skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There is a theory that Perestroika and Glasnost were responsible for the collapse of the Soviet Union, but to me that seems unlikely. The Soviet Union was bound to collapse, because it's mandate, by definition, was limitless expansion of communism.

When the government could no longer coordinate production, Perestroika and Glasnost were last-ditch efforts to bring the Soviet Union more in line with Western norms. Unfortunately, since their empire was built on force, the loosening of the reigns only encouraged irredentist movements, until one by one the Soviet republics fell like dominos.

Don't get me wrong. It is a major mainstream theory that the liberalizing reforms unleashed too much information on the Soviet public all at once, causing a massive reaction.

I do believe Glasnost and Perestroika were the cause of the collapse, but it wasn't was because of the volume of information released. Rather, it was the increased freedoms to organize and communicate outside the strictures of the state. Free speech and freedom of assembly are anathema to dictatorship. Once that occurred, it was only a matter of time before their vassal states rose up.

The United States isn't quite as vulnerable to that type of collapse. You have to remember the Soviet style of occupation was absolutely brutal. The murder of anyone considered to be part of the elite class, including everyone from factory owners to the university professors, constant surveillance, and indiscriminate use of force were the first steps upon the Soviets gaining control of a country. The result was subjugated nations and people, not new provinces and citizens.

The United States doesn't have that style of federation. Its provinces are held together by a common national identity in voluntary assembly, not a single nation presiding over others by raw force.

I do also believe that if the United States' TS archives were ever opened, many things suspected by conspiracy theorists would be proved correct, even more would be proven false, and there would be countless other plots no one even suspected.
I read about a bunch of growthHacking/SEO/spamming/productthing/astroturfing effort. There wasn't much mention of talking to users getting their feedback and iteration to improve the product.

Coding is easy. Twittering is easy. Talking to users is hard. Much harder than socially engineering placement on Product Hunt and less fun than photoshopping up an ideal "booth babe" or writing a blog post...it's even harder than posting a blog post to HN because not only does it carry the same risks of vulnerability but those risks are even greater.

If the project is going to succeed, the push should be to find a small group of people use the product because it fits their brain...just one.

Good luck
> There's nothing wrong with Twitter providing tools to help someone being harassed.

Nothing wrong, except those tools don't exist today.
Very nice work and very interesting! expect FBook to shut this down pretty soon ha ha
I'm not sure you're correct:

> Twitter is structured in such a way that direct censorship can't be differentiated between

Twitter provides data to researchers, at least in some situations, and may provide data about these events.

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

AFAIK, there are well-known methods in political science for defining left and right.
Microsoft partners with Blockstack Labs (YC S14) for building global identity
Right now we're currently in beta and that could be a bit riskier than some people are comfortable with for their production apps.

As the HyperDev platform matures it will be great for production apps. We're already hosting some components of HyperDev in the platform itself:

Community page: https://hyperdev.com/#!/project/cosmic-flower

Gallery page: https://hyperdev.com/#!/project/cosmic-panther
Also my concern. It's only justification is that it's a more efficient alternative to all other welfare. That would put a LOT of bureaucrats out of work. It'll never happen. Also, it's hard to buy votes with something that doesn't expand.
Indeed. It was with lawyers in mind I went for overkill on the licensing front. I wanted to wholly and completely remove that issue from consideration.
I don't know what happened in this case, but i assume most companies do large PBN's to alter the pagerank and so the search footprint.
Any tips on making the transition to remote consulting? I've made some half-hearted attempts to do the same, but quickly gave up and went back to working for local companies.
Yep, also back in the day it was common protocol to have .history files chmod'd to 600 by default.

Having an unlimited history is great. Sometimes there'd be a tool or resource I'd vaguely remember skimming (e.g., "oh yeah, I was working on ___, so it must have been on (day +/- 24 hours)". I'd find a command that more or less is chronologically synced with the command, then go into Chrome's SQLite history db in my User Profile to find it.
Not sure that is a relevant measure. Those people will also be paying a relatively low percentage of their income to taxes overall thanks to taxes which are flat or capped, so I'm not sure why it's meaningful what percent of tax revenues they contribute.

As an admittedly extreme example, if the population consisted of 100 people who make 2$ and pay 1$, and one guy who makes $1000 and pays $100, he's responsible for half the tax income but probably still isn't paying his fair share since he's only paying 10% instead of 50%.
Elm Webpack Starter
So this isn't basic income at all, just a very very long vacation.
Its not that rare. Especially modern synthetics. Many organic compounds have 4 figure molecules. Most are repetitive chains, such as natural rubber.
GitHub adds Profile Bios
Isn't the whole point to eliminate administrative overhead?
Uber also tried to overcome the "all drivers on the road should have valid insurance" rules.
Well ECC is not the be-all end-all. There are several sources of bit errors. SD-Cards, USB Flash drives, TCP/IP Packets, HDDs, SSDs etc etc. Thats just the 'bits' you have control over. If you're copying data from somewhere else, you have no control over what the other person does to it, etc etc. I wont't produce a thesis here, but you get the idea :)
And pretty effective, though it could still be better. Imagine programmable ones. The only danger is malevolent ones :/
Yep, should have read all the way through before posting.

But the example solution is so bad anyway.
But the study doesn't actually study UBI. The problems with UBI are heavily rooted in the U -- what happens when an entire society is now making (X + Income)? Using any reasonable economics we'd assume that the price of goods would scale accordingly, especially at the bottom of the curve.
Delivering the money in small chunks might help. Instead of 70$ every week, make it 5$ twice a day. So no matter how broke you were yesterday, you'll have enough money to eat in a few hours.

Another "make it easy to get food even if you really screwed up" option might be to give grocery stores 'first dibs' on the money. Basically, let people spend the money a couple days in advance if they do it at a grocery store. A foodstamp micro-loan.

The really tricky stuff is probably cases involving debt, where the debt-collector wants to pressure the person into paying them before buying food.
It's what I was taught in an intelligence course.
It's on our roadmap, but I can't give you a date :)
NYC or Manhattan? Manhattan is probably around the same as Palo Alto, but that's only a tiny portion of NYC.
I'll be interested to see if this actually works. As an established academic, we constantly interact with private companies that seriously underestimate how much research actually costs.
I don't understand what is the purpose of this research program. Is it to find the better ways the State will then use later when BI is implemented?
You can - by taking a loan.
not sure about the top 3% but the top 1% have 34.6% of the wealth(measured in net worth) and the top 5% have 61.9%. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_Unite...)

So yes! I do think its too little, especially in the top 1%. I think some moderately more progressive tax rates would be an improvement.

One of the things that appeals to me about UBI is that it is a dramatic simplification of welfare bureaucracy. I would love to see something similar to the way we calculate taxes. Simplifying and closing tax holes would help extract more taxes from people who should be paying more while not punishing wage earners who have most of their taxes preempted out of their paycheck.
> I thought BI would replace all social services.

Most proponents of UBI see it as, at least eventually, replacing some range of existing government means- and/or behavior-tested benefit programs and, possibly, some age- or disability-tested ones (in the US, most advocates would probably include, at a minimum, EITC, General Assistance programs, SNAP, TANF, Section 8 housing subsidies; some would also include Child Tax Credit, Tuition and Student Loan related credits and deductions, Medicaid, Medicare, and/or Social Security.)

I've never heard any advocate argue that it would replace all social services.
Assuming a rational market, sure. But market panics aren't governed by the normal rules of supply and demand. They're a behavioral phenomenon caused by the non-rational human agents in the system panicking.
Odd that there aren't any visitor posts on their facebook page..
Reminds me of "going viral" and how everyone kept saying: "let's create a viral video".
I cannot survive without the calendar widget.

My need is to have a glanceable schedule for the day - what is coming up, when and where; or how packed the day is or not. Calendar notifications don't work for me as I need information at the back of my mind. Having a widget displaying information without me seeking it out, helps my back of mind scheduler.

Now thinking about it, Widgets (atleast for my case) acts like an ambient device.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambient_device
I think they can.

> In our pilot, the income will be unconditional; we’re going to give it to participants for the duration of the study, no matter what. People will be able to volunteer, work, not work, move to another country—anything.
Food stamps? After-school programs?
Don't they actually get more like an extra 30-50k burden to cancel out the 10k they got and pay 10k to several other people?
> That's not the point. The point is that it's a pandora box.

If it's a "box," then frankly, that box was opened long ago, long before the internet or computers.
I'm not sure these rules won't be widely seen as reasonable. The forum we are participating in, Hacker News, removes hate speech much more quickly than that, though it doesn't provide an SLA with a response time.
Jobs are for machines. Not so distant future. Only a few percent of people are then needed to do actual work, and mostly because they freely choose to do so... Like agriculture in the past: only .0X of people can feed us all, so to speak. 80% of all Jobs in the western world are already bullshit jobs, that can be eliminated without any disadvantage.

Ultimately one is truly free when he can decide what to do with his time on earth without any pressure.

Or, to put it into perspective: why bother about funding for a tech startup, when a few friends can choose to Code stuff they want, just for fun, without any risk or have to live on ramen? Its a whole new level of entrepreneurship that would be enabled.
what if it's more than 100% of their income :)

are YOU prepared to pay let's say an 80% income tax and a 25% sales tax for example ?
> instance checking and class-hook hacks

These are not remotely "hacks" in Python. They are up-front, first class patterns for Python metaclasses. I do agree that monkeypatching is a hack, and is unfortunately relied upon too often in Python.
I somehow completely missed this at the time as well (the settlement with the DoJ was announced in August 2011).

I also find this bit credible: “We simply know from the documents we reviewed and witnesses we interviewed that Larry Page knew what was going on,” Neronha said. Even for Google at the time, a $500M+ revenue stream from advertising illegal pharmaceuticals can't have escaped notice.
No, the whole point of BI is that it goes to everyone, so there is no disincentive to work.
> 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 my point is, when you hand someone a check and they must in turn be responsible for spending that money on food and shelter, they might not actually do that and then what? At least with Section 8 and food stamps you're earmarking the money for a particular purpose so as to make it much harder for the money to not be used the way it was intended.

> WRT things like the car breakdown case you described...

Keep in mind "my car broke down" is a metaphor for any unexpected event that impacts someone financially (and commonly as an excuse for "I spent my money foolishly and now I'm broke"), so I didn't mean for that to be some single concrete case I wanted a specific answer for. But again, if we decide that we need to help someone on BI who had some particular financial hardship beyond what their check allows for, how do we police that?
Top Movies for Engineers
Uber is testing its first self-driving car
I've heard of Rust. People seem to like it. However, I am a C programmer and have always been a C programmer, and I write the library for the pleasure of it, so other languages don't really connect.
What's it like if you have a high IQ and you fall out of an airplane?
Its not like the VC forces you to spend money a certain way.

Unless the terms of the VC dictate you only get access to tranches of money when you hit certain goals (for example, a revenue target will make you do very different things compared to a user acquisition target), or the VC will only co-invest with an established investor who has industry experience so you can't be really disruptive, or the money comes with a requirement that the VC company gets a seat on the board. And so on.

VC money often has very controlling strings attached.
One of them is quite a bit of interesting work and play with Sam Altman and his new YC Research initiatives. A recent one is:
https://blog.ycombinator.com/harc
>OR people would be forced to automate them

as if it were that easy. Why don't we worry about UBI once we actually reach the post scarcity economy?
I think Buffet should pay a higher tax rate than his secretary.
http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/04/news/economy/buffett-secreta...

And I think Mitt Romney should pay a higher rate than me.
http://money.cnn.com/2012/09/21/pf/taxes/romney-tax-return/

The problem is that we treat capital gains differently than we treat income. Most of the top 3% work and pay income taxes, but the top .1% don't really pay income tax.
Realistically a Basic Income wouldn't be guaranteed forever either, as it'd rely on a government, which tend to be replaced every 4 - 8 years. The main difference is perhaps that they know how long it will last.

Edit: rephrase because I didn't express myself very well
Of course we will never reach any conclusions, because after 100 generations of BI there must be some unpredicted effect.
Cacheonix announces Java Web cache
You completely side stepped the question. I find it absolutely amazing how naive BI supporters are. I grew up poor in a ghetto in New York. Studied, went to university, became an engineer and am no longer in that socioeconomic bracket. However it is very apparent that the people in my current bracket (the one's that support BI), have no idea about the issues of the poor. Poor people are mostly poor because of the decisions they make. At least that is my experience. Drug addiction, gambling, alcoholism, poor budgeting, mental illness, etc, etc, etc. Thinking back I do not know anyone in my neighborhood who was genuinely a hard working person with no vices. Hard working people with not vices don't live in the slums and generally can support their basic needs. Yes there are those occasions were an acute emergency happens and support is need but that is an atypical story. Giving $1200 check to someone without food and shelter most definitely isn't going to provide them food and shelter. It will more likely go to a stamp bag, scratch off, 40 ounce, etc.

Yes, we need to help these people. Mental health, substance abuse, etc do not make people "bad". But giving someone a months worth of rent/food/utilities/clothing in cash is going to be disastrous
What I don't understand with BI is this: if you give everyone the same amount of money, won't prices and rents adjust accordingly by exactly that amount, thereby nulling the effect ?
scoot, I offer my apologies. You are correct -- I read too much into what you said (limitations on bluetooth due to RAM scarcity), and took off on a tangent.
The Parallel Climbers Puzzle
The GRIM Test for Evaluating Published Research
I think there is not any one set of concepts that can be called basic income.

Anyway, if people really are proposing that the state should give money away because then there is no need to protect children from bad parents, that's pretty stupid.
>Are you saying that people commit crimes because they have too much time on their hands?

Partially, yes. Why do you think after school programs are so good at keeping kids out of crime?
The specifics obviously matter.
> "There are places where people don't have enough mobility to be able to do this."

That's where Internet shopping comes in. Ideally you want to support local businesses to keep jobs in the area, but if you need to fight against price hikes and can't do so locally then the best thing to do is shop online until the price hikes are reduced.
The reason that Facebook and Twitter receive this scrutiny is that information posted to them is public, persistent, viral and forced into many people's view by feeds. I think SnapChat counteracts all these features.

I was recently hanging out at some nightlife spots, casually talking to random millennials at bars and such and realized that nobody was using Facebook or Twitter. They were all using SnapChat, almost compulsively.

I asked them why and they said it was because their mom was on Facebook (!public). They also liked that everything disappeared after 24 hours (!persistent) and it alerts you if people screenshot your posts (!persistent). They also liked the fact that you couldn't repost stuff, only show pictures that the app took and you only shared with your friends (!viral) and only had to look at their stuff if you actually wanted to (!feed). It didn't come in on a feed.

I think Facebook and Twitter are going to be cleaned out soon except for self-promotion and commercial information. At this point I assume that Facebook is public too. People desperately want privacy. I think a rising trend in the industry is the notion of forgetting. People want services to forget. They want to live in the present and not have everything remembered about them forever. They also don't want to be bombarded by feeds since they are full of distraction, advertising and ideology. The only thing they are interested in posting to these public services is things that they want to share publicly, like self-promotion or commercial/job related stuff.
What impact does UBI have on technology and companies?

In theory I suppose more people will be able to afford a basic phone, banking, transportation etc so more eyeballs on ads and users of services. By getting out of the poverty trap, more people can be employed so even more expendable income on technology.

Will companies pay their employees less if their basic needs are covered? Then automation would be less of a cost advantage. Cheaper labour could mean a shift of manufacturing back to the US?
10 Smallest Things of Their Kind in the World – Listverse
This is outrageous. Look at how this people lobby to the State to take money out of others pockets against their will and still appear to the media as a benefactor of some kind.
What you're describing is conditional cash transfers. We have that in the US already (public housing vouchers, food stamps). BI is an unconditional cash transfer. It really is more like a stack of 20s.
OF course not. Money can't stop adults from abusing children, or each other. Money only fixed money problems. We don't have Child Protective Services because parents are poor; we have them because some people are assholes.

Personally, I'd like to see us end the welfare programs for the rich.
How much would data engineers make (scala, spark, kafka) ?
Does basic income claim to solve this problem for people already in poverty? Or does it claim to prevent future generations from ever being in poverty?
Sure, that doesn't mean that arbitrarily defining things as 'hate-speech' and censoring them completely for everyone is the right solution.
That would be a very interesting opinion. Where could this discussion be arranged?
There is also a lot of really important "high hanging fruit" that needs to be done (for example real education for the entire world).
What does 'explicit' mean in this context? It's not like a hashtag has a mission statement or any kind of statement of values.
I think as long as they don't get into debt, it should be okay if they blow all their money on drugs and alcohol or whatever once or twice. Maybe they end up sleeping on the street for a few weeks, but I think there's only so much you can to help people who are totally self destructive. There should still be addiction programs that would be covered by universal health insurance to help people who do this sort of thing regularly.

I think to prevent 'payday loan' types of scams, a good fix would be to make these payments totally unrecoverable by debt collectors. Maybe people might still loan 50 or 100 dollars, but they would just be throwing away money if they loaded you up with thousands of dollars worth of debt.
Good point on the mac address/IP, and that does happen you can tell with targeted ads and re-marketing campaigns. But at least it is a little more clean. And my main goal originally was to test mobile Safari vs Chrome etc on sites I created or to load up an app to test it in a clean environment. Then it expanded to hey, this works really well for keeping things pretty clean and I don't have to worry about what someone might see on the tablet itself.

Also works great for public places where even if I use it to play on wifi and someone cracks into it, they won't see anything but my browsing history overall (and wifi connections). I am sure there are a few more things they could find, but nothing I'd feel bad about being lost I don't think. And since I never access my email or anything on it that won't be there.

I do leave wifi (and bluetooth) off on my phone and don't ever connect my phone to wifi or bluetooth except at home. I know people can still likely get into it through other means, but reducing the attack surface by turning off wifi and bluetooth seems reasonable and is easy enough. Curious how much protection it adds though, cause sometimes it is inconvenient not to just jump on wifi to speed things up or just to get a connection.

And I have played with Tor some, but haven't yet really gotten into it. I need to explore it some more if for nothing else to learn it and understand it better.
The real idea behind basic income is not efficiency, it's marxism.
How can the world's ultimate nanny state function without proper censorship?
It takes such discipline to do something like this. Wonder what keeps you going after week 25.
This shit again.

NO ONE has given me an answer to the question: what will happen when basic income inevitably raises the overall price of basic stuff because now "everyone can afford it"?

It will be back to zero, people with basic income will not be able to afford both housing/bills and food. Moreover the ones without will be totally fucked.

So, what gives? Run BI in a few small counties and call it a success? Gee wouldn't BI supporters love that...