skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There is definitely a set of people for whom reducing poverty is not profitable. Unfortunately in SF you see this coming from a number of non profit affordable housing developers as well as tenants rights advocates who are often the loudest voices opposing adding housing supply and even fighting legislation for density bonuses for developments that include a high percentage of affordable housing. It took me a really long time to understand that actually fixing the housing problem inSF would mean that they lose a ton of government grants and that the executives of these orgs who often make over 200k would all lose their jobs. So it's not just in the private market- it's definitely the non profit sector too.
Wow, you're not getting the right advice here at all.

I haven't been in this situation, but I believe very strongly that you should consult an attorney before going to HR. There are attorneys who specialize in employment law. They will tell you what to do as far as recordkeeping, the legality of recording these incidents in your jurisdiction, etc.

The thing to keep in mind is that HR's job is to protect the company, not you. They're not "teacher", exactly, and you can't necessarily trust them.

Personally, I think the behavior you're describing is abominable -- besides being highly illegal -- and I hope you sue their asses for a big pile of money. But, whether to litigate or not will be up to you.
The article also points out that FBI flights circled other muslim communities as well. However all of these attacks are perpetrated in the name of Islam (albeit bastardised Islam), so it seems reasonable for them to do this, even if politically incorrect. Also, we don't know if there were any suspects in those communities linked to the attackers.
That's an excellent point. The lottery aspect does bug me a lot. (Though my "regular" grocer also has lottery, tobacco, and beer/wine, so I don't think the bodega is worse than the other grocers in that regard.)
Sometimes I think even the police and city governments depend on people in poverty

You're right, but I don't think anyone has mentioned another big profiteer, the welfare bureaucracy itself. The government pays people to remain in poverty, and everyone employed in those programs is profiting from poverty and is incentivized for it to continue. So are the politicians who create these progams. It also contributes to the inflated the rents that the subject article complains about.
Once someone is trained, they might just leave and work somewhere else.
It's cool. Why using the braces rather than ()?
> What is the alternative? These people aren't forced to live there. If there were a cheaper, better alternative available to them, they'd probably take it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_cooperative
It provides (or exhibits, or is indicative of [I'm not sure on any direction of causality]) maximum motivation for (especially collective) action.

I don't know about anyone else, but the more I see in shades of grey, the more I devolve into Hamlet-like indecision ("the best lack all conviction" is a self-flattering way to put it).
According to Nina Mufleh [0] it was the person who had been interviewing her that said that rather than the CMO. Apparently she did not get an interview with the CMO (it was cancelled).

[0]https://eatwritewalk.com/2015/07/14/the-good-the-bad-and-the...
Taxpayers pay for it.

I'm not sure balloons could give adequate control, but drones are a great idea and I look forward to the day when they are so cheap that the same amount of tax money can pay for drastically increased surveillance from the sky.

Oh wait.
While plenty of money comes from businesses serving (or disserving) poor people, even more money comes from businesses serving wealthier people (with some portion of those services also qualifying as rip-offs).

The problem with the article is it makes the implication that the money made by vulture capitalists in poor areas is the biggest motivation for the existence of the poor.

But one can see a much larger beneficiary. If a company that automated a factory or moved a factory to a different region or country had to pay to support the wages of those workers it left behind, the costs of automation and mobility of capital would be much higher. Thus the ability of the poor to exist, the condition of each worker being on their own even if suddenly all the jobs in a given area dry up, is tremendously profitable to the largest industrial companies in the world.
That can be contractualized, right?
> China (East coast time right now is 9 hr diff from West coast usa.

BTW, all of China is on Beijing time.
I think you're letting off too easy the politicians in impoverished communities who are incentivized to keep their constituencies so they themselves keep their jobs.

Do you have any examples of where Frito-Lay, McDonalds, Burger King, etc. are lobbying the government to "keep people in poverty?"

Edit: and as mentioned elsewhere here, state lotteries are another huge government-authorized program that disproportionately takes from the poor.
_the act of sex was largely indentical_

If studies are accurate, oral sex, anal sex (especially between man and woman, duh) and many other sex acts are far more common now. But I guess maybe people just lied about it until more recently.
Why are you trying to connect to the web at all?

> Yes, we can do much of this by having the user install a local application that communicates via web sockets, but that has its own security implications and adds an additional step for the user.

You're target audience is arduino hackers, and you're worried about them installing an app? You need to seriously reassess your assumptions.
I definitely personally prefer ChaCha/Poly to GCM, but GCM is unfortunately quite popular right now; of the unencumbered AEADs blessed by NIST, it's very performant and thus widely implemented.
What's the old joke? Poverty is a symptom of wealth.
The differences you name can be factors in any given crash, but only in combination, because many things have to go wrong for a crash to happen.

Also, the number of crashes is so low that each crash happens under unique circumstances.

Also, people are pretty irrational about rare risks.

So such differences may affect safety, but not in a way that will affect the market price in any useful way.
Wealth isnt about money, its a measure of your ability to buy other peoples time. Until every person on this planet cant afford to buy more of other peoples time than they sell to others you will have lower class, middle class, upper class.
See also: library of babel [1].

[1]: https://libraryofbabel.info/
Yes, teaching people how to use computers as tools more than anything. ESL means English as a Second Language. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_as_a_second_or_forei...

Thanks!
I never understood the big deal about death bed. I don't care much about what I think when my i am old and senile.
Hmm not sure, there might be some legal/regulatory barriers there.
“Stack Overflow is currently offline for maintenance”
Life is a series of projects.

Seems sensible to make them as worthwhile as possible.
In casual observation, I've found that to be the case in every submission/comment site I've read (Slashdot, Reddit, HN, etc). The submissions that seem to gather the most comments are always the ones about politics, social drama, and "real-world" news.
Allowing individuals to adjust the safety levers means more people will die, because the vast majority of individuals who use air travel are not qualified or informed enough to make good decisions about these things. More people will die unnecessarily than under the current system.
The FAA has a policy of "one safety standard for all airlines" for passenger flights.

Obviously that's nonsense, as regional and major airlines have totally different resources.

I don't fly regionals, and I tell my family not to.

Before August 2015, regionals used low-hour pilots sleeping at the airport, resulting in the Colgan accident.

After August 2015 (post-Colgan), Congress increased pilot experience requirements to ATP minimums of 1,500 hours. All of the regional airlines are in the process of closing down as a result.
That's a good way to look at it.
Google Glass and Android Wear have maps and navigation, and have from the beginning. It's pretty cool too.
What if poverty is profitable to the government? What if, through welfare, the government encouraged single motherhood, and thus poverty, and thus dependance on the government?

What if single mothers were held responsible for their choice to have children with bad men?
He was in many respects. However, that offends delicate sensibilities here and so down goes da the vote.
TL;DR - don't take the product seriously. It's the UX process.

The article is more about the author learning UX methodologies and showing it off to Google rather than the product that's being pitched.

The product being pitched already has many issues and problems:

* Is "Hobbies" the right product? Looks like this product is trying to solve too much - trying to "make time for people to do hobbies", search for teachers, filter and organize information better, etc...

* Would people even use this for hobbies? How serious do people take their hobbies? It is actually a problem that people meander through youtube while attempting to learn something?

* What's the difference between a hobbie and something like taking a school course? It happens that if the person likes it, and can do it as a job, then that intersection works well. Otherwise it turns hobbies into a chore.

</2cents>
That paper's definition of rewriting isn't the same as postgres' (they even say that: "The work presented here should not be confused with the query rewrite facility of POSTGRES [SJGP90]."). Flattening subqueries and views happens during planning in postgres.

Source: I'm a PostgreSQL Developer.
When I was in high school, I wrote an inventory-control system for a rent-to-own business, which rented TVs and furniture to poor people. It was an extremely exploitative business, and 100% of their customers would have been better off doing without & saving up some money for 4-6 months to buy a used or new whatever. I'm now ashamed that I didn't walk out the minute I figured out how the business worked.
Now are doing this with slack. Everyone wants to put some integration or other in slack. When it started, I just had a chat with friends. Now it's a mix of random bots and non-stop alerts about things I really don't want to know (immediately) at that point.
How many bit of entropy are in a credit card? I ran the numbers a few years ago but don't remember now. Well within a very small rainbow table in any case.
Nobody is suggesting that it's either necessary or possible for the climate to never change at all, even slightly. The point being made is that climate change of too large a magnitude, occurring too quickly, is damaging, potentially even catastrophic, so we need to mitigate the change in order to mitigate the damage.
The author is poking at several questions that are deeper than the simple question of whether or not someone is good at their job. Take this paragraph, for example:

"The Netflix code has been emulated by countless other companies, including HubSpot, which employed a metric called VORP, or value over replacement player. This brutal idea comes from the world of baseball, where it is used to set prices on players. At HubSpot we got a VORP score in our annual reviews. It was supposed to feel scientific, part of being a `data-driven organization,` as management called it."

There's at least two issues that I see raised immediately by this. We are no longer talking about whether someone is adequate or even good at their job. We are talking about a culture where there is the ongoing of question of whether or not someone can be replaced more affordably by someone who provides greater or equal value. This is not a surprise exactly, given that every business in a competitive market is going to have some degree of incentive to minimize costs. But it is a very distinct thing from the issue of whether an employee can do the work, and it lays bare a philosophy that looks a lot like people are entirely reduced to fungible inputs.

That has its own moral problems; trying to cover it with positive spin like “graduation” exacerbates them.

But on top of that, we have the question of whether HubSpot really has any idea how to make accurate VORP assessments... or whether they're lifting a model that probably is effective in a game context like Baseball where key performance metrics are in fact what you are trying to optimize and trying to import it into a setting where most metrics are often only indicators at best. You could reduce this to the problem of whether a given manager is "just an idiot" -- but it's not that simple, because we're talking about a management philosophy that is likely to be wielded by any number of managers.

Now, you might think the market will weed out such philosophies if they're not actually effective. But then we're up against the principal-agent problem. The philosophy doesn't have to be optimal, it just has to not be bad and have a good story to sell. If it wreaks havoc with employees who may be more adequate than the management philosophy along the way, that's not going to matter much.

There's plenty of argument and conversation left in this.
People don't need to make those decisions. Currently, safety decisions are made by the government, which really doesn't have any competition and thus is not incentivized to improve its set of regulations. If you had 2-3 companies providing market review for the passengers, I'm pretty sure the situation would improve, not deteriorate. Perhaps some regulations simply don't make any sense and do not improve safety, but you'd never know that until you have one agency managing it.
StackExchange sites are down
To me, worthwhile projects is about personal achievement, reaching your potential, and giving back to society. So yes, I do wish I had more time to work on more worthwhile projects.
Well, these are not power9, but in theory... :P

http://www.penguincomputing.com/products/rackmount-servers/o...
Here's an article:

http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2006/03/general-motors-paying...

Also, just search for "gm paying people for not working"
Jake Lloyd diagnosed with schizophrenia, moved from jail to psychiatric facility
How to Be Productive
"There was [an instance] where a child was going to die of an awful childhood condition before the book came out," he said. "So we did the only thing we could do and referred it to the author to decide how to handle it because it's her story, not ours.
"History doesn't tell the outcome of that sad story, but I'm sure it was a happy one."

Ouch.
If you're interested in the psychology of audience manipulation for magicians, check out "Strong Magic" by Darwin Ortiz.
You need money to buy into a housing cooperative, and even more to start one (i.e. build a whole new apartment building). The poor people who are renting the apartments in the linked article don't have it; they are living paycheck to paycheck, and frequently falling behind even on that.

I'm not seeing a workable alternative beyond government-provided housing, but that doesn't have a good history of success in the US.
Everything is profitable to other people.

> makes $400k a year renting out 131 trailers

So, just over $3kpa each. Not a lot. It only sounds like he's profiting a lot because nobody would do that unless at scale - i.e. have 131 of them.

At those margins (I don't know what the costs are, but with that little annual profit per trailer it really doesn't matter) there would be no reason to not want the poverty-stricken to have more money, other than perhaps an unwillingness to change business model. The profit margin is just _so_ much greater on more expensive properties.
OK, say those "exploitive" businesses didn't exist. That doesn't subsequently mean "non-exploitive" alternatives would exist, it just means those customers/employees would have no options (not even "exploitive" ones). Is having no option better than having a bad option, when good options aren't available?
So, I thought the question was obvious and answer is a resounding 'yes'. Many elections are won by keeping people poor and in many of those countries politicians hand out freebies. This is also the case for non-goverments. It is in the best interests of the middle class to have a working poor population because one can offload chores (like house work, car driver) to the poor at a cheap cost.
The 𝐛𝐨𝐥𝐝, 𝑖𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑐, 𝕕𝕠𝕦𝕓𝕝𝕖 𝕤𝕥𝕣𝕦𝕔𝕜, and 𝔟𝔩𝔞𝔠𝔨𝔩𝔢𝔱𝔱𝔢𝔯 gylphs are in Unicode for mathematics, where the style of glyphs is not a merely stylistic choice but is part of their meaning.

e.g.

ℝ denotes the set of real numbers, whilst R denotes the gas constant. 𝐑 would by convention be the name of some matrix.

ln is the natural logarithm, 𝑙𝑛 is the product of 𝑙 and 𝑛. (Only a monster would actually write ln 𝑙𝑛, though.)

I don't know why the consortium chose to include these glyphs rather than push it out to markup languages, though.
The lottos are state-run though. Don't blame the bodega owner, blame the government for financially preying on poor people who are bad at math in the first place. I don't think you can really criticize someone too much for selling something that the government plays ads for on the radio.
> Yes, the corner bodega is more expensive than the full grocery store

All your justifications are reasonable from a business standpoint. But if I'm so poor and my circumstances are so bad that a bodega is the only place I can realistically go for groceries, what difference does it make to me?

This seems to be the exact point of the original article. Someone is making money off of bodegas, just like someone is making money off of gouging the poor on housing or payday loans, and in all cases the added cost can be justified as "perfectly legitimate business expenses." And the poor continue to suffer and bear the brunt.
Well, you can use client side encryption with Owncloud as well. What makes dropbox special?
Those people could just as easily be employed in other domains. This is all the more true when their income is conditional upon a centrally-managed stipend like all government employment is.
Presumably amongst the 50 volumes of Marx/Engels Collected Works he was right in some places and wrong in others.
Flip sides of the same coin.

Didn't mean the phrasing literally, as much as in parody. That said, there is an element of upwardly mobile African Americans seeking opportunities for their children. While they are not explicitly "chasing white people", this search frequently lands them in the same suburban locales.
I do not want this.
A collection of SQL queries to social media datasets
AdLib sound card on a parallel port
The entire US is at-will employment. It can't be.

About the most you can do is try to claw-back your training expenses if they don't stay for a certain number of years, but you can't squeeze blood from a stone. That money was already spent on basic necessities of life and can't be recovered.
The article was written by somebody who knows very little about airlines:

- an airline has to have pilots at the gate on time, guaranteed

- each airline has its own operating rules and checklists

- planes and airports have unique combinations of Cat III landings

- airline pilots are route-checked. they don't fly random routes.

- most major airlines have unions, so freelancers are not allowed.

However, he could be describing ferry pilots or Netjet pilots or some other non-scheduled route.
There is an old saying that "if you took all the money away from all the rich people, and spread it around evenly to everyone else, within 2 or 3 years, all the formerly rich would be rich again having taken advantage of the poor who don't know how to make and keep money". This adage, although heartless to be sure, has some degree of truth to it in my view. The problem is twofold, 1) a lot of people become rich not because they are so smart but because the lack compunction, that is, they feel no remorse for taking advantage of someone else 2) people who come out of poverty often lack the skills to know how to improve their situation, such as a lack of business skills, money management and etc., not having had good role models. In my view, the role of the government should be to check the first, that is to insure that some are not taking advantage too much, obviously this is a far to complex issue to even begin to cover here, but I am just touching on the gist, the second is to lend help to those in poverty through education and training assistance. The third component is of course, the well to do who are willing and able to help and do (e.g. the Gates and others). Thank you for the excellent thought provoking post and many good comments so far.
What? Sounds communist to me!
So is this what the doubling of GCHQ's budget is going to be used for? Protecting against the piracy of various novels and movies?

I thought it was to stop terrorism or something like that. Silly me.
Presumably, a better approach to downvoting would be to explore the works in context.
In my experience banks don't charge fees for efficiency reasons, they charge fees because they can.
80% of my cycling is in my basement. Many ways to train.
Safety decisions are not made by the government. They are made by IATA.
(This probably should've been tagged "Ask HN:"...)

For what my opinion is worth, I don't think there's much to be afraid of here. There's a pretty big gulf between mouthing Amazon's cant and actually becoming that sort of Darwinian hell workplace. Amazon is the way it is because Jeff Bezos wants it to be so.

I've been through several different episodes where the PHBs decide to adopt some philosophy that doesn't really affect daily work life.

My current workplace has hired some senior Amazon management and beyond adopting their sort of product definition (the infamous PR/FAQ), has had no other effects. We're still dreadful incompetents with or without them, but seemingly no more cruel.
> The landlords chose their market, not the other way
> around.

That goes against.. almost all economic thought.

You don't choose to make umbrellas for the umbrella market, and just keep churning out umbrellas, perpetually disappointed by the fine weather.

This market is profitable, but if it were wealthier, it would be more profitable. There's no incentive for a business-owner in such a place to somehow keep the locals in a state of poverty.
Running without ADS-B around major airports would be unacceptable. I think drones are going to be required to have them before 2020 which makes me think that isn't quite right.
With 131 properties she probably also has an employee or two to help her manage and repair them.

My main problem is I just don't see what the alternative is. Any rental housing needs to be minimally profitable or no one will bother providing it. That applies at all ends of the pricing spectrum. So if a profit can't even be made, what is the alternative? Millions of people homeless because there are no properties rentable at a price they can afford?
What is your concept?
> But if I'm so poor and my circumstances are so bad that a bodega is the only place I can realistically go for groceries, what difference does it make to me?

You're also still worse off if the bodega closes, right? I think we're just circling on "being hopelessly poor sucks in lots of ways".
There's a similar trailer park near here. Near the front, by the main road, and where many would loiter hoping someone would pick them up for odd jobs, there was a tiny convenience store; I've driven by there many times and took note of it. One day I drove by: it had been burned down ... accident? arson? dunno. Soon a small travel trailer was parked next to the charred remains, attempting to continue at least some of the services. Drove by again: that too had been burned down ... probably not an accident. Now, years later and quite predictably, nothing has replaced that service though the many still loiter hoping for odd jobs.

Make of the anecdote what you will.
Feel honoured, because usually they are rude to people who do not know any facts but propose solutions.