skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
But you're right, at least some people would definitely completely exit the work force. Well, that just means the salaries of the rest would go up. Simple economics. Does that mean that some working families can no longer afford to pay a new immigrant bottom dollar to mow their lawn and instead have to pitch in themselves? Maybe so. Is that so bad.

Yes, it's bad because now we are all poorer. We have fewer goods and services to go around. The fact that salaries (paper) go up doesn't change this fact.

Okay, you say, but what about those working mothers that are barely making enough money to be able to afford the most basic child care...

I'm referring to highly productive women who should be designing self driving cars, automating business processes, and other such valuable things. Instead they are stuck at home changing diapers.

We, as a society, lose the value of their output.
The best supposition I've seen in this story comes from [https://cp4space.wordpress.com/2016/05/02/is-craig-wright/]:

> However, on this occasion there is the added caveat that two well-known Bitcoin developers, Jon Matonis and Gavin Andresen, purport that Wright is indeed right

> The little-blockians want the block sizes of Bitcoin to remain small, and thus for it to be a pure decentralised currency that can be used by anyone with a computer. This would maintain it as a peer-to-peer currency, but would limit its growth.

> By comparison, the big-blockians believe Bitcoin should grow into a universal currency, expanding the block size to accommodate absolutely every transaction. The downside is that this is beyond the computational limits of domestic machines, thereby meaning that Bitcoin could only be regulated by banks, governments, and other large organisations: thereby moving it away from a libertarian idyll into something more akin to a regular currency.

> Matonis, Andresen and Wright are all big-blockians. Having the esteemed creator Satoshi on their side would help their argument, and it is entirely plausible that there are several large organisations who would benefit from having more control over the regulation of Bitcoin.
That is false, at least in the example of online retail. If you sell stuff to someone in another country, online or not, you are bound by the consumer protection laws of that country. So someone in Scandinavia has two years of warranty on a laptop bought on dell.com, vs. one year for an American making the same purchase.

I don't think it makes a difference whether what you are offering is physical or not, your service is bound by the laws in whichever country the exchange takes place. Of course enforcement might be an issue, which is exactly why the Brazilian judge did what he did, when Whatsapp failed to abide by Brazilian law.
I'm thinking from the government's perspective. It's still money that is being removed from the treasury that they have to factor into the budgets.
Does that imply it should be decreased with economic recessions too?

Myself I don't really see any long term social solution other than UBI as well. But there are plenty of rough corners like that..
Basic Income is very, VERY far away from the Utopia in that experiment. It means enough money to cover rent, utilities and food. For anything more, you still have to study, work, etc.

Also, it's one experiment, that I haven't seen replicated, done in an age when you had to show up those darn commies, that Capitalism is the best.
It's too easy to be in non-compliance with those terms by accident. I absolutely intend to use them in a honest way, but just think of terms like having prices up to date, which can collide with caching, and easy stuff like that. Or a wrong formulated notice in the impressum that is than counted as wrong representation. I'm not willing to risk my personal existence by accepting draconian terms that would be illegal in europe.

But I'll reconsider if I manage to get a proper barrier between the finances of the site and my own.
Stylight | Munich | Germany | Visa & Relocation support

At Stylight we build a fashion website where users find inspiration and can search for fashion. We're among Munich hottest startups and quite international. English is our company language and we have colleagues from 20+ nations. We run joint engineering and business teams, to maximize the impact of each engineer.

-----------------------------------------------

We're hiring:

* Senior Full Stack Developer (http://stylig.ht/Senior_Fullstack_Developer)

* System Administrator (http://stylig.ht/1rgJXj5)

-----------------------------------------------

Interested? Contact me on sandra.jasarevic@stylight.com.
Want to know more about us? Check out our Tech Blog: http://tech.stylight.com/
PIKIO and KREWR are going to change the world and eat Favebook for lunch!
The reason many (not me) look down on things like welfare is they are not personally and directly benefitting while some other person is and they aren't perceived as working to deserve the benefit.

The idea with UBI is that you no longer make the government assistance a merit based assistance and instead everyone gets it equally. For those with large incomes the small amount of UBI will be a pittance. For those with little or no income it will be a lifeline. In both cases the amount would be exactly the same.
Who said the default reaction should be offence then? Who even said rituch was personally offended by it?

If someone doesn't recognize it as relatively harmless banter (which may be a matter of opinion anyway), then why would they not think it's inappropriate here, when this forum is known for being more civil than most, partly for the reason rituch gave?

The "default" should be to recognize that misunderstandings happen online, and to definitely not post a rude, redundant comment like "get real" to an already heavily downvoted post that two other people have already addressed.

Edit: Well, judging by the down and upvoting, it seems I'm in a minority, or a lot of 'free speech' warriors here don't understand the concept of private forums with rules, and think posts simply telling people to "get real" add to a discussion.
”Even in modern times, only suckers pay retail”

What does that mean? Is one a sucker for going to the store and paying list price for e.g. bread?
If you think it's so rational to have children for cash, you can go do it. I've never met anyone who actually thinks it's a good idea. It's always a hypothetical to malign the poor. Because people who malign the poor know exactly how poor people think, or something.
Isn't this the exact effect you would want, if you are instituting basic income partly as a response to structural unemployment as a result of automation?

If we don't have robots providing child care, cleaning houses, and all these other services, then "structural unemployment as a result of automation" is not actually a problem we have.
The amount of boilerplate seems much lagrer with Vulkan, given what they say :)
It means hardly anyone sees them.
It's a visual feedback tool which makes issue tracking and agile project management a breeze.

So for me the best thing about DebugMe is the focus on the visuals. Their tickets are containing an editable screenshot and all the information your front-end developers need to fix the problems: the browser version, the screen resolution, the plugins used in the browser and the operation system too. Bugs and issues are also reported where they occur: live on-site. This makes it (compared to JIRA) super easy to report issues, give website feedback or create new tickets.
> In the US, it means that maybe you own a house.

Geography plays into this quite a bit, too. The cost of living is lower in the Midwest so it's possible to live a larger lifestyle on more of a working-class salary.
There will always be work that some find unglamorous but has to be done. I doubt that garbage collectors see their job as a higher calling or a passion, and yet without solid waste collection society would literally collapse.

Somehow, you're assigning lesser intrinsic value to lawn mowing than you are to (eg.) jobs in STEM. Society may have assigned a lesser monetary value to it, but that's a function of supply and demand, and not a suggestion that the job is somehow "lesser" in some way.

It doesn't make sense to judge another person's job decisions using your own value system. Many (perhaps even most?) people see their job as a means to an end -- a way to make money to do the things they love. That's a perfectly reasonable and honorable way to live your life.

What we do need is equal access to the means to do other things. If you're interested, capable, and willing to have a career in (eg.) STEM, you should be able to do so without having to fight the socioeconomic conditions into which you were born.
Debt is the problem. The majority of Americans have a large amount of debt and if income goes down, which is what will happen in a deflationary spiral, how are they going to afford to pay off their debt?

It also encourages hording of money and doing nothing with it as it becomes more valuable over time.
There's lots of work that needs to get done, whether anybody likes it or not. If the intrinsic motivation to do it is not there, people are willing to offer rewards to other people for it to be done.

I feel like your ideals are very far away from a gritty reality of the working arrangement for most people.
Sounds good to me. Thanks. I'll have to see how I can add this into to Ui without just making it bigger and bigger.
Depends what level of income disparity you're operating on, rich people don't share nannies - the nanny's kids go to a nursery or more likely are looked after by a grandparent (maybe in a different country).
Millions can't even get health insurance in half of the entire USA (24 vs 26 states do not have medicaid expansion because the supreme court ruled it was okay to screw everyone over).

Good luck with this basic income fantasy. Might as well try to negotiate reparations for slavery.

How about you finish what was started FIRST - and don't give me this "we can do multiple things at the same time" nonsense. This is six years later. The need for health care is pretty much universally understood. Giving people free money would never get out of congress.
In Germany at least, public retirement funds are "pay-as-you-go", i.e. you don't pay in to save up money for yourself, you pay in to finance the current payouts to other people who previously paid into the system (and so on). Of course nobody treats it that way -- you'll hear a lot of "my pension" talk especially from people close to retirement and those who are unaware of how low their pensions will be a the current rate.

Theoretically the system could be justifiably stopped at any second and simply drained by the current pensioners (which would probably happen almost instantly). But good luck explaining that to people raised under the false assumption that the public pensions are "safe" (as politicians like to announce so frequently).

Our best bet would probably be "universal basic income for everyone below retirement age" but pensions are "topped up" to parity with basic income. A not-insignificant portion of pensioners already gets pensions below social security levels (meaning it is topped up to social security levels -- not that they get welfare on top). You could then fade out the pension system and replace it with basic income.
In CUDA you can write your device kernel as a templated function and the compiler will specialise it based on how it's called by the host. In some cases this can result in big speed-ups while keeping the code simple and maintainable. You could get the same speed from specialising the code by hand, or with a separate code generation tool; but having that ability built in to the compiler makes it very easy to use.

It's also handy for the compiler to be able to check for errors in shader invocations. Looking up parameters by name and setting them dynamically adds a whole class of potential runtime errors that don't exist in straight c++ programs.
You may be interested by looking into "An Effective Git And Org-Mode Based Workflow For Reproducible Research", which describes more or less your idea (https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01112795/document).
> Suppose they were a mail order company based in Brazil but serving customers internationally by post. If a US judge issued a court order in the US requiring the company to hand over business records stored on paper in Barzil, he would have no jurisdiction whatsoever.

Fair point. But to continue that analogy, the US judge is quite free to ban the commercial operation of that Brazilian company in the USA. Which is exactly what happens, and is happening here.
I think that's great advice. Thanks. I have enough to think about and act upon for a day (that thread here worked so much better than I hoped!), but that is still a good thing to do.
1. Can an unemployed single parent of two support themselves and their family on $10,000 per year in San Francisco?
2. Can an unemployed single parent of two support themselves and their family on $10,000 per year in Detroit?
3. Why?
4. See 3.
5. What are the proposed benefits of UBI?
So you're saying he expected it would take months to debunk his story, by which time he would have profited handsomely and irreversibly. Right?
You don't know many 21st century identity-politics leftists, I guess. Try visiting Seattle :)
What we really need is a project to do for GPUs what RISC-V[0] is about to do for CPUs. It's high time we as a society broke away from the stranglehold proprietary companies such as Nvidia and Intel have over us. It's time for a completely open computing platform for all of us to use to the fullest advantage of society.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RISC-V
This #PressFreedom Day: Journalists Use Umbrella App to Manage Security
> Conservatives don't give a shit about social welfare, this is just another scheme to enrich their pals and undermine the social safety net.

Huh?! That makes no sense: how is giving everyone a sufficient income to survive undermining the social safety net? How is increasing taxes on the wealthy enriching their pals?
I played with that in the beginning, it does not feel good in practice. You have not enough control what he should reduce next.
Roseane was very much Working Class / Blue Collar
> in a contemporary legal setting it's difficult to find footing.

Freemnan-on-the-land is totaly quackery in a comptemporary legal setting. It's like homeopathy, but for laws. It's Creationism, it's snake oil. Fundamentally it presumes/assumes that laws work differently from how the organs of the state think they work.
I think television just reflects the career-obsessed nature with society today. Characters are not just competent employees, they tend to be excellent at their jobs (top of their field, seemingly) while spending very little time doing their job.

I don't know if blue-collaredness is looked down upon, but it feels like writers go out of their way to let it be known that the characters we are supposed to like, are extraordinary.
That makes sense, however shouldn't patent applications like this be rejected then?
Optionally, consider actual co-located teams in cheaper areas. I fully support expanded virtual teams, but there are some benefits to co-location as well, and investing in long-term co-location areas, even in other parts of the US, would be a step towards getting the benefits of both co-location and lower costs. You might even be expanding the labor pool to include some culture that isn't an SV echo chamber (potentially cheap-shot, I know).
Well putting aside that you might be making a kind of post-hoc fallacy there with your equation; Is reducing labor supply really a bad thing?

Most developed countries have unemployment permanently somewhere between 5-10% or even more during recession. Some, like Spain, have closer to 25%. Reducing labor supply may be the only answer.

It's not that I don't agree with you in principle. But you can only gain productivity if there are things for people to do. The fact of modern society is that we are running out of jobs.
Designed to /= actually will

There are plenty of campaigners on the left - the UK Green Party is an example - that openly campaign for a BI in addition to most of the state benefits that already exist. And when it comes to implementation details, it's quite hard to believe that many left wing proponents actually would take the "well if the BI isn't enough for you to afford your social housing once we sell it off, maybe you should just move" route.
I thought the problem is pretty much spelled out in that post:

> [...] doesn’t solve the fundamental problem: the interface between the CPU and GPU code is needlessly dynamic, so you can’t reason statically about the whole, heterogeneous program.

It's the same thing as raw SQL vs abstraction (could be ORM, but not necessarily). Not only are your assumptions not verified (is there table X, will I receive the columns I expect, etc.), you cannot tell if the constructs are even valid until runtime (is "SELECT %s from %s" valid?). Abstractions let you do things like `table.where(abc=123)` which is guaranteed to be a valid construct and can be verified against schema at compile time. It can still fail at runtime, but has much fewer failure modes and is clearer when reading.
Even days or even hours count: he already broke some nice records. His first "outing" and his PGP trick was found and discredited in December, and yet he still managed to do it the second time, even bigger, better and shinier! He is already much more famous than he was in December. I can imagine Leonardo di Caprio to play him in a new variation on the "Catch me if you can" subject. Note there's already a book author who "spent many months" with this fake Satoshi.

Also read about big-blockians, the conference in NY that started exactly yesterday etc.

https://cp4space.wordpress.com/2016/05/02/is-craig-wright/

http://gizmodo.com/gavin-andresen-i-was-not-hacked-and-i-bel...
Interesting contrast to academic economists, where average output is probably less than 1 published paper per year.
Swimlane | Remote (US)
-------
What: Sr Quality Assurance Engineer for startup cyber security company

* Work from home
* No micro-mgmt / Work whenever
* Contribute to OS/Community
* Languages: JavaScript / Python / etc
* AWS / Github / CI's
* Competitive Pay

Apply: http://stackoverflow.com/jobs/100506/sr-quality-assurance-qa...
Unfortunately, no mention of "Malcolm in the Middle" or "The Simpsons" (which admittedly I havent watched in about 10 years). Both of which continued the class contrasts of yesteryears' sitcoms.

Overall though, I do agree with the article. It does seem like everyone has it really easy on American TV.
a huge amount of work today is done by people instead of machines because people are cheaper than machines. If you make people more expensive than machines, the machines will do the work, and the people can stick to doing something they actually want to do (like playing with their kids, working on a hobby, or exploring the world)

Look at the response to a higher minimum wage - McDonalds, which typically runs a store with 8 to 10 people at $7/hour discovered that most of those jobs could be automated (with better results) for the capital expenditure equivalent of less than $15/hour. So now there are McDonalds stores that run with 2 people instead of 10. People still get their hamburgers, but now orders are taken by a computer screen, hamburgers are assembled by a machine instead of a person, etc.

Lawnmowers, street sweepers, taxi cabs, factory lines, farms can all be nearly fully automated these days, but it's cheaper to put a person there right now.
That's why I said "in the comanche sense", since this style of raycasting was commonly and erroneously referred to as "voxels" in the 90s (all other raycasters having basically flat floors).

"elevation map" doesn't mean anything in terms of projection, you can project an elevation map onto a 2D display in a hundred ways, "raycaster" does mean something here, a raycasted elevation map or raycasted heightfield is what this is, anyway it's just an example of what types of problems can be solved 10x faster with pypy.
Paymill files for preliminary insolvency
Having lived thru that era, and having been a poor starving student around the time of Married with Children, my experience was they bolted on the poverty but never internalized it to the show. The characters clothing budget exceeded mine by a factor of perhaps 100, their house and possessions were fancier than my parents by a large factor (and my parents were pretty well off, wealthier than I'll ever be) and when they were not directly discussing finances their financial issues were laughed off at a level that would mean I'd end up homeless if it happened to me as a starving student.

Basically they were a rich family like the Cosby show but they loved to LARP that they were poor. A cheap cut-and-paste job where Bill isn't an OB/GYN or whatever he was, but cut and paste him as a retail show salesman without changing anything.

There's a good analogy with how soft sci fi is made, aka the bad stuff. Take a story from another genre and have a computer mechanically cut and paste it into "sci fi" without changing any aspect of the story beyond the crude cut and paste. Superficially shiny and signally, but the slightest attention shows it makes no sense.

From memory the pull the show had was crude language and motivations, in a non comedic manner. It was an appeal to the 80-90 IQ cohort, roughly. Its appeal wasn't the socioeconomic class they lived in, it was appealing to the fart joke demographic, and the producers figured they'd have to bolt on a shoe salesman job instead of OB/GYN because OB/GYNs don't talk like high school dropouts.
Surely $833 a month ($10,000 a year) still wouldn't be even close to enough for someone who is unemployed to live? Wouldn't rent and bills use that up, without leaving anything for food, clothing etc? I love the idea of universal basic income, but I feel it would need to be double the amount proposed in this article to really change society for the better. Otherwise people will still need to resort to crime to extra money, seeing as there are going to be even less jobs in the future.
Yes, as a British person I'd say an example of a middle class sitcom is something like Frasier, not Roseanne.
No one even attempts to quantify the the effects they claim are so important.

Perhaps I didn't phrase that strongly enough but growing the economy or making it more efficient is not the point. It's at most a rationalization.

go live in a rural area, consume very little, and survive with bad internet

That's not a realistic advice. It's extremely difficult, puts having a family largely out of reach, and places you away from potential collaborators. Even Joey Hess[1][2] has to resort to crowd funding and grants.

[1] https://joeyh.name/

[2] https://usesthis.com/interviews/joey.hess/
The only way I can see UBI working is if most people get no benefit. So someone making the average US income of $50,000/yr would get a check for $20k from the government and then see their taxes go up by ~$20k. Rich people would pay much more, effectively transferring their wealth to the poor. People who are solidly middle class wouldn't see much change, except having a new class of potential customers (the people that used to be poor).
This is not exactly new. I replace the air filters in my Mazda and Subaru cars fairly regularly. The filters aren't cheap, either. Same for my Coway unit in our house.