skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A decrease in gasoline usage is by definition a recession. It is people being unable to be productive.
In the economics world, tax incidence is a matter of serious study. There has been a decent amount of work on who actually pays oil taxes.

Hal Varian (who later became Chief Economist at Google) wrote a good piece[1] summarizing the basics in 2000 for the New York Times.

The summary: "A gasoline tax in a small country falls mostly on the residents of that country. The world price of oil is essentially independent of the taxing policies of most countries, since most countries consume only a small fraction of the amount of oil sold.

"But the United States consumes a lot of oil -- almost a quarter of the world's production. That means it has considerable market power: its tax policies have a major impact on the world price of oil, and economic analysis suggests that in the long run, a significant part of a gasoline tax increase would end up being paid by the producers of oil, not the consumers."

[1] http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~hal/people/hal/NYTimes/2...
Service discovery and load balancing with DCOS and marathon-lb
In a perfectly competitive market corporate profits are zero and it all comes out of the consumer.

Now oil is not perfectly competitive and you are right. But it is rather close. So you can still expect the majority to come from the consumer.
not a lot of sight gags; his observational comedy about observational comedy is a chuckle
Is AI an existential threat to humanity? – answers by prominent AI researchers
Yep. Let's implement possibly the most regressive tax possible on working-class people. Because every penny of that tax is going to come out of our pockets at the pump or at the grocery store.
Of course, the whole reason for our dependence on oil is that there's a much larger basket of externalities that count as benefits. Those are harmed by higher oil prices.
Is this compatible with mesos 0.25 (not DCOS) and marathon 0.14. I'm trying to run in my environment, but it is failing.
Me please!
I completely agree. If you were linked to a github page out of the blue or for the first time its incredibly intimidating. Most notably is the first text you read on the page isn't a title, but a list of folders/files. Why not put the dam title and description at the top?

One line of, "Hows this work?" would help a lot of people. I took the git lesson from code academy and have messed around in ubuntu but am still very intimidated by github and the brutal installation instructions every project has (or doesn't have).
At what point is our ROI on clean energy negative?
I've been in this situation. I remember i had switched jobs and that really helped me. My current job doesn't have much pressure but we are working on building so many awesome things.

With that said, you should Work From Home more. One room at home should specifically be for Work. That would definitely help.

At this point in time, i'm really excited and full of energy and one of the reasons being i want to push myself to create something awesome because so many awesome people around me are.

I moved in with my girlfriend a few months and she is very understanding of how work takes over me once in a while, not everyday.

I don't see a therapist. I start exercising more often. Pick a sport. Have a strict to-do for myself. Watch motivational movies. Go out more often.
I would like to try ...
> Not to speak badly about any of my peers in particular, but I've come in after other security auditing teams and found really obvious bugs that they've overlooked.

And you've never missed one, right?

Aside from this, your behavior in this thread is a very loud warning about working with you, particularly telling someone to learn to read below by linking to an app. Handle being questioned a bit better, if you can, and understand that seeing this immediately talks me out of using your services. (Even if you're an oracle who never makes a mistake, as you imply. I'll take my chances with someone a bit more professional.)
I don't know if there's a West Coast / East Coast "thing" in firefighting or not, but there is definitely a marked difference from very urban departments (FDNY) to very rural departments (my department in rural NC).

For one, we had little or no reason to training in high-rise firefighting tactics. We had no buildings more than 2 stories in our district and those were residential, with no standpipes or any of that stuff.

OTOH, I guess most FDNY companies don't respond to a lot of brush fires, or have to deal with a lot of urban/wildland interface stuff. I'm sure there are some, depending on the exact location, but how much wildland / brush is there in downtown Manhattan? For us, brush fires, including very large brush fires (think thousands or tens of thousands of acres) were something we dealt with semi-regularly.

There are differences in equipment as well. FDNY can usually rely on hydrants, whereas we had to do a lot of stuff with running tanker shuttles and drafting from dump tanks, drafting from static water sources (ponds, etc.). And even when we had hydrants they would probably be further away due to the difference in spacing (ours were every 1,000 feet where they exist, most major cities have a "hydrant on every corner" or "hydrant ever 500 feet" or something policy), which mean longer hose lays, more relay pumping, etc.

I've sort of always seen the urban/rural difference as one of the main "branches" in the fire service (aside from paid vs volunteer).
Please send me an invite :) Thanks in advance.
>> We lead different lives, my friend...and both are OK...

Absolutely and thank goodness for that variety. I was just putting up an explanation for why kids like playing in the rain and why adults typically do not.
You're mixing up price and value to an extent. The money's not being set on fire, it's going to other useful things. The question is whether those things are worth more or less than discount gasoline.
git push --force-with-lease

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:TKD0MW...
Isn't that a flat tax? And definitely not regressive if you assume rich people buy more gas.
This thing is a total disaster.

Some of their example code: https://github.com/VisaDeveloperProgram/SampleCode/blob/mast...

Docs are incoherent in just so many ways - and their quick start drops you right into like a 9 page guide for generating two-way ssl docs. Not exactly a quick dev onboarding path.

Request docs list attributes as required that aren't in their examples or runnable sidebar thing (the only cool part). Returns an error body with no error messages, codes, or info. You use some "correlation-id" (called "correlationId" in other places) to apparently get your error messages for a failed request.

Final rating: 1/7, would not play with again.
No one stopped buying gas at $4 a gallon but they did stop spending money elsewhere to make up for it.
Have I overlooked bugs? Sure.

Have I overlooked really obvious bugs? None so far that I've been informed of.

I'm not careless when I get paid to audit a project. Of course, I know I'm not perfect either.

One time, I was writing a PoC implementation of AES-CBC and forgot to authenticate the IV (which was included in the message). Luckily, someone called me out on it very early on. (As a result, I'm also more likely to catch this kind of mistake in someone else's work.)

Making mistakes is part of the learning process. Making mistakes when assessing someone else's security is a very real danger. That's why I give GitLab kudos for using multiple organizations.

The moral to the story I was telling, albeit poorly, is that "I think you're doing the right thing by having multiple teams look at your project". But that was my fault for not expressing this clearly enough.

> Aside from this, your behavior in this thread is a very loud warning about working with you, particularly telling someone to learn to read below by linking to an app.

Nobody who contacts my employer deals with me directly. The person who handles clients has people skills. I do the technical heavy lifting.

So, please rest assured, that any "very loud warning" you're reading won't translate into the quality of services we provide, even if I am an asshole on my personal accounts.

> Handle being questioned a bit better, if you can, and understand that seeing this immediately talks me out of using your services. (Even if you're an oracle who never makes a mistake, as you imply. I'll take my chances with someone a bit more professional.)

I don't mind being questioned. I mind people demonstrating a blindness to the qualifiers I explicitly include in my statements.
No it shouldn't. For the same reason you gave.
OMD's "Time Zones" from Dazzle Ships used a number of various telephone-time recordings from different countries.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwx8A0XUpfM
This is really helpful and matches stories that I've heard (I'm in Seattle). The immediacy slips away and I find myself applying for interesting AWS jobs, but reminders like this make me press their "Withdraw from All Jobs" button. Better me pressing it now, than it being pressed for me later.
I suspect if they knew how badly it hurt my reception (I totally lost signal and it took a long time to get back), they would be less surprised at the reaction.
To clarify or perhaps nitpick, if the price of gas included the cost of its damage to the environment (and all other current externalities), then there would be no externalities, and decreasing the usage of gasoline wouldn't be a desirable economic goal.
It's largely being set on fire through bureaucracy in practice. I would get much much more out of the money myself than I do from the government.

Let's say this costs me a thousand dollars a year out of pocket. I could get a new computer and add a lot of value to the economy. Or the government could buy a square foot of pavement.
To be fair, docker defined appc.
need an email
I've begun to look at software license fees as a kind of insurance policy against developers quitting the project :)
[ x ] done.
I'd also love to check it out :)
Oil is 31 USD/bbl now. It was 41 USD/bbl in Jan 2015. Would you notice the difference?
[ x ] sent to the email on the key in your profile
Oil just dropped in price by more than $70 a barrel, a $10 tax isn't going to cause economic trouble.

It's the perfect time to enact a carbon tax, even if it is limited to oil. This will boost the ROI of new energy technology and open up more private investment dollars.

One way to get bipartisan support may be to put the tax on imported (not domestic) oil.
> In what world is automating the deletion of customer data a good idea?

The data destruction world :)
I'm sensing some very, very strong irony here.

When GitHub (which has always been cash-flow positive) took VC money, they said that it wasn't because they needed the money. Rather, they said that the money would be used to fund new projects and directions, and because it brought the VCs in as strategic partners.

Maybe the money did change things -- but the new directions weren't positive, and the strategy suggested by their partners wasn't as beneficial as they thought?
Rich people may buy more gas, but gas eats up a considerably larger portion of the poor's wallets.
How I, a designer, learned to code and release a native OS X app in 4 months
This'll go over like a lead ballon - now oil companies are not only feeling pressure from clean energy; they're being asked to actually pay for it?
That's not true! I specifically remember reading, back when gas broke $4 a gallon, that we had finally discovered the price at which drivers change their habits. Below $4, rising prices just made them complain. But above that price, we started seeing statistically-significant changes in demand.
> due to class warfare to keep the "riff-raff" out of desirable neighborhoods

Actually, the exact opposite is the case: US zoning laws were created by the 1910s/1920s era "progressive" movement as a leftist social improvement project. The goal was to legally require that poor people would thenceforth all live in such conditions as the (mostly bourgeois) progressives deemed correct and "proper" according to middle class mores of the day, by making other conditions illegal.

See e.g. "Living Downtown" by Paul Groth for more info: http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft6j49p...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era
I think it's regressive because people with less income spend a larger proportion of their income on gas.

I disagree with him; for the record. Just trying to see his viewpoint. Personally—I think this tax is a great idea. I think the government has two jobs: (1) to build and maintain effective infrastructure for the common good (roads, firefighters, etc.), and (2) to apply pressure to rectify forces where the tragedy of the commons would otherwise apply (global warming, etc.). This is an example of the latter.
> You seem to be interpreting it as an accusation based on the idea that a person making this statement about himself is very unlikely to be incorrect.

I'm interpreting it as an accusation based on the prior explanation, which is less about likelihood of correctness and more about questioning the single authoritative root source of information. In truth, that reasoning is really my explanation of what I see in practice. I cannot recall an instance where someone said "I find that hard to believe" to someone's statement about their own current actions that did not also carry a clear "I call bullshit" connotation. That is, while logically "I find that hard to believe" used in this way can mean that a person thinks you might be wrong, I find that in practice it is not used this way, so it's irrelevant in this context. Specifically, I think the statement as used hear carried a clear "I call bullshit" connotation, which is an implication of lying.

That said, I freely admit my experience in the use of this expression in English might be influenced by region, or even my own biased interpretation, and you or others may have experiences where it was used by or to you in reference to an assertive statement about your action in which there was not a clear "I call bullshit" connotation, in which case I would happily hear them and use them as counter evidence to my own experiences.

> "I don't use the default apps" could be low or high certainty.

To me, assertive statements like this do not exhibit low certainty at all, specifically because it's referencing current state. If it's about the past, it's open to recollection issues, if it's about the future, it's about possible future actions, but when you state "This is what I do", to me that is meant as a clearly defined statement of truth.
Jumping on the invite begging train (email in profile)
What is point of Obama at this point proposing anything unless it can be implement by executive order. Congress won't pass anything he suggests.
I didn't say paying them wasn't a valid means of achieving the goal, I'm merely pointing out that making the inventions public is the goal, paying them is merely a means of achieving that goal. To lose sight of the goal leads to making bad decisions. Thinking the goal of patents is to pay inventors for example, could lead to a far more screwed up system that doesn't benefit the public. We want to progress human knowledge, not make inventors rich; the latter achieves the former currently, but it doesn't necessarily have to be so if better means are found to achieve it.
> So, please rest assured, that any "very loud warning" you're reading won't translate into the quality of services we provide, even if I am an asshole on my personal accounts.

And yet here I am, mentally blacklisting your company. Weird, right? Almost like team matters, and you carry a 'C' in your title, allegedly, so...

It was just informal advice to rein yourself in. Take it or leave it.
Things evolve in weird ways, bitcoin doesn't have a perfect way to do refunds, but it does have the ability to do escrow and to be built into contracts. It could be interesting to disallow refunds generally but be explicit in how contracts and purchases are structured so that a transaction is binding after both parties agree and confirm as much to a 3rd party escrow agent.

Credit cards, much like HTML, were a good idea built on a preceding ideas looking at the problem they were solving. So while credit cards have evolved, the now appear most similar to the Diner's club implementation popularized in the mid 50s[0]

KAZ NEJATIAN did an interesting interview in a YC podcast about his company Kash. He talks about how credit cards work on an antiquated system that, in 90% of transactions (his words) don't use anymore than the expiration date and numbers to process and compares defending processing to building a really strong door without walls.

He is neccessarily biased of course, but his explanation of the routing and auth system credit card companies used seems insane, and they aren't even value stores like banks.

Point is, things evolve in different ways and in fact, bitcoins lack of refunds (which may or may not even be true), could in fact be a massive innovation. Especially if it could deal with fraud which one could make a case for being the only valid reason for a refund. Not meeting a future obligation, could in fact be settled in the future by escrow or an insurance product one could create. E.g. I buy a laptop with a 5 year warranty and it breaks in year 4. In this contrived example, an issuer could run a system scan and verify this independently and objectively and release a predetermined payment amount, or go to a 3rd party arbitrator who would verify and release the funds.

[0]http://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/credit-cards-his...
Aaron Cheung just won't give up. I wonder what site he wget'ed this time?
You do realize that wholesale oil is not literally packaged in individual drums? "Barrel" is a unit of measure.
A couple of quotes that caught my attention:

> However, keep in mind that such potential dangers are quite far from us right now. There has been a tendency in the press to blow this up out of proportion to attract attention. It could hurt AI research. Instead, we should encourage research towards better understanding these issues, to build an understanding that can, if the day comes that it becomes something more concrete to deal with, prepare us better and provide us with safer AI that respects human values.

> To match the increased power that science and technology give us, the law of the jungle is not appropriate: we need an increase in individual and collective wisdom, for our sake and that of our descendants.

Yoshua Bengio

> No, provided we stick to a simple rule: don't create AIs with goals of their own. AIs can come up with their own subgoals, but only in service of the goals we set them, and within the constraints we specify. This is how all AIs work today, and as long as they keep doing so, they can be infinitely intelligent without being a threat to us.

> Of course, human nature being what it is, sooner or later someone will try to create a self-seeking AI. To deal with that, we need what William Gibson called the "Turing police": good AIs that catch bad AIs in the same way that cops catch criminals.

Pedro Domingos
How to leverage reverse psychology in negotiations
Not sure that thats true. And I'm not super interested in a prolonged semantic argument that would sort it out. I'll just note that the "elements of sovereignty" I was referring to are transnational corps attacking nation-states for enacting laws that would protect their populations but would cut into corporate profits. Many examples of which already exist, like, say, the cigarette labelling laws of Austraila and Togo. Or environmental protection laws in Canada (and else where). These are not the sorts of "sovereignty" one negotiates away in the traditional westphailian system of nation states.
I also would love an invite
These are the terms and conditions all web shops really want to give you
That's why it should be revenue-neutral. Every dollar the government brings in via higher fuel taxes, it should offset by reducing taxes somewhere else.

The average fuel consumer breaks even. People with low carbon footprints come out ahead. People with abnormally high carbon footprints lose. Seems perfect to me.
The TPP will decrease the fees the US charges to Chinese-made goods.
git -f on a shared branch is a surefire way to lose commits. OMFG. It's better not to allow it at all. git revert will undo damage adequately, just not cleanly.
1) You should definitely leverage your existing networks
2) If you keep your email concise and to the point (read up about cold-emailing people), then most will respond. There is nothing wrong with seeking new opportunities and if people are disturbed they just won't answer you. It seems you are afraid of what other people think. Don't be. be confident and trust your intuition.
Ok...now what's GS/why did you post it here?
Hi John, I also would love to test it out!
https://keybase.io/flaviotsf

Thank you so much and congratulations on the release!
Isn't the USA basically an net exporter these days?

If congress can't increase the gas tax to support the highways how are they ever going to support something like a tax on oil to support clean transport?
Nothing, since no one has used that backend in years. Note that the LXC command-line utility is not the same thing as Linux containers, which Docker still uses.
Can we just institute a revenue-neutral carbon tax ($15-35/ton) and let the market figure out the solutions?
I would greatly appreciate an invite as well (ben[at]jelled.com).
Do you actually know anyone that doesn't work in it? Those people do.
> It was just informal advice to rein yourself in. Take it or leave it.

Okay, I'll take it. It's just really frustrating that this keeps happening even though I take care to choose my words very precisely. Especially qualifiers.

I don't know how to be more explicit than totally explicit. That doesn't even seem possible. Maybe I'm the idiot here.
Show HN: Sound Shelter – Ready to Find Your New Favourite Record?
My biggest reservation with oil/gas taxes is that consumption taxes tend to be very regressive. Car ownership is already a tremendous burden for the poor in the US that isn't present in other countries - in all but a handful of US cities a car is pretty much required to hold down a job.

So while I like the idea of raising money for clean energy, I would be more supportive of a policy where the burden isn't disproportionately shouldered by the poor.
I think there's plenty of blame to go to both of them. There's no defensible reason to put dotfiles in every single folder, and there are many, many reasons why it may not be desired of various levels of vehemence.
I addressed each of their concerns in my previous 'pitches' to the committee. CFO gets better financial reporting to accurately make forecasts and decrease errors, COO gets better data on day to day operations, etc. Things go well for a week or two after the pitches but it seems to fade and they wonder what these "random project costs" are all about.

I think the disconnect is that I feel that since this project is what the CEO wants and has approved it doesn't need further "proving". I see how that might be naive of me.
That's kind of what I was intending with the "laws they create" phrase; I should have phrased that better. My point was more that laws are generally not easy to repeal once they are enacted.

Sure, some are repealed, but it's a lot easier to fix a bad policy before it becomes the status quo. After a policy becomes law, fixing it now has the added hurdle of having to argue against an "incumbent" policy.
I assume that $6K/month includes return of principle? Otherwise that's 72% annual return, not 12%. So you're saying you get about $1K/month in profit and $5K/month in returned principle?
Think about leaving the bay area, work for some BigCo or MediumCo that you don't care about, do an excellent job from 8 to 4, then go home and think about nothing but what you want to learn and do.

Do that for a year or two, then go wherever you can amplify what you've discovered about yourself.