.
If you want to learn more, the best raytracing book is http://www.pbrt.org/ which goes into immense details about various techniques and won an Academy Award. The renderer described in the book is also available online: https://github.com/mmp/pbrt-v3
Don't forget about "pay to play" either, where hiring these firms encourages (to say the least) positive coverage. Or how easy/common it is for these firms to be paid to write various white papers which usually possess the rigor of Looney Tunes. I had a job for a while discrediting these things - talk about having a battle of wits with a punching bag.
Please explain your comment.
Incorrect. More money => inflation[1].

GDP growth is more total overall spending, plus certain adjustments, in real, constant currency units. That is, inflation adjusted.

The problems around GDP tend to be that:

1. It discounts nonfinacialised quality-of-life improvements.

2. It neglects the negative costs of financialised quality-of-life detriments.

I believe that the Wikipedia article links to several alternative measures of GDP. I find Herman Daly's discussion of these pretty good, or you might check to see what the WorldWatch Institute's come up with, to name another likely source.

________________________________

Notes:

1. So, you might ask, what of QE, why all this money and no inflation? Good question, and people are pursuing that. My theory is that a) the money's largely gone to banks and large institutional investors, b) see Robert Gordon, there's a long term secular decline in growth, so they're looking for alternative investments, resulting in c) Gee, stock markets and housing have been going gangbusters, but isn't that just asset price inflation, i.e., inflation on Stuff Rich People Buy? Seems fairly likely, particularly if you plot the Dow or S&P 500 average against the Fed's balance sheet (proxy for money supply / QE. Head over to the St. Louis Fed's FRED plotting toy[2] to see for yourself.\

2. It's actually a pretty cool toy. The sort of thing you might imagine a megolomanic conspiracy controlling the global money supply to come up with.[3]

3. I kid, I kid. It's the lizard-men.
ok it's also velocity, but in general once a boom starts and the taps come on it's both. Now I agree they are pushing on a string.

If velocity is held as a constant then creating more => "growth".
I doubt the law is that stupid, and judges tend to frown on shenanigans like this.
SharePoint 2016 Support, Enhanced Footnote Handling and Floating Shapes Rendering
Pro ranks are much closer than amature ranks. The difference between a 9p and 6p is probably less than one stone, and definitely less than three.
I too was confused why they tried to tie the two events together. The lead pipes had formed a coating (and this is true in other locations too) that made them nontoxic but when they were flushed with acidic water (as the water treatment plant did) they shed that lining and it began washing through the lead and putting it into the lines. The lines had operated fine with water from a different location that had different pH levels, but pH variation is common without pollution, so blaming this on pollution is a bit nonsensical.

When it comes to the article, it makes sense that pollution would be in poorer areas. Pollution lowers property value, which allows poorer individuals to live there. Or the area could have already been poor and they are unable to afford to leave.

I'm not sure who is to blame for the Flint crisis tbh, there seems to be a lot of finger pointing and politicizing. I have yet to find a source that wasn't biased one way or the other, which is sad. People just want answers and for it to be fixed.
We've had rampant land price inflation which is not correctly reflected in the stats. GDP uses a deflator and that deflator doesn't reflect land prices, therefore printing through land doesn't show up fully.
It just means analyzing more than one move at a time. Any engine supporting the UCI protocol should be able to do it. Like Stockfish, which is free.[1] So you don't need to create a new engine to implement this feature. It might be possible to implement it with a bash script. Certainly with JS.[2]

Stockfish does have a "skill level" setting, and it's not terrible at faking club-level play (if you have the Play Magnus mobile app, it's just Stockfish at different skill levels). However, as of 2013 the implementation is much more primitive than what I'm suggesting here.[3]

To be clear, even though it's incredibly obvious, I've never seen this idea anywhere else. It first occurred to me after reading the original Guid & Bratko paper on intrinsic ratings in 2006. Happy to continue this offlist if you want to work on it. My e-mail is in my profile.

[1] http://support.stockfishchess.org/kb/advanced-topics/uci-pro...

[2] https://www.npmjs.com/package/stockfish

[3] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/fishcooking/4Q6BQyHeRJ...
So, I'm sure this will get buried, but in the hopeful event of responses: How does this prevent people from spending up to their means?

People who make 20k, spend to their means.

People who make 50k, spend to their means.

People who make 100k, spend to their means.

People who make 452k, spend to their means.

This is a sincere, non-snark question: people spend to their means. It's similar to packing a bag, a person has a tendency to fill the bag, regardless to if they need all the things they put into it. I'll dig up sources, but people who make 452k a year, they'll tell you they're not rich. They don't feel rich.

This. How is this resolved?

Everyone wants a vacation to an island every year, and the best things for their kids, the best food on the table, the best cable channels. How is this fixed?

For example (and for the record, I hold these people in the highest regard) how do we replace trashmen, postal workers, the guy who pumps my sewage, that dunkin donuts worker? The guy who cuts lawns, or sells firewood?

Basic income, in my opinion, is a good idea. People living without the stress of of worrying about paying rent, I really like that idea. I have siblings, and their life is upside-down because they can't pay the bills and keep food on the table (I help as much as I can) how do we fix that? Would my brother just get a nicer apartment, and eat nicer food, and still be broke? He is a welder by trade, and makes a living. Paycheck-to-paycheck, but he makes it work.

If he had an extra 15k a year, I am fully confident, he would still be living paycheck-to-paycheck. He is my brother and I love him, this is his reality.

How do we fix that?
My biggest disillusionment when I learned about Stingrays was with the FCC. I had always thought of the FCC as good stewards of the broadcast spectrum and I didn't think they would ever approve shenanigans like the commercial development of radios that impersonate commercial broadcasters.