skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Sacramento has their own utility district, "SMUD". In the neighboring counties, we have PG&E. I talked to a coworker in Sac. His highest "tier" price is about my lowest tier. Marginal cost in the upper tiers is in the 30 to 40 cent per kWh range (it has changed a bit from year to year due to some restructuring). The only people who I can see staying in Tier one would be single people who leave the house all day (with the AC off). If you have a family, fuggedaboutid.

We recently put in solar panels to at least shave the top tiers off of the bill (very cost effective vs $.35/kWh, even if not at $.12/kWh). However, I feel it's only a matter of time before PG&E lobbies for mandatory time of day based billing, in which case the panels won't help reduce the rates much for charging a car.

Sad, but true. Also, I had a used Leaf for a few days, but took it back because the battery only held about 80% of its original capacity, barely made a round trip to work (49 miles) with no A/C running, and required a special fast charge outlet to be installed if I wanted it to do a full recharge overnight. For doing short trips (say, 25 miles including some steep hills), it was great, and would recharge in about 6 hours from a standard outlet. It would have been a great car for my wife, if she could remember to plug it in when she returned from errands (not likely, alas).
$0.22/kWh is very high. I pay like $0.09/kWh. On top of that in my LEAF I average ~4 miles per kWH, which gets me to a cost of $0.0225 per mile. Considerably cheaper than gas, even at $2.20/gallon. The last year or so has had abnormally low gas prices in the US, I don't expect them to stay that low.

I don't know why your dad has such incredibly high energy costs, but there may be ways he can cut that significantly such as having the car charge over night.

For 99.9% of people in the US and Europe, an EV is a lot cheaper than driving any gas burning car.
If Google is really aiming as high as it says it is, you would expect the rate of successes to be fairly low. A true "moonshot" success - one that creates a whole new industry - every decade would still be a phenomenal success. Maybe we just need patience?
Funny you should bring that up, considering the circumstances in which he did so.

I recommend everyone do some research on his suicide, it's very interesting. Start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_S._Thompson#Death
Yep the biggest issue we have with software is every developer knows Single Responsibility Principle, and no developers know why. Everyone knows decouple and increase cohesion, but few any know what cohesion is.
I wouldn't call a 10-15% increase in the price of gas "little effect."
She obviously had a contract seeing as how she had to get it revised multiple times before she signed. If you did research and couldn't find enough about the CEO, you would see the CTO, the other founder, was legitimate with press releases by companies that were eventually acquired by big names like IBM.

Saying this would never happen to you is pretentious and ignorant.
Witch-hunting. Our legal standard is "innocent until proven guilty", and the author already filed a legal complaint, so the best thing for her to do is tell her story in general terms and let the legal system sort it out. Vigilante justice of any kind (including an internet lynch mob) doesn't help.
Off the top of my head: monitoring weather, providing communications, and allowing devices to precisely locate themselves.
Artoo.js – The client-side scraping companion
In the sense that the author and the subjects claim it are non-fiction - yes, quite enough.

For people to approach it non-skeptically, no - not at all.

It's like that rubbish about the child that had visions of heaven or whatever while in hospital, they even made a "based on the true story" movie of it, and it was listed as non-fiction.

Non-fiction doesn't actually mean "factual", technically...
Sorry, my sarcasm did not come off properly :)
The poor may commit 4x the /reported/ domestic violence. Wealthier people have more to lose. I don't doubt that there is somewhat more domestic violence among the poor but I'd be willing to bet that if you take a wealthy couples and put them under extreme financial stress that the numbers would quickly even out. And vice versa.

Assuming people are largely rational is wishful thinking?

I am not against something like the CCC but forcing people to work or starve starts to look like slavery. Since it leads, as you say, to very cheap labor it incentivizes keeping the poor right in the situation they are in. The poor are not the only ones that can exploit a broken incentive structure.
Training machine learning models with Airflow and BigQuery
The big problem I've had with Python and bit shifting has just been dealing with negative numbers. Python doesn't have a concept of unsigned ints, or even just 32bit numbers so I end up having to mask everything by 0xFFFFFFFF. Not really a big deal but maybe that's the issue you were running into?
This is Charlie. I met the CEO (not sharing his name, though it is in this thread) through his brother in law, Jay. Jay worked with me at a prior company. He was a data scientist and factual. He mentioned his brother in law came to Silicon Valley to do a startup having made some money as an investment banker.

As we talked, the CEO stated he is putting in $2M to fund the startup in November. In December, with $400k or so in the company with the rest coming, we started to build. We grew steadily till about April with a prototype. At which point, the CEO kept mentioning money was coming and with a few different reasons on why it did not arrive.

I bridged May and June. As the stories piled up, I started to ask more pointed questions. I met Bernie, the lawyer who was real. Bernie has an office with Montgomery McCracken in NYC. I insisted the CEO to fly twice to NYC to meet with Bernie and resolve the funding issue. On the last trip, he claimed he got a $500k loan from his lawyer, Bernie, and his cousin, Tommy. The last payroll with ADP was made.

I did not find out till the beginning of August that the money for the last payroll came from one of the employees. I thought there was $500k available starting July. It became apparent it was not available shortly thereafter.

In July, Penny joined. We went through more stress at the company with the CEO stating every other week money was coming from a variety of sources – a line of credit from Mackie Research due to his personal connections, his money making it over, and different investors. None of it came to pass.

In August, I thought it better to let some of developers go as there was no funds to pay them and ask the other ones not to come to work until money is in the bank. An investor did come in that allowed us to make July’s payroll a month late.

I did not see any of the wire transfer confirmations till later as I was showed by a couple of the employees. I did not get a confirmation personally. The team was paid for that wire transfer (July).

In August, I tried to validate his story with his brother in law with no success. I was not able to corroborate any of his story after contacting his educational institution and prior institutional employer. This lack of trust came to a head a week ago and we parted ways.

The current story from the CEO right now is that the team will get paid for August on Monday to Wednesday this week. I have no idea if it is true.

To this day, I don’t understand the game plan from the CEO. Why accelerate into a brick wall? None of it makes sense.

I am currently out the bridge, expenses, August office rent and back pay.

It never occurred to me, till too late, that somebody would misrepresent so much of his story. For being naïve and believing in the dream, I am truly sorry.
In a capitalist society they are.
I've found a recent government report (June, 2016) very useful in thinking about the economics of taxes and UBI. See The Distribution of Household Income and Federal Taxes, 2013 [1].

[1] https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/114th-congress-2015-...
It seems obvious that it would be a struggle for them to ship products - they are "moonshots" after all.

Reading this article makes me wonder if it was a good idea to put all of them into one division though. Even when you go in knowing a project is a long-shot it can be demoralizing when it fails. I can't imagine how hard it would be to work in a whole division of mostly failed projects.
Not to mention -- college grads are ALSO finding employment rough, unemployment for college grads is > 7% -- surely if the economy looks bleak for people with a college degree, maybe its' a bit more bleaker for those without?

http://www.epi.org/publication/the-class-of-2015/
Everyone knows we need a direct carbon tax, it's just too convenient politically to be anti-tax. As a result, I think this is mostly a marketing problem.

From the article, it looks like the current bill is "Climate Protection and Justice Act of 2015". I propose instead the "Save our Children Act". Hard to be against that.
If your marketing material has typos (yes, even including your company twitter account), you don't deserve a second glance from me, and I think many people would feel similarly. On the other hand, this was an off-the-cuff blog post. They're different.
You're confusing Criminal Charges which is what a DA would handle vs. Civil (suing for back pay) which some attorneys will take on a contingency (30% of payout) but not pro-bono.

Pro-Bono is usually for criminal defense for folks who can't afford a lawyer and when public defenders aren't available.
Since it isn't illegally acquired and distributed software, no.
The Zinc API and pivoting before demo day
Apologies for the late response here. This makes sense, I was not thinking we were talking lower grade levels. So, 12+ is what I had in mind.
Oil and gas prices are low now, but are not guaranteed to be over the next decade. You might want to use a cost number that has been averaged over a number of years.

Also the 90D is not exactly a car to be looking at if you are concerned about costs. I don't know if it allows you to choose a more efficient model.
Given enough data, while you can't predict exact actions, you can predict general trends with good accuracy. For example, given your complete post history and metadata about those posts and your views of HN, someone could fairly easily predict what subjects you will upvote, what subjects you'll comment on (and a good idea of the tone of your comment), and so forth.

We're creatures of habit, and once you have enough information to identify those habits, you can do a pretty good job at predicting what we will do. Heck, with the little data I have access to, I can be pretty sure which articles I will see comments from big posters like jacquesm and tptacek, and what their comments will contain. I can't predict every story they will comment upon, nor the exact details of the comments, but at a higher level it is definitely predictable.
That is one strong assumption to be tested. Sadly we lack the technology and are in general loathe to run experiments on humans.

Except raising kids, that is.
You forgot to put "company" in quotes =D
Or they are customers of CDNs.
Going down three orders of difficulty would put us back to dropping colored stones into a jar.

Can you at least identify the bottleneck that makes this system infeasible, in your opinion?
That's not how "knowledge" and "information" works.
it's written just micropython without the dash and is actually quite close to having all python3 syntax implemented

https://github.com/micropython/micropython/
This should not be targeted just to github issues users but to any bug reporting audience. (On a sidenote; I like gitlab issues so much more than github's now, they have emulated trello to add dnd kanbas style to them)
The title feels like an oxymoron. I would assume the reason for spinning out a "moonshot" division is that if some projects fail, at least they are not part of the main division. Perhaps some of these projects are not the type that can ship an MVP?
...Well, I'm an idiot. Good point, Steve.
The concept of "private prosecution" exists, but my understanding is that it's not usually practiced (anymore). Some states prohibit it completely, and of those that do allow it some judicial authority is still usually required to sign off on it before it can proceed.
> A Basic Job Guarantee (if you need a job real bad, the government gives you a real bad job) does not create incentives for fraud.

No one needs a job. People need good and services, which (in a system that is basically market structured) income is a means to provide. A job isn't a need, its multiple steps removed from needs.

A "Basic Job" labor army programming is a reasonable means of providing stability in income, currency in marketable skills, and providing for infrastructure and other public needs during a short-term disruption in the private economy negatively effecting employment that does not involve a long-term transformation in the nature of the economy and the kinds of work likely to be in demand.

Its a very bad way of dealing with long-term structural unemployment, providing a social safety net during a period of substantial transformation of the jobs in demand which either makes people permanently unemployable or requires substantial time devoted to retraining to regain employability for displaced workers, etc. Its a good component of a set of policies to address the Great Depression, but not for an economic revolution driven by automation and other developments.

> EITC also has minimal incentives for fraud.

Sure, because EITC has a fairly gradual falloff of benefits with increasing income at the top end (and because, though risk of getting caught may be fairly low, sanctions for tax fraud are very steep), it creates only a fairly mild incentive to fraud through concealed outside income. Certainly, rolling all primarily means-tested (but not mainly conditioned on other needs) social benefit programs into EITC, both raising the cap and broadening the range appropriately, and keeping the fairly mild fall-off at the top would substantially reduce overall complexity, and reduce incentives for fraud, at the cost of directing less funds to the neediest at the bottom (due to the phase-in part at the bottom end of the scale with EITC.)

Of course, the only differences between an EITC and a UBI funded (insofar as funds are needed beyond those from replaced means-tested programs) increased high-end taxes in a progressive income tax system is:

(1) EITC doesn't reach the bottom end of the distribution as effectively, due to the phase-in,

(2) EITC is effectively (other than as mentioned in #1) equivalent to a UBI funded by an increased tax on a narrow range of income toward the low (but not absolute bottom) end of the scale (the range at which the UBI phases out.) rather than one funded by an increased tax at the top end of the scale, as in most UBI proposals.

UBI is basically EITC with those two problems fixed.
Ever wonder if you can make a square wooden beer keg?
Further aside, I'm also amused and unsurprised that engineering has been going into React Native for Web [1] so that with React Native you might not even target base DOM React again.

[1] https://github.com/necolas/react-native-web
After sleeping on the street for one night, the brother might also choose to spend his money on rent rather than weed the next time around.
[Infographic] How to come up with a name for a make money on the Internet site
Yes - this is the VC model. Hitting 100-1000x results every once in a while, as opposed to lots of 3-10x results.
>the poor will spend all their money on drugs,

If and when attempting to formulate coherent arguments, avoid using such absolute statements.
Isn't a venture capital firm (even a good one) a business investing in mostly failed projects?
Yeah, for a company so big it really bothers me that there are flaws like this still around. Fixing this would be a win for everybody.
I want it learn and grow. Most developers won't be too interested in maintaining a wiki.
Many people (myself included) would compare X in intent and setup to PARC from the 1970s. The latter managed the extraordinary feat of pushing out a major innovation on average about once every 2.5 years from 1970 to 2000. That's things like laser printing, OOP, Ethernet, etc. that went on to build industries or take existing ones in new directions.

X, on the other hand, has been around for over 6 years now and as far as I know, its only marginal success to date has been Glass. I don't think it's unreasonable to say that X's success rate so far has been lower than many people expected.
>The "easiest" solution would simply be to wait a few billion years

Actually that is incorrect as there is no guarantee that every prisoner has been in the room at least once over any amount of time. Of course the probability will get higher and higher that everyone was in the room once if it was completely random but that probability will never be 100%.

I know of two legitimate answers to this problem, it took me awhile when I first heard it.
"...used in anger" means used for the purpose it was intended for, not just in testing or rehearsal.

The analogy is to a spear or a gun; when used in anger, it is used to hurt somebody.
There is only one business plan for the 'air industry', "transportation", which was totally unforeseen in 1905, yet it seems to be quite large.
Why should it be low money? Because private contractors (with far, far less resources in terms of capital investment in equipment and bulk materials) are just better?

Sounds good. My little town has a giant hulking diesel powered snow muncher, hundreds of times the size of a consumer snowblower, which munches huge impacted Vermont snowdrifts and TAKES THEM AWAY, paid for by my tax dollars.

Hell, yes, fix the infrastructure, across the board. Pay good money to work on that. Hell, I'd sign up, I like supporting my community. The heavy machinery does most of the hard labor anyway.

Unless you're literally suggesting introducing meaningless and inefficient physical labor for poor money just to punish poor people for being poor? I think maybe you are.

Civilized societies have giant diesel power snow munchers. Just saying. We have big machines and robots and stuff, now.
That is mathematical, but the marginal benefit can't exclusively be considered in terms of the financial health of the program. The imposition of fraud prevention creates a lot of negative externalities (in relation to the finances of the program) on people who are recipients or potential recipients. False positive detections of fraud, or heavy burdens of evidence will cause a feedback effect by causing people who we would want to qualify as recipients to commit fraud in order to elude oversight, thereby (if focused on the solvency of the program) justifying even further oversight, and higher overheads.

Also, since the purpose of the program is to reduce poverty, not to detect fraud, another effect is that the additional oversight will keep people away from the program, either by (as above) their inability to navigate the efforts to protect the program from fraud, but also by the effect of intrusive (and possibly personal and demeaning) questions and inspections has on people's self-image who choose to accept the aid (as per TFA), causing them to avoid taking it to avoid social stigma.

I know these are the types of points that laissez-faire libertarians laugh at i.e. "imagine someone who is taking my money refuse any indignity; they can always choose to starve," but those sorts of libertarians don't think that poverty is a concern anyway. When those types get to design programs like this, they end up largely populated by people who are willing to navigate them as a job, hence largely fraudulent, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The vast bulk of overhead is ultimately fraud control in some form, and as that expands, so the program expands, while the number of people being helped stays steady or even shrinks. This massive administration is farmed out to contractors to reduce ballooning costs (cronies, friends of friends and/or benefactors - an externality that affects us all as a rise in corruption) who are rewarded for finding more fraud with a higher proportion of the budget of the program. Their primary motivation then becomes to find excuses to exclude people from the program.

This is depressing to even type. The reason one would have basic income is to eliminate this. I believe that every millionaire should receive a check. Means-testing is a scam.
5 Biggest DDoS Attacks of the Past Decade
OTOH, most carbon capture schemes need a carbon price about triple of that to break even (IIRC).
His collections of letters and journalistic work is way better than his books. He always hated writing books and was much better in short brilliant bursts. He wrote extensively to his friends (some very famous friends like Tom Wolfe and other great writers).

Both the letters and articles were released in 3 book series each. These are my favourite books from each series:

(letters) The Proud Highway: Saga of a Desperate Southern Gentleman, 1955-1967 (The Fear and Loathing Letters, Vol. 1

https://www.amazon.com/Proud-Highway-Desperate-Gentleman-195...

(articles) The Great Shark Hunt: Strange Tales from a Strange Time

https://www.amazon.com/Great-Shark-Hunt-Strange-Tales/dp/074...
Also maintenance costs are lower for electric cars.
Probably because tcp or http or both are throttled somewhere. Bit torrent uses any port and lots of connections so throttling is much less effective.
NeuralStyler AI source code
11 Ways Startups Outrun Established Corporations: Jeremiah Owyang
I haven't found a Tesla to have bad handling. I'm not a handling expert, but during a test drive, it met my needs for handling. I'd buy a Tesla for the zero emissions and driver assistance features. The handling as-is is sufficient for me. (I don't recall any of the major automotive publications mentioning bad handling in their reviews. Do you have links to the C&D, R&T or Motor Trend reviews that mention this issue?)
The original statement was "plenty", which is the opposite of "shortage". Also, while you can certainly have a lot of something in the absolute sense while still having a shortage relative to your needs, "shortage" applies that the additional things are not available. Having those things available but not having the resources to make use of them is not a shortage or that thing, it is a shortage of whatever resource is required to use that thing.
Thanks for the link, this is an excellent resource.

I really appreciate this view for the rails commits:
https://rubybench.org/rails/rails/commits/overview
Well over 40% of US electricity comes from things that don't create carbon dioxide. Exact numbers are hard to come by because a lot of solar power for example never ends up on the electric grid.
That's exactly what I meant by that statement, corporations are tools for our collaboration. They are a dominant form of our economic collaboration. Nearly all of us invest in them in our retirement savings. Many of us work for them. Everyone uses their services. So they have a big role in our society, and they are a tool that can be used in good and bad ways.

So in summary, I'm not sure what your problem was with that statement, other than perhaps my statement was too ambiguous :)
I agree. I dismissed Scratch as a toy, and then saw my kid doing logic, loops, variables, procedures... It was more advanced that anything I learned up until AP Computer Science. (And now he wants to learn Python)
That doesn't necessarily give you resiliency or fail proof. It's recommended that way because there is no other way with ECS. The reason is that unlike K8S, ECS does not inherently have a service discovery. K8S solved it well with a notion of services and has a built-in load balancer. The design is very solid and doesn't require you to pay for a set of ELB instances every time you want to do that. That is why I asked if ECS has added this. It sounds like it has not.