skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Couple of things:

1. Brave won't "sell ads", that's not how it works. Marketers buy space for ads and spend to create the ads themselves. Websites or publishers sell space for ads, sometimes directly to brands/agencies. If ads use no tracking and host the ads' images and other assets on a non-blocked domain, no problem.

2. Where we propose to do better is with "indirect" or programmatic ads. These are so out of control, publishers make money from them but disclaim responsibility when a piece of ransomware malvertisement places in the offered space. We aim to put tracker-free, sandboxed ads in these spaces and share revenue (equal shares to the user and to Brave: 15%) with the bulk of the revenue (55% direct, 70% in total per the default settings) to the website.

We're thus working to align incentives in the system that currently work against the user's interest.

We also support pure ad/tracker blocking, if you prefer.

On top of either mode, we're buildling an anonymous system for micropayments as well as aggregated ad metrics, so no one can re-identify a Brave user from a revenue stream.

Of course, we're not yet doing anything more than blocking all third party / indirect ads and trackers. To get better user-aligned revenue models in place, we'll need to scale up and win over some top publishers for trial/testing purposes.

So if you want the fastest (native code wins in perf and mem use) browser that blocks ads by default, I hope you will give Brave a try.
> I never check the gender of the author when picking up a book.

That's probably true, and that's good. However, that doesn't mean that the author's gender doesn't influence the work itself. You are not deliberately opting into skewing the data yourself, but you are still consuming a biased input set.

> Your comment suggest that Alan Kay deliberately discarded books written by women, and I find that hard to believe.

I don't think that's the case. I think it's just the more value-free observation that "this set of data points is biased." It doesn't state why it is, just that it is. That might be relevant to someone who expects the list to reflect a certain distribution of perspectives.
My interest in having a running Darwin system is the ability to build OSX things on an openly licensed platform. I know that it is permissible to virtualize OSX on top of OSX, but even that is a PITA and more so in a TeamCity/jenkins/etc setup

Giving what the mingw project has contributed to being able to build Windows binaries on Linux, I'm pretty sure it would be possible to do something similar for OSX, but since so much of it is already open source, it seems a waste to discard the exact code that OSX is running
I thought BI would replace all social services. That's how its cost is justified?
I'm going to be relocating soon and am looking to maintain my current US job. How does the remote situation work from a tax/legal perspective?
> flat-out blows all their money and now can't afford rent and/or food?

Well for starters I'd imagine a future BI system to handle something like rent via direct transfer to the landlord. Food handled the same way, some prepaid debit card that only works at grocery stores, etc.

I don't envision a system where people pick up a stack of 20's with a post-it note on it that says "remember to pay your rent".
Why wouldn't you want ECC for everything?
Macros are heavily used to avoid making function calls.

I'd glad you find it readable - I hope you're right :-)
Or, to put it another way, [your company] will either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain.
The actual study will likely run for 5 years. The shorter pilot will help us refine our research design and mechanics; we don't expect to answer any of our research questions with the pilot.
The one thing that I never actually see any of the people who tout BI answer is why it won't just cause an increase in the price of low income goods. Why won't laundry detergent just cost x% more money, etc. I think that the effective spending power low income individuals have under BI would be practically around the same that they had pre-BI if it's used a supplement to our current programs, and lower if BI is used to replace current programs...
Ask HN: Are press releases relevant anymore?
> But riddle me this: what do you do when someone on BI has a financial emergency or, as will happen with some regularity, just flat-out blows all their money and now can't afford rent and/or food?

In the simplest case, the same thing as when someone on existing cash benefits has an emergency or blows them all (and, yes, that happens even with restricted-use benefits like food stamps) -- there may be public and/or private emergency shelters, charity kitchens, etc. that operate at a level below the benefit programs that exist now that would be replaced eventually by UBI, and the transition to UBI doesn't really affect the use case for those.

There may be ways to improve the handling of those situations (or mitigate them) within a UBI by adding new public systems that leverage the UBI infrastructure, are voluntary, and don't change the basic nature of the UBI. But those are factors beyond the basics of a UBI -- in the simplest case, that's an issue that exists in the status quo and is not among those addressed by UBI.
Small Business Financing, Black People and Venture Capital https://youtu.be/gXGBEUoxHHs
Yes to both. It is billable hours which would total 2000 hours/year, if the project lasts that long. However, the startup might choose to pivot away from this project at any point.
I use FreeBSD as my VPS OS. I use nginx as my web server. FreeBSD because I am used to it (used BSDi a long time ago, and stuck to BSD ever since), and is an excellent OS. Nginx because it is rock solid.
That's a standard of proof that's impossible to meet.

Consider:

- Twitter is structured in such a way that direct censorship can't be differentiated between somebody's finger on a button and technical difficulties. (Did this hashtag disappear from autocomplete because someone removed it, or because the backend index is messed up?)

- Differentiating between "left" and "right" political posts is not possible from an objective, programmatic standpoint.

Political identity doesn't work either. Someone who's an unabashed Republican tweeting about, say, abortion, there's a very high likelihood that whatever they say about it is negative regardless of the content of the message, but how do you get a computer to understand that without a lot of false positives?

- Nobody from the companies is ever going to admit to hiding/removing content for political reasons. (Barring whistleblowers of questionable veracity, c.f. Facebook)

That only leaves generalities and user reports to work from, which have their own reliability problems. We're talking sociology/political science at the end of the day, and it's opinions all the way down, with very little hard data.
NeXTSTEP lives on as OS X to this day :) Even the base class in every API is called "NSObject" :)
thx, last question: Is localStorage more/less/same secure than sessionStorage?
"Snell’s Youtube channel advertises many of the ship sounds he has collected as a sort of relaxing white noise for the geek set"

It works! :-) how cool...
Glad to hear! If you or people you know might have any feedback, please feel free to reach out at basicincome@ycr.org
There is a name for this, it's a censorship. And in long terms it just doesn't work. Look at EU, almost all countries there have very restrictive laws against the hate speech and spreading of the racial/religious hatred, and yet far-right political options are winning all over Europe... by banning people and ideas from mainstream soc. networks they'll just push them into underground, which will make them even more appealing to young... being banned on FB will be a way to show that you are cool...
What could possibly be more important than happiness?
I dunno. That article is kind of an evidence point towards what the author is talking about - the interplay of ownership. Who "owns" the ending to Mass Effect 3 - the creators or the players?

The article clearly falls on the side of the latter - protesting that it destroys many of the player-chosen threads in the story. But isn't there something in that? No matter what you choose, no matter what kind of person you are, there are inevitabilities that none of us can stop?

I find it an interesting thing to think about. I don't think this article does a fantastic job of it, but nor do I think there is much balance in the article you've linked to.
>But few people want to participate in message boards filled with hate speech.

I predict that more people will want to visit if they see it as the only outlet where they can freely express their opinions on a topic. The vast majority of people don't seem to be able to sustain silence when they have a differing opinion, they need an outlet.

If they cannot express that on Twitter/FB, they Will find another way.

Funnily enough this will have a much larger negative effect on the "hate speech" movements goals than the existing presence of so called "hate speech".
> after a spammer started a competitor and engaged SEO link rings to inorganically alter his ranking, among other tactics

How did you find out about this? What could you have done to react to this? I think this would be a fascinating story.
The overall gist here seems to be that XSS is not anything to worry about because if there was an exploit the attacker will always choose CSRF. However, there are well-understood and proven mitigation strategies for almost all versions of CSRF attacks. For XSS you are reliant on a CDN or your own code review of your hosted JS to prevent all XSS. I'm not willing to bet I'll never make a mistake like that. An XSS can expose a lot of users very quickly in that scenario, and the mitigating factor usually offered is some time-expiring attribute of the tokens stored locally, but for usability reasons such expiration is usually long enough that an attacker will have plenty of time to use the tokens. Http-only secure cookies provide strong mitigation here that covers more scenarios.

In general, it's annoying because local/session storage are so close to being ready for prime-time, and as outlined here there are various advantages. But the XSS mitigations are too important to abandon if you really want the most security available, IMO.
How to skip the app review process and update your app instantly
Lock-free data structures are process, thread and interrupt safe (i.e. the same data structure instance can be safely used across processes, threads and both inside and outside of interrupt handlers).
Vitrivr – Open Source project for searching for video sequences
Why is it justified when it replaces all, but not when it replaces some? It only needs to replace enough, not necessarily all.
Depends which BI fans you ask. The ones who want to completely eliminate other welfare programs are generally right-wing and/or libertarian - they're opposed to existing welfare programs for all kinds of ideological reasons. Left-wing BI fans (like me) are not so gung-ho about eliminating other welfare systems for the reasons you described, and I at least am totally willing to accept that BI will cost money.

That said, I do think there are some welfare items that can be eliminated, namely those that provide an income guarantee rather than a safety net against catastrophic expenses. So for example, section 8 and food stamps might be phased out under a BI system (they're always going to get next month's or week's deposit), but I think government-subsidized healthcare should not be.

WRT things like the car breakdown case you described... I think that's a gray area? With a few very big exceptions (people with disabilities or living in rural areas) the lack of a car is mainly a catastrophic issue because it endangers jobs. If the person has a basic living standard guaranteed, the urgency goes down, and I think you can just say "tough shit, save up until you can afford the repair". But I do think that there has to be a social safety net for people for whom a greater variety of big-ticket outlays are essential.
Could you explain why this is the only way to use the library? why are typedefs essential for use?
Government policy is for long term. We can think of how to help people to transition, but can't just stop progress because some are used to current system.

And long term basic income will work precisely to reduce learned helplessness. Society will provide some cash, but individuals still need for look for a hostel to stay in, manage money for meals etc. I would prefer daily deposits to recipient accounts so that if someone spends money for one day unwisely they don't end up needing other services for the rest of the month.
This really isn't a good riddle.

First, Unconditional Cash Transfers (UCT) work better than most people expect (http://www.economist.com/news/international/21588385-giving-...). As noted in the article, UCTs work surprisingly well in scenarios where lack of capital is the primary problem. A UBI (at least as usually is discussed in the US) is a de-scaling UCT.

Second, most proponents of a UBI see it as more efficient because of the savings on administrative overhead. So dollar for dollar the assumption is that your social safety net with UBI is larger than current welfare.

Which finally brings us to the observation that current welfare is not an all-inclusive safety net, so opposing UBI because it isn't either seems a bit of a distraction.

A more interesting question, raised by the Economist article linked above, is where do UCTs break down? This is a question whether or not UBI should be _entirely_ UCT or if there should also be some Conditional Cash Transfers (CCT). This would be like providing incentives for going to college.

CCTs are better at correcting deeper issues that contribute to the cycle of poverty.

Ultimately I feel like a UBI is a good first step, but ultimately a combination of UCTs and CCTs are needed to really combat poverty.
Ah, the old Law of ECC. Say it once and everyone assumes you not only do you not need it, but you don't know how much you don't need it!

I have one machine with ECC, because it runs a backup server for all of my devices (Bacula, for anyone curious). I wouldn't mind it on all my desktop, though, and will probably have it in the next build. I remember asking around about the miniITX motherboard for the backup machine, just to double-check that worked with ECC before buying, and I couldn't get a simple yes/no answer out of anyone. Just a lot of words about how much I definitely didn't need ECC.
> push forward alternative models of doing (and funding) research

> thought about partnering closely with were somewhat bloated

> made the whole study significantly more expensive and slower

Not to be obtuse, but these reasons sound an awful lot like the excuses Theranos gave when questioned why they didn't do things more correctly.

I mean, it sounds like ycombinator wants to help propel this idea forward, but you're attempting to minimize your cost and also rush it, instead of doing things right.

> it would have made the whole study significantly more expensive and slower

And so be it. This is a major paradigm shifting idea, and you're not going to be able to take short-cuts and come out with respectable results that hold up to scrutiny.
This is a real problem, and it sucks. By offering money with strings attached (about bureaucracy, overhead, etc) you have an opportunity to shape how things are done though.
Vanilla List: The Vanilla JavaScript Repository
Too lazy to work? Or the economy can only support 100k jobs when we have 100 million people? Eventually the latter will be true.
You already do, and they're free.
We are forced us to decide if forward progress alongside our neighbors is a moral right.
I think you're both correct, but your points respond to different needs. For some types of results (and audiences and modes of presentation) its more important that the reader be able to determine the approximate value that a color corresponds to than that the reader be able to quickly intuit the progression of values. For me, Jet is better at the former while Viridis et al are better at the latter.
> If you say this from a position of success, people will believe you

So true! But the founders has to make a call on the extent of this. The Uber and Airbnb example is not a good analogy, since they tried to break/overcome the archaic rules made by cities many years ago. Otherwise I kinda reckon with your argument that in many areas of customer acquisition(SEO/Spammy mail marketing), all companies do have to involve in not so moral things.
You have to demean to feel superior.
x86, yes, and the limitations on the toolchains you can use is weird and bad.
This can happen when the income is earned, too. And there are independent safety nets for it.
Edit: You know, I should have known better to get involved. Despite my best intentions, people have decided to misrepresent what I said as something completely different. Might as well just end it here.
Has anyone considered "subsidizing jobs" as an alternative to BI? Would it work better if the government gives $X to a company when they hire someone?
YC has invested in and even defended a few companies that have caught flak here on HN for "breaking" the rules.
Good luck! I'll be following closely. I've always envied how in economics it's the practitioners who can push the boundaries the furthest.

Of course, if you ever have any results you'd like to post on Experiment feel free to reach out.
"We", meaning the readership of this site probably doesn't (I hope?), but it is a common trope that what you are allowed to say (meaning: be accepted without immediate backlash) is based entirely on your identity.

I'll not go into that concept further for fear of igniting another tired flame war.
I do the opposite and maybe weird - I disable history, and keep the history file contents hand curated.
Whenever I come up/across/use a command I'd like to keep for future or use frequently, it gets appended to the history file.
This is my company CEO's experience with press releases. I can't decide if it's funny or dreadful, maybe it's both. What I don't know however is - is this an isolated case or the common case?

I don't know if it has been discussed or not, but if it has, please don't mind sharing the links to the discussions, I haven't been able to find anything similar.
It's not the "hate speech" that puts you in trouble there, it's the threat of violence.
Yeah, it's a great question.

One solution I've been thinking about is if we could hand out the basic income in a daily increment. I don't know the actual implementation details, but something like you get a government card that can work at any ATM or something, which has an account that increments every day.

That way, at worst, you end up hungry for a day, which is manageable.

We'd need "basic income compatible" housing, hence my answer[0] to a previous YC question about what they should fund at YC Research. If the housing is cheap enough to accommodate BI, and it accepted payments every day, then you can't really spend yourself out of accommodations. At least, if the feedback loop is close enough such that "I buy this thing and now I can't get back into my apartment tonight" works, then I think that could prevent homelessness in the "poor budgeting" rather than "mental illness" case.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11000558
I think the short answer is you can't. This study is probably less likely to be susceptible to another major problem with philanthropy experiments, which is recipients reporting what they think the survey designers want to hear because they believe they will be further rewarded as a consequence.

(which I think is present and very difficult to avoid in RCT trials in developing countries; a notable example was people reporting that they were less likely to have recently been subjected to domestic violence after their neighbours had received money.)
> difference is ISIS isn't out to terrorize women

I'm not sure about that. They literally capture women as sexual slaves and have extremely regressive views of women's rights.
Will recipients of Basic Income payments be allowed to move to somewhere with a lower cost of living where their payments will go further?

Handcuffing people to a location - especially one with a rising cost of living like Oakland - seems like it would not be in the best interest of participants receiving such payments.
I'm not a "BI fan" and I'm curious what they think too, but I think it could be done. I think it depends on the kind of emergency.

For not-really-critical ones (eg Joe's car broke down), you could just do nothing - if Joe wants to he can wait and use his next BI check to fix his car.

For life-threatening emergencies like can't afford food or rent, that's trickier. I would say that if we can afford to give a BI, we should also have soup kitchens and homeless shelters that don't have means testing, so while that does create a kind of social safety net "below BI", it should be much cheaper to run and harder to abuse.

The biggest source of financial emergency for most people is unexpected health problems, and I'm not sure what a solution is. Maybe free insurance for everyone? What would insurance fraud look like in such a world?
Real-Time Security Analytics Against Real Threats
Yes. The reason for this is that every version of the library can be concurrently included and linked against. The reason for this is so that when a new version of the library is incorporated, existing code does not even have to be revalidated, because the code it is using is unchanged.

In this latest release, I've actually moved over to a single repo, which will gain a new directory for each new release. The reason for this is that the benchmark app builds and links against earlier version of the library, so it can benchmark them. The gnuplots show not only the performance of locking data strcutures running the same benchmarks, but also of the earlier versions of liblfds.
which welfare program gives people more money if they already blew the welfare money they got?
Is Facebook going to delete Ramzan Kadyrov's Instagram then?
Plenty of people belong to forums and social networks with reasonable rules though. Which say, remove actual personal attacks but use common sense in regards to what should be removed rather than promising to 'remove hate speech in 24 hours' under some general 'framework'.
It absolutely makes sense for large single page applications where you are doing multiple roundtrips to load the application anyway and you will keep the tab open (e.g gmail / trello / etc).
Keep in mind when discussing UBI, especially in the context of poverty, that it is not a solution to poverty. It is a solution to automation crashing demand by throwing earners permanently out of the economy.

Robots take the jobs so people have no money to spend even as the robots make more stuff, cheaper.

What to do with the people? Throw them in a volcano? "Hunger Games"? Let's just give them money and see what happens, okay?

That's UBI.

UBI isn't for the bum. It's for you (okay, well, your cousin. You read HN, you're probably fine.)