skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Wow, this is extremely condescending with no actual backing information.

The fact of the matter is, people make bad choices. People who make bad choices are more likely to be poor. Lack of impulse control is extremely prevalent in poor communities. Like the GP, I was poor, I know poor people, and 95% of them are just shit at thinking long term.

The educational system fails people sure, but why does that mean we should give $1200/mo to people who do not have the necessary discipline to use it appropriately? CCTs have been used extremely effectively, and do combat this problem on a structural level.

There is actually a huge lack of skilled professionals in blue collar fields. We import mechanics at a ridiculous rate. This is true throughout a large portion of the world -- a SKILLED mechanic in Mexico can earn roughly the same wage as a skilled mechanic in the U.S...

It is hard to support your basic needs because you need to budget appropriately and you don't have extra money to spend -- but a large portion of poor people spend it anyway. I can't tell you how many of the people I know will drop $30 on some alcohol, drugs, club cover, concert, when they know that they'll be struggling to pay rent at the end of the month.

If you're actually an engineer you'll realize that most problems are multi-faceted and flat out telling people who have lived in a situation that some poorly researched secondhand analysis (i.e. the joke that is modern Sociology) is more relevant is absurd.
Thanks for the awesome tips and simple recipe to tie things together.

Had to tweak mine slightly though:

${HOSTNAME_SHORT} -> ${HOSTNAME}

$HOME/Sync/Dotfiles/history -> $HOME/Sync/Dotfiles/history/*

(maybe the missing star was due to HN formatting?)
The whitepaper that is announced here was discussed previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11538560
> Swinging the election toward a hawkish demagogue with no knowledge of foreign policy

At this point that sounds like either of them.
Is Intelligence Hereditary?
This Is the Most Terrifying Golf Course Hazard
Thanks for the extension. To quickly see what's going on you can also just monkey patch the native functions right in the console.
"Inflation" occurs when the money supply increases but the supply of things money can buy does not increase.

If basic income is funded by taxation, then the money supply does not increase. Every dollar distributed to the set { A, B, C ... } is taxed away from the set { A, B, C ... }, so the purchasing power of the set is unchanged.
That what the "web" link is for under the article.
I am also just thinking this through for the first time :)

If what you say is true, then I think we will have just successfully upgraded minimum wage to a living wage, and have allowed companies to hire more people at higher wages due to the wage subsidy :)
Although I admire the intent here, my opinion is that it's focused on the wrong variable. Lack of "enough" income is not the root of the problem for why people get sucked into poverty and stuck there. The problem is that working people have become increasingly unable to turn their income into equity. And the number one expensive expense of "shelter" is why. So the poor people will have more money to pay rent ... woohoo. Landlords in Oakland are probably already salivating, factoring this into their next rent increase, maybe even planning to build a few more "brand new affordable housing units" in a complex that will increase both supply and price of rent. Are people ever motivated to work harder to pay their landlords more? Almost never... But give them an opportunity of ownership, and that truly turns the tables on not only what kind of work they can do, but how they spend their time and money.

I'm slowly building Ecosteader to go this direction of enabling ownership to build equity. My motivation was originally to build a land development network of people interested in green / sustainabile building, but the more I investigate this piece of the project, the more apparent it becomes that land ownership really does solve both problems in one. People who own land or homes tend to care more about environmental quality / NIMBY issues.

For the "property tax is just rent" crowd arguing that angle -- property tax on a small and undeveloped piece of land is almost nothing... build a small structure on that land and it doesn't go up by that much. In 90 percent of the US, I'd imagine that tax for the whole year is less than one month's rent in Oakland. It's when people who have massive square footage on massive acreage start complaining that property tax makes them poor that the perception gets skewed.
Clean Your Stinky Vagina (Part 2)
>Gill tells me he doesn’t consider himself in the adware business. He prefers, instead, to describe 50onRed as a company that keeps content free for users.

I love that bit. How does injecting ads into random sites help keep content free for users?

Who's buying those ads by the way? Sure it sound like a terrible company, but I can help thinking that their customers are worse.
It's a problem if the math behind UBI presumes savings from eliminating a ton of social programs and we later find that there are substantial numbers of people that still need those programs even with UBI for non-financial reasons.

If we find that non-trivial numbers of parents blow all their UBI on XYZ, are we really going to let their kids starve? Or will we see that programs like SNAP need to remain in existence?
We should unstifle it.

Are you claiming that safe-space movements that stifle free speech are justified, because someone else's free speech was stifled?

Please give us an example with details of what exactly you are talking about.
>>What you and Hume…don't understand is the reach of science, experience and empirical testing

I'm familiar with Sam Harris' argument. We have measured levels of health, pain response, serotonin, dopamine, and various other yardsticks with new technology. Harris argues that assuming our goal is to maximize happiness and reduce pain, these technologies can help us track our progress. He's right. But this assumed suggested first principle of human empathy isn't novel. Hume in 1738 was very familiar with the concept of human empathy. It was not enough then to tell us how to act and never can be.

>>I don't presume human healt to be an ultimate good, experience has shown that it is an ultimate good, or as ultimate as a goal can be.

Being only a subjective human, your personal opinion about health, which is all this is, is not infallible and is validly rejected.

>>I have not chosen a camp...ultimate objective morality to me is just as irrelevant as ultimate objective medicine.

This is a real dichotomy, not a false dichotomy: moral statements refer to objective moral facts (Moral Realism) or they do not (Moral Nonrealism). You do not currently believe moral statements refer to objective moral facts, correct? That's one of the two camps. There is no neutral position, you have chosen.

>>we have made incredible moral progress

In your camp, Moral Nonrealism, morals (statements about what humans should do) don't refer to objective moral facts. Instead they are subjective whims and invented delusions we use to help us survive and thrive and to give us comfort. Just as one subjective moral opinion in America today cannot be objectively better than a differing subjective moral opinion in Brazil today, subjective opinions that differ across time also cannot be said to be better or worse than any other. Thus, while change occurs "progress" never does.

>>one of the worst if not the worst as the christian god

A common response to a proposed Upside-Down Kingdom, where the currently first will later be last.

>>What you need is evidence but you have none.

Start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_realism
Given how drastically Microsoft changed in the last couple years, I wouldn't be surprised if they distanced themselves from the level of compatibility guarantees they issued in the past.

EDIT: I don't think it would go down well, if some files cannot be opened in all applications only because of the path. I mean, Windows is the biggest enviroment for the most diverse set of desktop applications right now, so refusing to open files because your app doesn't support the path sounds unreasonable but I cannot think of a solution myself. Thus I'd like to know how they're approaching this.
Old news, Facebook has been working very closely with the German Government to protect poor little Merkel from being criticized.
No, it's literally called enabling, and it doesn't help people's problems. There's a reason why you're told to cut off funds to people who have problems like this.
How can this not just be blocked / igonored?
Interesting. I've always seen Phoenix as a place where you spend most of your life indoors due to the heat. And it always has given me a "suburb" vibe when I've flown over it.

Haven't lived there though.
This sounds reasonable. Case in point are other features which required a manifest with the right entries.
For any practical purpose, it's not "license free", it's your choice from the
six licenses mentioned. BSD or MIT alone (or Apache? I don't remember the
contents) would be plenty enough here.
`Censorship of hate speech on the internet` was opened long before the internet?
The UK also has infinitely better healthcare-related bankruptcy statistics.

I suspect it would be easier to improve the 5-year cancer survival rates in the UK than it would be to eliminate healthcare-related bankruptcies in the US.

The NHS has also become increasingly inefficient over the last couple of decades, as managerialisation and stealth privatisation have diverted funds away from front-line patient care towards administration costs and third-party profits.
Thank you. Actions that are deemed to have been taken solely for their tax effects are clearly and explicitly deemed tax evasion by the IRS, and are prosecuted as such. I believe other countries have similar standards. There's a lot of room to give people the benefit of the doubt, e.g. by counting the good will from charitable activities as a credible alternate reason, but there's no license and certainly no requirement to cheat.
All that's changing is the medium. The media aren't even that different -- the same coaxial I plugged into for television and internet now gives me just internet which I use to view the same content as before via Netflix, PSVue, HBO Go, etc.

As for financial news, I watch Bloomberg which has already streamed on many devices including Roku for years.

I don't want to watch television on my laptop or phone either. I want it on my television.
If two people misunderstand your homepage in the same way, it may be time to change your homepage.
This is the wrong question to ask, based on the wrong premise.

The point of BI is NOT to save money but to provide income for the increasing number of people who wont be able to provide value for the labour market.

If someone has a secured income then there is also a better chance that they can get insurance, a loan and so one.
What amazes me in this discussion about BI is that most people don't seem to realize that systems similar to BI have already been tried in Europe, and that they didn't work.

I come from the Netherlands, which has always had unemployment benefits. Nowadays you get those only if you meet a bunch of strict conditions but it hasn't always been so tough. In the early eighties, there were almost no checks whatsoever. The result was that many people started to see the benefit as a 'right', and that the choice to work or not to work was a matter of personal choice. So basically the same thing that BI tries to achieve. But the result in the Netherlands was that more and more people chose not to work, or chose to do work that didn't pay anything, or worked for black money and collect the social benefit at the same time. In the end the whole system just got too expensive and had to be adjusted to be much more strict.

Tl;Dr; BI is a very nice idea on paper but unfortunately becomes too expensive in practice.
Few people complain when rich and middle class people start moving into historically low income areas (at least until the poor can't afford to live there)

When it applies to companies, I think it's pretty universally suggested that hiring people from poor backgrounds who've worked very hard to get close to the hiring thresholds and are probably being overlooked by other companies is usually a good decision. You don't get any additional "diversity benefit" from paying them less though...
I learned at the age of 12 that you do -NOT- have freedom of speech on the internet. I was on some internet forum causing a ruckus and one of the moderators told me to stop posting or whatever. I countered with "free speech!" and got banned off the forum.

Most of the internet we choose to use is a collection of walled gardens. People can kick you out of their garden, that's how it works.
"newly issued fiat currency" is theft. Forced inflation is theft from people with savings etc etc etc.
Ask HN: What are the best JavaScript libraries for data visualization
Tesla's Gigafactory grand opening to take place July 29
oddly enough a relevant arXiv paper was released today: https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.08323

Also how does it compare with https://github.com/mitmul/ssai-cnn
Because harassers can just register a new account in 10 seconds (and frequently do).
> I am not sure about this, because the net amount is still new money in the economy

No, the net amount is zero. Unless you're talking about literally printing money (in which case the costs are spread about in the form of inflation). There is no 'new money'.

> Yes, a typical person is paying more taxes, but they will have net more money to spend or save: $BI - [Tax on $BI] is still > $0.

You're ignoring the number of people who will be paying more in taxes than they will recieve. Even if you make the moral argument for taking their money and giving it to others, you can't ignore the fact that, without the additional tax, the money would literally be used in some other way, either as consumption or as investment.

As a ballpark, if the payout is $5,000/person/year * 300,000,000 people = $150,000,000,000/year, that's $150,000,000,000/year that needs to be raised in taxes in order to cover the program. Every dollar that gets paid out has to be funded through money that would otherwise be in someone's bank account, and which they either would spend or would save (invest).
Can you? I mean, at that point, you're basically deciding that a people are not allowed to self govern themselves.
Adding VoxelShop to the list: https://blackflux.com/node/11
> If you can't factor it into your costs of doing business (that you pass on to the client) then you either have to factor it into your costs of doing business (that you have to eat) or decide to take the risk of not bothering.

Thanks, I know this myself. But there is a reality in which no one will accept you factoring in the costs of analysing every tool used.

You try to do this -> someone else gets the contract

You try to change the contract to cover for this -> someone else gets the contract
Yeah, I'm not surprised; that's generally how they handle these sorts of things. See /LARGEADDRESSAWARE.
HTTPOnly is security theater!!

It is worse than useless because it makes you think you are secure.

XSS attackers are more likely to generate arbitrary requests to secure endpoints as you via JS than they are to send the cookie to themselves at 3AM so they can rush to craft requests.

And httponly does didly squat to prevent that.

Better is to focus entirely on santizing your output properly in the context it is outputted. And use whitelists, never blacklists.
It's in the corporate interest to promote Basic Income. Relieves the social unrest of an automated future.

Corporate calls for Basic Income aren't very credible unless they come with a new corporate tax.
> just look at the gamer gate thing to see a prominent example.

This comic sums up that situation pretty well: http://imgur.com/aF8eTQf
The thing I'd like to see is government services that will optionally replace portions of your Basic Income.

If you're having problems feeding yourself, I would like to see an opt-in program where you can receive food, in exchange for $X out of your BI. If you're having problems housing yourself, an opt-in program for housing in exchange for $Y out of your BI.

The same options should be available for all the necessities (clothes, food, water, shelter, communications, and savings). The sum of these government services should sum to your total BI grant, so if you opt-in to all government services you have the basics of survival totally covered but receive no direct BI.
Ask the end users instead.
Great paper, but I was wondering particularly about the "optimizing for SSD" aspect. The paper you cite seems to deal only with optimizing for "in RAM" databases. While one might hope that the same techniques would work for both, I think Andrew may have important insights into the differences.
I'm starting to see this way too often. No one cares.
> Zero-configuration ... also eliminates tuning.

Not quite, SQLite can be tuned using pragma's, https://www.sqlite.org/pragma.html which covers most of your tuning needs.
I think the idea that Facebook, Snapchat and Twitter would be the biggest beneficiaries is mistaken. Facebook is obviously a behemoth in anything it does just because its user base is so huge right now, but it is in decline. The future of anything is not in Facebook. Young people know Facebook isn't cool.

Snapchat is cute but it's never going to be the dominant anything. It's an app for seeing pictures of naked girls that people also use to share pictures of food and stuff.

Twitter has also stagnated and Periscope was a still birth.

Youtube is the king of online video, and will continue to be so for some time. Twitch is the king of streaming live gaming video, and will continue to dominate that space. Its efforts to expand into other areas have been hindered by the fact that a) the audience for watching people do other stuff besides play games live is not as big and b) for things that might have some audience appeal like say cooking or whatever, Twitch hasn't reached those audiences (and its not friendly to those audiences since everything about Twitch screams gaming. Which it should since that's where its money is.)

The place where Youtube and Twitch fall flat is narrative entertainment video. Netflix, Hulu and Amazon obviously dominate that space. I agree with the analysis that the current industry mindset of "We all make our own apps and make our own money!" is not the future. Everybody's only limiting their own audiences there. If anyone can manage to bundle multiple quality video subscription services (e.g. if Amazon could bundle Hulu + HBO) of your choosing they would see massive subscriber increases.

That's the thing that's missing right now, is a la cart bundling. And why the cable industry is dying. We by default have a la cart bundling online right now but there's no discount for doing multiple. If someone can manage that (i.e. Apple) they're in a good state.
As a developer, I feel like I have more control over mitigating CSRF then XSS.

But where I have more issues is that OWASP clearly advises not to use web storage for identities:

+ A single Cross Site Scripting can be used to steal all the data in these objects, so again it's recommended not to store sensitive information in local storage.
+ A single Cross Site Scripting can be used to load malicious data into these objects too, so don't consider objects in these to be trusted.
+ Pay extra attention to “localStorage.getItem” and “setItem” calls implemented in HTML5 page. It helps in detecting when developers build solutions that put sensitive information in local storage, which is a bad practice.
+ Do not store session identifiers in local storage as the data is always accessible by JavaScript. Cookies can mitigate this risk using the httpOnly flag.

https://www.owasp.org/index.php/HTML5_Security_Cheat_Sheet
God, I'm old.
Thank you. Although I haven't heard anyone ever use the same breakdown as me, I have heard a lot of people who want to "change the world". I always interpreted that to mean that they want to do type 1 work.
nginx Security Release 1.10.1/1.11.1
Just thinking of this on the fly but could you have certain things that you cannot spend BI dollars on like this? Or after layering all these restrictions you've essentially recreated the previous system?
What? No it wouldn't.
Makes you wonder if the people developing windows are even using their own product as a development platform. I imagine they use some unix or unix like platform to program windows and thus the developers themselves rarely run into problems like this, so they become unaccounted for.
ST becoming open-source is one thing, making it freemium another. I was talking about the latter.

Does freemium really work at all for anyone? Gets you new users quickly but then 1 in 10,000 converts. This works for established companies as they can weather the freeloaders with piles of cash from other parts of the business. Or in the case of VC-backed companies, from the money fountain (better not ask Spotify about that though).

I just can't see how a small company depending on a single product would benefit from this model.
You can get all of that by visiting another website. You don't need to go to Facebook or Twitter to get that.

I don't get why people feel the need for Facebook or Twitter need to host those items on their own servers?

Do people not realize that these are private companies with editorial discretion?
Simple Set Game Proof Stuns Mathematicians
You would be surprised.
https://legalentityidentifier.info/
While I tentatively agree, I don't think BI in this manner could succeed without first setting people up for success. Financial education and the ability to manage finances is a crucial prerequisite skill that many who would qualify for BI might very well lack. We can't throw people in the deep end of the pool and say the ones who didn't drown learned to swim.
That's exactly how existing welfare systems work. If you spend the money you must rely on charities like soup kitchens. BI changes nothing in that regard, what it does change is: it removes means testing and the huge cost, stigma, and unfairness that goes with it.

Many countries already pay for schooling, healthcare and military protection, why not do it for basic living costs?
Clearly at least one person cares, or he wouldn't have commented about it.

Not that the comment was useful.

But neither was yours.
PawSpots – Map of pets friendly places in city
The market for trading benefits for cash/services/products is quite robust in communities where it is the norm to be on them.

I think you would be quite surprised - it's a very well developed shadow economy that has pretty well known "rule of thumb" exchange rates, money changers, runners, etc.

This will pop up in any market that offers non-cash items of value.
More deets: [0], [1].

[0]: http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2016-4450

[1]: http://mailman.nginx.org/pipermail/nginx-announce/2016/00017...
Sort of agree, but the title made me think of https://www.arqbackup.com

Quite close field to be honest.
Gravitational waves may reveal stringy Universe
Ok, so they DID make it to the top, great! Now, how does this help me get better at graph theory?

Edit: That being said, I mean no disrespect to this... 20 year old article. Hope I didn't hurt your feelings, Article. Just trying to find an entry point into this domain.
No, there isn't. There is a fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of shareholders. To extrapolate that out to tax evasion is just plain silly.
The only time I need cookies is during OAuth requests because you need the token there. That's the only place I use them.
I paid for extra insurance without meaning to last time I visited their site. Pretty sure the "opt in" button was checked by default.