skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's nothing hypothetical about tor search engines. A small list can be found here: http://www.thehiddenwiki.net/deep-web-directories-search-eng...
Consumers and the review industry need to put more emphasis on this stuff. A very quick look around:

Laptopmag rates best & worst[1], but only gives 5 points to "software". Asus sits in 3rd place, with 3/5 rating for software, with the comment:

> Many of Asus’ laptops ship with more than their fair share of bloatware, including Line, Netflix, Candy Crush Saga, Flipboard and TripAdvisor.[2]

PC Mag rates the top 10 of 2016[3], with the 1st being a chromebook and 2nd place going to an Acer despite one of its cons being "lots of bloatware".[4]

On one hand, it's not that hard to reinstall an OS from scratch (something I always do), so to say "don't buy this laptop" because of that is maybe a bit extreme, but on the other hand, most consumers don't do that.

[1] http://www.laptopmag.com/articles/laptop-brand-ratings
[2] http://www.laptopmag.com/articles/asus-brand-rating#sthash.9...
[3] http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2369981,00.asp
[4] http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2498473,00.asp
I love articles like this, bold statements that are supposed to apply to everyone. Oh look, my beloved one is not directly alergic to gluten but if she eats some she simply gets sick. Also I have seen her on multiple occasions to take probiotics and have such noticable improvement on her health...

Everyone's different and our health is a result of how well do we know our bodies. This is a life time project, you study yourself and improve on daily basis.
off topic, but I've noticed that they're now straight up lying to people using adblock...

"We noticed that you're using an ad blocker, which may adversely affect the performance and content on Bloomberg.com."

Pretty sleazy, bloomberg.
The mindset is that the services should forget, but if I want persistence it is up to me to remember. I have to same sort of archive of 20 years or so of computing but it's mine and not in custodianship by someone else and that's the distinction. Just because some random web service has a breach it doesn't mean that messages/thoughts/dreams/jokes I sent someone in confidence should be exposed to the world unless I permit it.

It's closer to wanting to be able to archive every letter you receive in the post, not the post office keeping every letter and you having to rely on them for the safety of your messages. A lot of these services also keep changing the rules of inclusion to a community over time, where things were private they are now not private or people just need to restart and get going again in a new social group.
Not sure why you're downvoted. I suppose you're not contributing too much to the conversation, and it seems a little sarcastic (or something), but i often feel not having kids is a forgotten option. My SO and I chose long ago not to have kids (independently, fwiw), and people often look at us like we have two heads (.. each, heh).
FBI Wants to Remove Privacy Protections from Its Massive Biometrics Database
No doubt. I unplugged and threw chromecast away long ago.
> I have a feeling most people who would need to rely on BI also have a problem managing money.

I think this depends on what you mean by "rely on". I could see many people who are very capable of managing their money relying on BI to allow them to take behaviors that would be risky in the absence of BI. For example, a college student who is choosing between starting a small business or interviewing at larger companies may significantly rely on the BI when deciding to start their business.

However I agree that, when viewing BI as a safety net, those who would need it are disproportionately likely to also need help managing the money.
Snapchat doesn't need data to sell brand advertising; Facebook does
This was practically the panacea of 20th century liberalism - the idea of state retirement income being unconditional was fundamental to post WW2 society in all western democracies and become a cornerstone of growth in the era. How could you fathom being successful in business while you had to care for your parents?

In the same sense, that will apply to basically everyone in this century in regards to technological unemployability. We could either stifle our society with the burden of social unrest involving the unemployable and underemployed, or we could just give them the money to take care of themselves so anyone who can still be productive will be able to.
Does your concern depend on the "dependents" receiving basic income, but the "working class" not receiving basic income? Or, does it depend on basic income possibly changing the signifiers of social status?

If it's the first case,

Most proponents of Basic Income want to implement either Universal Basic Income (everyone gets the same check, regardless of their means), or a Basic Income which drops off proportionally with earned income.

In a Universal Basic Income scenario, someone who chooses to work should always have more income than someone who does not work. Given how much social status is currently centered around wealth and income, a worker should have more social status than a non-worker.

If it's the second case, where we assume implementing UBI will change the markers of social status - I think this is pretty unlikely. For the foreseeable future, having more income than someone else means being able to buy rarer or higher-quality luxuries. Humans value rarity and scarcity.
I figured if we passed that test, we could handle pretty much anything.

A relationship isn't hard when you are on an adventure and experiencing new things and facing new challenges. Relationships become hard when you have spent a few years in a daily rut of kids, work, house work, bills repeat repeat repeat.
Clearly this is super cool. It is also a legal licensing nightmare since it takes "derived product" to a new level...
One could settle this by reproducibly demonstrating the bug with a pirated mp3.
If parents would only be on UBI, that is not enough to provide for kids, but that is a reflection of negligence on the part of the parents.

Scenario: Single mom of a child with special needs who is devotedly taking care of said child and does not have time to also work for money.

One of my fears with UBI is that I am hearing ideas posited that men will no longer be made responsible for things like child support or alimony because, hey, the woman gets a check anyway. And I think this is incredibly, seriously problematic.

Please do not make such sweeping statements about parents. Parenting is a very tough thing and money alone hardly makes one a decent parent. Studies have shown that there is as much neglect and abuse (and addiction) in rich neighborhood as in the ghetto. The best parents are typically middle class. They have consistently made choices to try to balance the need for money (which takes time) and the need to spend substantial time with their child(ren) in order to raise them.
The myth of unadopted babies/kids is pervasive and pretty inaccurate. Most babies and small children who are up for adoption have multiple families vying to bring them home already...

If you want to talk about adopting preteens/teens/special needs children then it's a different ball game, but that's not what people try to do.
I realize that "feasible" is a messy word.

The problem with such make-work is that you're paying people to do work which shouldn't be done. You're assuming that "staying at home watching TV" doesn't create any value—but it creates entertainment value for the consumer. If it didn't have any value, nobody would buy cable.

Let's say we have some totally trivial job. Say, generating electricity from running on a bike. The market wage for this would be $1.

In the status quo, we might assume that nobody would do that job. If nobody is willing to do that job, it means that their opportunity cost is greater than $1—ie. that even if they are unemployed, their non-market activity is worth more to them than $1/hr. Let's assume their non-market activity is worth $5/hr to them.

Now a government subsidy comes in and pays the employer $5/hr for everyone they employ. So the employer starts advertising bicycle jobs at $6/hr (in practice, they would keep some of the subsidy for themselves). Now the individual is willing to take the job at $6/hr.

Somewhat counterintuitively, this has destroyed value. In the status quo, we were paying nothing (no subsidy) and total value was $5/hr (the value the person gains from their leisure time). With a subsidy, we pay $5/hr and gain only $1/hr in total value (the benefit of the person riding the bike). This is obviously worse.

The only way that your system makes sense is if you treat leisure time as worthless. But that's clearly false: if leisure time was workless, everyone would work every possible hour and unemployed people would all be walking around the streets looking for pennies.
This whole low/no expectations thing can keep people in some pretty toxic situations.

It's not really about low/no expectations. It's about not letting smaller, less important things impact the larger, more important things. So, one person sometimes not putting down the toilet seat could either be a momentary frustration that is sometimes mentioned but largely ignored, or used instead as a catalyst for arguments and an example of how that person is lazy and uncaring.
Mind you, that would require financially literate teachers. I never had one, in all the years I was in school
If you need non busybox things, just install them and they replace the busybox version automatically. If you don't then leave it minimal.

It is mainly about size on the base install, long before shellshock. Many use cases only need basic tools, eg configuring the Alpine system itself.
Law and order responds after the wrong. I'm talking about protection to prevent the wrong.
Irrelevant comment: Title 'consise' -> 'concise'
I find it very naive to assume that basic income will be implemented as a simple, straightforward, clean replacement of our current welfare systems.

Our current, messy, complicated, unsuccessful welfare systems is the result of many powerful political, social, and moral tendencies and forces, which will reshape basic income in the same way they shaped the welfare system in the first place. There will be many attempts to give some people more income than others -- and some of those attempts will be justified. After several years, we will end up re-creating our current welfare systems, for the same reasons we created them in the first place. Society is not a clean slate upon which any policies can be successfully imposed.

Unless those political, social, and moral forces change or disappear, basic income won't be very basic after the politicians, and the voters, get their hands on it.

Tyler Cowen's thoughts on the matter are very perceptive: http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2013/11/wha...
I've been using pidgin for this feature for years, people freak out when they don't see you typing but you say something before they even start... ;)
As a kid I would find them all the time. These days if I end up standing around a clover patch with nothing to do, I always look for them but never find them. I can't imagine I had the patience to look for them as a kid for very long, so I feel that my ability must have gone down hill OR that the patches I'm by now just don't have as many of them. I was always convinced that the ones at the house I grew up at had an abundance of four (or higher) leafed clovers and that patches at school, for example, were relatively poor.

Perhaps that ability decline is just my current reluctance to get down on my hands and knees and leaf through them by hand.
Under many current basic income programs, or just under other welfare programs? My impression of basic income schemes is that they are universal - they don't care if you're a millionaire, you still get your $30K per year.
I think its just node at the moment.

I think the code editor is 'Ace'[1] and that supports lots of languages.

[1] https://ace.c9.io/#nav=about
No mention of children, until we get this: "maddening children who kill the passion from which they emerged".

This solipsistic, navel-gazing age can't die fast enough.
why single this school out from the rest of their peers? i.e. Phoenix.

the entire system has incentives completely mis-aligned at every level. it you look at how the subsystems of immigration, finance/loans, for-profit education, and corporate sponsorship interact, how could you expect anything other than the corrupt clusterfuck we see today?
>For that kind of money, you typically need to be a manager (team lead at least).

False. You have to be very senior, but you do not need to 'typically' be a manager. There was a spreadsheet a few months ago on HN showing that with RSUs, most of the top tech companies pay above this for their higher level (non manager) engineers.

>It's less than $300k, but contracting taxes in UK are about 20%

Wow, contracting taxes are higher in the US, maybe it is a comparable if you can make 150k+ doing consulting work in the UK!
Legally "all rights reserved" is the default, until/unless you follow the legally appropriate ceremony to disable it. If you get the ceremony wrong in some way then you're back to "all rights reserved" in practice, regardless of intent.

CC0 contains the lawyer-developed appropriate ceremony to do what you want here, including handling weird jurisdictions. The way you've phrased it will confuse the lawyers and may or may not "work" legally speaking.

There are instructions on the CC site about how to apply CC0 to a project. CC0 was developed for precisely this purpose.
I completely understand this move. It seems logical enough, and it's much like what Reddit has done/is doing banning certain hateful subreddits. Advertisers don't want to advertise with companies who are known to host hate-speech or anything of that caliber. However, a move like this is essentially going down the rabbit's hole: you can never get to the bottom. Who decides what constitutes hate speech? No doubt, certain groups will claim they are being censored much like what happened recently with Facebook and conservatives. It may seem like a perfectly good move, but it's just not viable in the long-term.
Crunchbase shows them having taken an A round in '04 and several times since then [1]. Their E round wasn't long before my interview there [2].

[1] https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/simply-hired#/entity

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11810217
This reminds me of what the Web used to be: amusing entries by interesting people, devoid of advertising, marketing or JavaScript.
How such a mechanism was ever acceptable is beyond me.

They probably wanted to encourage the new owner to use TLS as well.
Measuring the Milky Way: One massive problem, one new solution
And the 8GB for the next version of the base system and so on, base system updates are fairly frequent.
I would suggest the idea of private insurance is actually completely non-functional without such heavy regulation that you might as well just institute public provision — which also has the benefit that it does not heavily incentivize over-provision.

With a competitive insurance market, you charge people a premium related to their expected healthcare costs. Some people have chronic diseases, and their expected healthcare costs are way beyond what they can likely afford.

However you regulate, insurance companies will always try to find a way to cream off the lowest risk customers to offer them the cheapest deal, progressively chipping away at the idea of collective insurance until it breaks.

Private health insurance is broken not only in practice but also in theory.
Automation-apocalyptics forget, intentionally I assume, that new types jobs are created in the course of history, not only lost.

While that is no guarantee of how (much) the direction of the jobs market will shape, it makes thing more complex than the "we're sinking!" analysis, since there are more variables which take part than just "robots".
> 1. Have a longterm vision/goal for your life that is achievable regardless of financial resources/location etc.

What's yours?
I find it interesting that, in this thread, most of the reasons to support this type of thing resort to the lowest common denominator as the reason to support it.

"This could be used to silence opposing viewpoints!"

"You mean like rape and death threats? Why do you support that? You're a disgusting racist bigot!"

As if that's the only type of free expression the naysayers are talking about. It's kind of sad really.

Imagine the surprise when some of these people supporting such things find out it's their turn to have their opposing viewpoint stifled.
What point are you making? That children can't somehow add additional stress to a relationship?
To be fair, both scenarios are known to stress them. I have known many couples who met, were fine for months, and then went on a trip together and broke up. Traveling with someone can be very stressful.
> Which should be just fine under UBI, where you shouldn't be getting anything for children in the first place.

If you are going to replace present means-tested benefit programs and not adversely affect current recipients, you need to have a lot higher per-person level of UBI if children aren't covered beneficiaries.

The most sensible target population I see for a UBI in the US is probably "all US citizens and legal permanent residents (green card holders)", without respect to age.

> and unless we need kids

We do. Permanently greying population would be a serious problem.
If you wait for a while (8 billion years, give or take) the Sun will expand enough to meet the Earth, and presumably that will happen long before any drag effects will cause the reverse to happen.
This has reminded me to sign up all my emails for alerts, and makes me glad I started using Lastpass back in 2012 and almost all my logins these days are separate and very long passwords.
Not yet unfortunately that I know of. There are some oldish instructions for AWS here https://wiki.alpinelinux.org/wiki/Install_Alpine_on_Amazon_E... and it was suggested that a community project might help build official cloud images.
A16z Podcast: Startups and Pendulum Swings Through Ideas, Time, Fame, and Money
Walmart today is the greatest example of subsidized jobs in practice. Their employees are underpaid and are given social benefit brochures on their first day working. Townships will give Walmart thousands in subsidies to get a store to move in, just to have all the wealth of the town vacuumed up and shipped to the Walton family while all local businesses wither and die because they cannot compete with the economies of scale at hand.

So the state and the taxpayers get to subsidize Walmarts profits, when Walmart could not operate in half the locations it has without corporate welfare to subsidize the costs of their employees.

This already happens today, it happens in many industries (including agricultural harvest and food service) using circumstantial employment rules to underpay employees and have the state subsidize their cost of living so the business can be more profitable.

It is absolutely dystopian and against everything the UBI movement stands for. It is much more reasonable to liberate peoples time to do what they think is valuable, rather than have some bureaucratic state agency colluding with business interests to determine what is valuable enough to force them to spend their time according to that metric (and hint, their measure of value is going to be shareholder value in all its forms).
Simply Fired.
> A bunch of React/ES2015/Flow/StandardJS/eslint tools exist for Atom but not yet for Emacs.

Yet another reason I mistrust the JavaScript ecosystem: it's built by a bunch of folks who don't understand why emacs (and vim) are great. If they don't get that, how can I trust them to get anything about software architecture?

> It's Atom that made me switch to ctrl-t (find file in project by partial filename match), by the way.

It's C-p f with emacs projectile & prelude.
I've achieved this with a few lines of bash on the default Pi distro. I don't really see the benefit unless there's added advantage of Chromium being accelerated? (Last time I checked it was not. Not only that HTML5 Audio was missing too).

For anyone interested heres a dirty bash script I had:

1. Auto Login & Disable Screen Blanking: http://www.raspberrypi.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=18200, http://elinux.org/RPi_Debian_Auto_Login

3. Adjust Overscan and force HDMI hotplug: nano /boot/config.txt
disable_overscan hdmi_force_hotplug

4. Install Chromium, Matchbox, unclutter: sudo apt-get -y install unclutter matchbox chromium-browser

5. Add a start up script:

unclutter &
xset -dpms
xset s off

matchbox-window-manager &
while true; do
sudo rm -r /etc/chromium
su -c "chromium-browser --kiosk --incognito http://localhost" -s /bin/sh pi
done

The script logs in and starts x with matchbox (better performance than LXDE default), opens Chromium to localhost (nginx would show a page).

I remember I added a few other things to 'sed' replace Pi config files to display a mp4 splash screen I made in AE (it looked marvelous). At one point I had a front end that could manage Wifi and do some other basic tasks. Using PHP and Nginx. Shamefully hackey.
I'd say a 100 year old case speaks to a lack of enforcement of fiduciary duty in the courts.
People don't like to question the basic assumptions they live with, such as, "Having children is a necessary part of a good and fulfilled life."
"No. In most countries of the world, including the United states, limited social benefits exist. It is sometimes messy, it is sometimes unfair. But they are reality."

Yes, that is exactly my point and it is from knowledge of the US systems especially that that point is informed.

It is my contention that they don't work - not just practically, on the ground, but even theoretically.
Automation is an absolute necessity to end poverty. Do you really think stone age people could have ended their abject poverty by just "fixing" their society? It is the immense wealth create through increased automation which has allowed the general well being of most people in the western world today.

We can't simply fix the world today by some political decision. There simply isn't enough wealth in the world to create a good life for the whole worlds population. Growing the economy for the whole world to the point there there will be enough for everybody will take significant time. You can't just do it right now, as much as you like.

Then you have countries such as the US, which has at least the same wealth asa e.g. Nordic countries but yet has significant poverty problems largely eradicated in Nordic nations. In a sort of naive and theoretical way these problems should be possible to solve given that enough wealth exists. But in practice such a thing would be difficult to achieve.

If you just installed a nordic style system in the US today, it wouldn't cause an immediate solution to all social problems. The existence of the nordic style welfare system over many years has made sure that there doesn't exist a large poorly educated and dysfunctional class of people.

You can treat an illness much more easily if you tackle it early on. However if you let it fester for years as the US has done, you will need much stronger forms of medication.

E.g the years bad blood between blacks and whites in America can't be changed by merely passing a set of laws.

What you can do is starting with reforms today, but it will be years before one can reap the benefits. People's values, attitudes etc doesn't move that fast. That is why one needs a lot of patience for solving a lot of world problems.

It is likely much faster to develop an advance AI system than getting blacks and white American to trust each other e.g. Likewise it will take decades before Americans are going to think poor people aren't just lazy and caused their own predicament.
Matrix – An open standard for decentralized persistent communication
this is awesome for irrigation system, or home automation