skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Well yes, fruit juice is fine in moderation (especially since it contains polyphenols and carotenoids) which is your point I think. However fruit juice makes it all too easy to take much more sugar than if you ate the raw fruit. As you say, fructose metabolizes to lipid in the liver but it's easy to over do it.

'a high intake of fructose (>20% of energy) can have a deleterious effect on lipid levels.'

[just like alcohol]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2682989/

Small point: fructose is a ketose sugar so fruit juice is indeed 'sugar water' - confusing bearing in mind the different metabolic fates of glucose and fructose.
When you say it's exactly the wrong thing to do, I think you're being a bit dramatic. Sure, there's some risk... But, ultimately you have the most leverage in the situation. Pay off the debt with a Visa/MC. If the collection agency is going to screw you, you can screw them right back with a charge back.
> Is the money/opt-out party-wide or is it tied to a specific candidate for a specific office. When you say "Obama" and "Romney" are you talking about them in their role as leading the entire party in the election or just their individual presidential runs?

It's for the candidate in the presidential race. Though that comparison makes less sense between the US and Canada, since the latter has a parliamentary system, which the US does not. Both the US and Canada have political parties, but the nature of the roles of political parties are very different, in terms of how they interact with the system.

If the US did what you're suggesting (provide money to parties, not to candidates from the two leading parties), it would have a very different effect. One could make the argument that it would be better, but it wouldn't really be the same as Canada doing it, because the political systems in which those policies exist are very different.
Insurance companies would lobby for a minimum dr salary so they could continue to remove most of it from the dr's pockets.
Letting this misconception continue is also potentially (although unlikely) dangerous to all of us who worked our way into the 1%. If there ever is any large scale social movement "against the 1%" the population involved in that movement is apparently not going to distinguish between us and the billionaires with inherited wealth.
There's a point where the distinction between the state and the super-wealthy blurs or disappears entirely, and there are many cases where the super-wealthy dictate policy to the state rather than vice versa.
I suspect they might stop eating after they died.
You hiring?
Ok, I'm not sure why I was downvoted for a simple question, but thanks HN! Way to encourage open discussion.
I never said they don't spend and I do expect them to spend... but the context of the statement matters and until they do spend... they haven't. Moreover, political spending, even by the rich isn't necessarily bad (and I don't think it should be legally curtailed, even when it is). It all depends on what they are supporting. I suspect that I support what the Kochs will say with their money (note this is a highly qualified endorsement and may change depending on the specifics).

For example, I wonder if Soros, a 1%er that is also known for dedicating some degree of his wealth to political advocacy last I heard. I suspect that the Guardian largely agrees with his advocacy and thus would never appear in an article like this. Their goal in suggesting wasn't to point out the likelihood of spending as a fact, but rather to suggest they would use their spending for nefarious purposes... without even the benefit of my kind of qualification: they suggest a foregone conclusion. That's not factual reporting, that's opinion making.
I don't think dexterdog is referring to places like Pizza Hut or Papa Johns.

A person who occasionally (let's say once every other month?) cooks themselves a pizza is not going to do a better job at it than a pizza chef (closer to gourmet than fast food) who is making pizzas for 8 hours a day - every day.
Or are these people poor /because/ they don't exercise personal responsibility as diligently? I can easily see the arguments for the causation going either way
hookup = sex with no strings in this context, so it's not ridiculous. They want to talk, and they want a date (or that's what they're asserting). Sex may happen, but that's not the initial intention, that's a part of the eventual goal (steady relationship).
You know, there's a degree of uncomfortable truth to this that requires the words "common sense" to be thrust between quotation marks for the statement to work.
probably a good thing, you wouldn't want most of the calls to be answered by people very unhappy to be cold-called by some random foreigner...
Yet another reason to make it easier for the less well-off to live in places like NY and San Francisco by building more housing.
It's not. (All right, it usually is, but...)

What if my definition of "power" is "the ability to write interrupt service routines and OS trap handlers"? That is, there are definitions of "power" where assembly is in fact the most powerful language out there. It all depends on what problem you're trying to solve.
The non 1 Percenters are already buying political power. The "1 Percenters", which in my mind means the political/corporate insiders, wanted an election between Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton. They're getting Cruz/Trump (not sure who they want least) and are barely going to get Hillary.

Either way this US presidential season ends, the Republican 1%'ers will be in shambles, with many networks destroyed and political capital all tapped out. The Democrats might remain okay, but there's a huge well of populism on the left just waiting to boil up and completely overwhelm any amount of advertising dollars, as it did on the right.
Parent didn't say anything about religion. Religion does not have a monopoly on basic human decency.
The first line from Wikipedia:

"A red herring is something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important issue."

And, this is exactly why I keep "losing my password" for my HN account, so that I have to take a break from participating. I didn't need to look to Wikipedia know what a Red Herring is. And it's a waste of my time spelling it out for others when they could figure it out themselves.

So, it works like this:

You said: "If you believe getting old, and sick, and miserable, and then dying, is good or natural or the way it is supposed to be, then I respectfully disagree with you."

But the person you were replying to said:"If you consider aging and death in old age as a negative, perhaps you should reconsider your philosophy, instead of chasing immortality."

their comment..
If P, perhaps Q.
P = "you consider aging and death in old age as a negative"
Q = "you should reconsider your philosophy" & "[not] chasing immortality"

and your comment...
"If P, then Q."
P = "you believe getting old, and sick, and miserable, and then dying, is good or natural or the way it is supposed to be"
Q = "I respectfully disagree with you"

so, the "P"s are at issue, as both "Q"s can roughly be translated into, "no", "false"

P[1] = "you consider aging and death in old age as a negative"
compared to...
P[2] = "you believe getting old, and sick, and miserable, and then dying, is good or natural or the way it is supposed to be"

Not the same.

The original comment simply said, it's not necessarily bad. You said, "you're" arguing it is good, or natural, or the way it's supposed to be.

Again, red herring: "A red herring is something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important issue."

You're misstatement of the original comment so distorts the issue that we're now arguing about whether "death is natural and inevitable" or "death is good". That is not what the original issue was. So, to reply to your comment, is to be distracted from a relevant or important issue. One would have been misled to go down that path.

logic 101. but hey, you have more karma points than me. so, what does logic really have against that.
OT: i submitted this 3'days ago, I wonder how this got resubmitted.
This is one of the least appropriate use of Betteridge's Law of Headlines.

The article starts with 'yes' and waters it down to 'maybe' and a real discussion could be had about whether or not the ends justifies the means, especially when it comes to criminal acts revealing dubious but legal acts.
> probably did nothing illegal, but rather they were trying to minimize their tax burden through (mostly) legal

Mostly legal and nothing illegal are contradicting.
They obeyed once. Chances are they will obey again. An organisation's culture is near impossible to change.
I was referring to the remark that, "anyone who knows even a smidgen about cars" needs no explanation about V8s.

I know more than a smidgen about cars, but I appreciated the explanation. Presumably, OP believes that I must not know a true smidgen about cars.
I am interested here in the relative income growth between percentiles, so the inflation applies in the same way to all revenues (the value of the same £1 goes down, irrespective of how many £ you have). So as a %, you would have to shave the cumulative inflation between 1999-2013, but that's subtracting a flat line, it doesn't affect the shape of the % change curve.

The point is not so much that low incomes did 200%, it is that low income did much better than the rest of the distribution (relatively).
I wish, we are very small, and very limited resource from few research projects we are contributing to, so we cant really afford. Sorry
The costs for hiring are enormous, and the cost for lost revenue are big for hiring agencies.

If I want to farm your labor, I need to find you, make sure you are going to work long enough at a site for me to make money, and I have to hope that you wont do something that will sour the relationship I have with "my" customer (the business I am renting you to.)

The margins for staffing places are actually pretty small per person, so its not so much unjustifiable as it is dehumanizing.
it says "talk about anything". How could you prank that ?
I take a small (0.2-0.4mg) dose of melatonin about 5 hours before the time I want to 'get sleepy' when travelling or returning. After a day or two of doing this, as well as getting plenty of daytime sunshine, I'm usually adjusted well enough not to notice any jet lag.
Because the media in the US are star struck. They wan't to be on the red carpet. They want to be at the big parties. They want to clink glasses with the rich and powerful.

That's why.
And in turn, if you think that is true, then clearly you've never tried investing serious money.

It doesn't get taxed when sold at a gain (because it's exchanged per 1031 or similar tax code provisions). If it does, it's often subject to super-advantaged treatment over and above long-term capital gains (think Qualified Small Business Stock or the like).

But it's often not sold at a gain and sometimes never will be; see various carveouts allowing for basis step-ups upon certain transfers (which might be within a family or a network).

But why even bother selling at a gain and paying even those favorable cap gains rates? Much more favorable to take out a loan against the asset for some spendable cash. You can even deduct the interest payments.

None of what I've described even requires an offshore vehicle, which parent rightly describes as usually perfectly legal -- although if you do have the right kind of setup you can keep deferring taxes for, practically speaking, forever. (It does require that there be enough money in play to make the significant overhead worth it, of course.)

"[L]ocal state income tax"? Not if you live in WA and a good number of other places.

And you really, really can't count sales tax as part of the taxes on investment income. Not least because the stuff one typically "spends" the bulk of investment returns on is, in turn, other investments, which are not taxed as sales items.
In the first season they all had the same car with 5 gears. In the second season development has been allowed on the motor, inverter, and transmission and the teams have taken a number of different approaches: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-KONybIQQA
> Most people would have to run 10 miles per day to burn off the garbage they would eat in the morning (think of a young adult having an innocent bowl of cereal and OJ for breakfast)

How big is your bowl of cereal? 10 miles of running would be >1000 Calories burned. I don't think I've ever consumed 1000 Calories of cereal and juice in a sitting. I'm also pretty sure most people are not eating 1000 Calories for a typical breakfast.
Classism lies at the heart of it. If someone is in a lower income job, higher ups are desperate to avoid hiring the "wrong sort of those people." In higher end jobs, they'll readily make excuses for past behavior (oh, it was just a youthful mistake). It sometimes amazes me that I've been hired into positions where I could have singlehandedly cost a company millions of dollars in revenue, but never had a single background check.

----

Of course, a much more charitable explanation would be that there's an "efficiency wage" effect behind background checks. For good jobs, the job itself is good enough that employers assume you'd be stupid to somehow jeopardize it by stealing or committing a crime. In contrast, shitty retail jobs are bad and everybody knows it—the company assumes that your loss from the job wouldn't be big enough to offset the gains you might make from stealing. This could be a similar explanation for why immigrants commit fewer crimes: they have more to lose.
I really like stevia. It's got a very specific taste so it doesn't work with everything. You have to work your recipes to deal with the extra mint. Chocolate works really well with stevia. A lot of people cut things with stevia + sugar alcohols.
The difference between sharing information about ordinary people charged with crimes and about the rich and powerful, is that the rich and powerful people are rich and powerful. These are people who exert power over the rest of society and therefore their business dealings - especially shady, quasi-legal or outright illegal business dealings - are in the public interest.

The fact some random person has been charged with a DUI is not comparable with the fact the Icelandic prime minister engaged in questionable business practices and possibly a conflict of interest, especially from the perspective of Iceland's citizens.
I like how his comparison implies that of course everyone exposed by the Panama papers is already under criminal investigation.
The dirty parts of the computing world
Consultants with merit awards will be pushing the towards £150k marks, so do many others e.g. GPs in partnerships etc.

Trouble with defining the 1%ers based on salary is that it avoids the really wealthy i.e. those with capital
> 1) Avoiding tax is in legal bounds is completely moral and is practised by everyone who is able to do that. I know a _lot_ of programmers in US who establish private consulting companies to write off all their private expenses and get 15% effective tax rate. If you think avoiding tax is immoral, you should hate them just as much as you hate billionaires.

Morality is not binary, and it is quite reasonable to think that while programmers evading taxes is bad, billionaires doing so is worse.
One way to think of it is an alternative tax rate, but it's also a minimum tax rate. It also incentivizes certain practices that are beneficial for everyone, such as holding stocks for many years instead of day trading.

If you were paid once every year instead of every week should both be taxed the same?
Ask a random Swede.
Although interesting, this is heavily biased towards cars that need third party servicing, so probably doesn't include new cars that are within warranty.
What do you mean by the first statement? Richer based on what numbers?
Online dating is so dehumanizing. People must really crave validation to subject themselves to this.
That's not true. The whole point of a smart card is that it's NOT just an "if statement".
Venture Capitalists Raise $12B in First Quarter
This is one of the most baffling things to me about modern mobile phones. The device now in my pocket is capable of producing 4k video at 100's of MB/minute yet has paltry internal storage and unlike the previous generation removed the ability to stick a 128gb microSD card in it. I honestly despair :(
I have to wonder if this, in part, has to do with the fact that poorer people here tend to ride the subway, and get exposed to a larger number of viruses, and building up an more immunities.

I'm no doctor, but it at least seems plausible from a lay-man's perspective.
Yes, that's part of the implication the findings appear to make. I don't see what you're saying differently.
Very happy to launch our MVP for Botlist.

We hope someday it will become a fully fledged store, but for now we're working towards building a complete directory of bots available on every platform.
NASA’s Planet Hunting Kepler Satellite Malfunctions
Discussion of the counterpoint (click through to original article): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3672815 (I acknowledge this is a couple years older; it's from 2012).
"The internet is used for (mostly) legal purposes"
Title should probably be "..Than _Some_ Other Poor Americans".
On top of that, the debt owner is obligated to make sure you receive appropriate tax documents, but in reality they don't particularly care and your documents will get "lost" in the mail. Since most people don't expect this to be taxable income, they're not looking for it.

Then fed and state collectors both delay addressing this until about 2 years before the statute of limitations. You have a ton of interest, fees, and interest on the fees, at which point they slam you with notices and judgements, and wage garnering.

For me they timed it perfectly, getting their last cent about a week before the statute of limitations was up. In the end, a little less than $5000 in debt forgiveness cost me around $18,000.
Ask HN: SEO impact of HN's URL “itemid” vs. an actual title?
What is the reasoning behind only an itemid in the URL for HN? Is there an SEO impact?

For instance, a url on reddit may be:

https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/4ea7ee/what_would_the_horizon_look_like_if_you_were/

while a link on HN looks like:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11465163
There's clearly some sort of selection bias going on, since I would hope it's obvious that simply moving NYC will not help you live longer.

(My guess is that people that live longer end up moving in with someone they know, and given that NYC has so many people, it's more likely that they'd move to NYC than another city.)
I haven't seen mention of the Kochs in "Panama papers" stories, but they were definitely mentioned in a previous round of leaks published by ICIJ, detailing tax avoidance strategies using Luxembourg's permissive tax regime. See: https://www.icij.org/project/luxembourg-leaks/new-leak-revea... for example, or, as http://crooksandliars.com/2014/12/leaked-documents-detail-ko... has it:

while the economy was melting down and U.S. banks were going broke, Koch Industries was moving corporate money out of the country and into the Luxembourg jurisdiction in order to dodge taxes and move nearly $1 billion around a Byzantine maze in order to ultimately cancel the debt and not impact balance sheets

I'm not sure to what extent this was really news, though, since an earlier (2009) report at http://ecobserver.blogspot.co.uk/2009/10/koch-industries-fai... states that

Public documents available on the Luxembourg government website, Legilux.lu, reveal that Koch operates a complex system of offshore companies and accounts in order to avoid paying US taxes on huge sums of corporate profits. Out of his Kansas office, Global Tax Director for Koch Industries, Craig M. Munson, manages these offshore corporations with the assistance of a shady Luxembourg company, ATOZ s.a., whose partners are primarily former Arthur Anderson staffers – the tax advisory giant that ceased to exist as a result of their felony conviction in the Enron “off-shore and off-balance sheet” debt scandal of 2002.
Thank you for taking out the time to check it out. I agree the prototype is subpar but we are working on the second iteration that will surely be a lot better. Would love to ask you a couple of questions if that's ok :

1. Would you be interested in an approach to learn which includes text and videos ( like Udacity.com) or something which is mostly interactive ( like Codecademy.com / what we planned to convey via prototype )?

2. Are there any particular topics in Finance that you would be interested to know about? (Stocks, mutual funds, investing in general, taxes, etc. )
I've tried it and here's what I want to say :
- I like that it was developed with mobile-first design.
- In my opinion when you develop a prototype always go for minimal design, use as less colors as possible (use the white space to your advantage)
- I like the interactive part of it, because it forces me to be engaged (in contrast with dead articles where I might skip whole passages).
- Beside the interactivity part, why would I use this platform? What advantages do this platform have over books?
How a Fixed-Width Button Can Get Your Company Trending for All the Wrong Reasons
I was disturbed to see this when I took the kids to see Zootopia this weekend. The protagonists threaten to harm a petty criminal, who then coughs up the information they need. It made me wonder -- the writers seem to have been so careful with their message, so should I take this to mean they endorse torture along with racial tolerance?
It's because they walk.
I understand that compared to raster images vector data for roads is negligible. A dinky Garmin car nav system from 2011 I had held continental US road system data in a few gigs only.
Yes, you are right. Most of the data on our platform is for out of warranty cars since that's our target market. Also, 85% of the cars in US are out of warranty.
Let's be clear: at any level of income, people pursue different tax minimizing strategies. At the lower end, you're looking at things like EITC. At the upper end, you get into capital gains, tax-loss harvesting, etc.

Separately, and at every income level, there are tax evasion strategies—like stashing money offshore and under-reporting your earnings, or taking all your tips in cash and "neglecting" to tell the IRS.

Tax evasion is illegal, tax minimization is logical. (If you want to argue about the complexity and bias of the U.S. tax code, that's a different topic.) In of itself, an offshore bank account is perfectly legal.

You're conflating income with illegal activities, and suggesting it's "common" for high-income or high-net-worth to be, effectively, criminals.
Which is completely absurd because not only were many of these laws recently enacted, but their the efficacy of some rules is also questionable (most notably the calorie count law).

I wouldn't be surprised if most of the difference cited by this study was due to walking. I know that I've had to exert extra effort living in SF to be more active than I had to when I lived in NYC.

I wonder if there will be a follow-up study looking into the actual reasons why life expectancy is higher in NYC.
I think the problem is that this is a retrospective step. If you don't know you've been the victim of identity theft, then the first time you might find out about it is when you're trying to make a large/important decision, which may well be the most inconvenient time for it to occur).

Then you've got to sort it all out, and _then_ do the thing you first thought of.