skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is demonstrably false, and actually the opposite of most countries that have successfully developed. I was searching for "South Korea protectionism history" to find articles for a great example (as SK practiced heavily protectionist policies in the immediate post-war decades), and this came up: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/sep/09/eu.glo...

Protectionism can be very successful for countries with underdeveloped economies.
The USA does not ban secure software completely. At the moment there is a chance that a US or UK company's software is government compromised. If this bill becomes law in the UK then all UK software must legally be government compromised.
> because a lot of them are running ancient operating systems that are the only ones that can interoperate with legacy hardware

FTFY
South Texas Tiny Homes
In the menu (three line icon in the upper left) under settings you can zoom in (worked for me on Firefox for Android, anyway).
Very few economists I know of disagree with Piketty's conclusions. Everyone knows he's right. But it is a very inconvenient problem, and most economists and leaders have a vested interest in not solving it.
The thing that strikes me is that she used American date notation on the "coded" note -- AFAIK no Europeans put the month first. Probably a red herring though ;)
I get that people like Leipzig but getting there is bad for almost anyone who is not from Germany.
I love the concept of a decentralized currency. Blockchains, not so much. They are inefficient, unscalable and resource-hungry. But they're the best we've got to get there now.

Looking forward to Mimblewimble.
> What's so hard about shifting the burden of tax from income to wealth?

Well, there are a bunch of practical difficulties, beyond just political will.

First, "wealth" is much harder to cheaply and objectively quantify than cash income. The value is often very subjective, and changes over time and circumstance.

Even a lot of "what's it worth right now" statements are flimsy: A guy might have X stock in a company worth $Y, but it's only a "if things go right" $Y because if you try to sell it all at once you'll cause a panic among investors and get fairly little for it.

Lastly, it's much easier for people to hide their current wealth, when they have an incentive to lie about it and have years to do it in. You'd need a financial panopticon to make sure nobody's burying gold in their garden while telling the tax man they spent it all on expensive food.
> The fancy waiter will recommend whatever the owner of the restaurant wants him to recommend, because that is his actual job. He is employed to maximize the dollar value of food and liquor sold.

This is a limited way of looking at the value of a waiter — I think this is a common misconception. A good waiter knows to listen to what you want and make recommendations based on that. Anytime a waiter recommends mostly or only the most expensive things, I trust them less and they lose the potential to be a great waiter even if the service is otherwise good.

The waiter is not really working for the restaurant because the amount of their pay that comes from the restaurant directly is very low. In a restaurant with tips that comprises most of the waiter's income, and since the amount you tip is voluntary, really the server is working for the customer to earn a good tip.
Corbyn is many things but he is definitely not a Blarite! The Labour party could not be making a cleaner break with the Blair era than that they have made by twice electing Corbyn as leader.
There was no patch for XP until today, so how could they?
> But how exactly is the state preventing two people voluntarily entering into a contract a good thing?

Because those voluntary contracts affect the economy as a whole. By preventing the worker from making use of even their non-proprietary general knowledge, they make the economy less efficient -- especially so when it comes to the formation of new ventures.

And empirically, prohibiting noncompetes works. I understand that California, if we were a separate country, would have the world's seventh (or sixth?) largest economy. I certainly would be very hesitant to accept a job offer in any other state. (Well, someone posted upthread that North Dakota and Oklahoma also prohibit noncompetes, but I don't think I want to live in either of those places, for other reasons.)
I fail to understand how online dating or social events might be wrong places where to find a person you love.

The "trick" is to use a bruteforce attack method: try meeting as many potential candidates as possible, wnile reducing your resources shortcomings (work out, learn skills, read books and watch movies, travel).

Learn to chit chat and be sociable, helps with engagement and retention of potential candidates
it isn't at all clear what your point is.
We had a plan to send copies of our mail encrypted in an enigma cipher to a Mr. Liam Pukcab figuring that with the encryption and a foreign sounding recipient it would always be stored on a server somewhere.
The assumption by us is that you would be recompiling from at least the LLVM IR level for each different version of the chip. This isn't a real problem for the markets we care about, as they have the source code for all of their applications. In the case of not wanting to distribute your source code, I am interested in being able to distribute emcrypted LLVM IR as a pseudo-binary, similar to how silicon IP companies deliver encrypted verilog and vhdl for integration into other chips.
Piketty likely will get a Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences awarded one day, but he doesn't have one at the moment
Sadly I can only recommend against that. Because you can't book them together you need to plan in a lengthy stop in case of delays. I made that mistake twice and both times I was badly burned.
From my understanding (and Wikipedia agrees with me[1]), "outsourcing" simply means paying someone to perform work outside your company that the company would otherwise perform. For example, my employer outsources payroll to ADP, and outsources office cleaning to a service company rather than hiring its own cleaning staff.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outsourcing - "In business, outsourcing involves the contracting out of a business process (e.g. payroll processing, claims processing) and operational, and/or non-core functions (e.g. manufacturing, facility management, call center support) to another party."
This prompted me to look at my employee agreement. Sure enough, there it is. I signed it because I needed the job and wasn't asking too many questions.

But this is interesting, I work in an area of the company that isn't really part of their core competency. Meaning that the kinds of firms that would hire me are literally in another sector and wouldn't be considered competitors.

So this fact, that normally manifests as complaints that "management has no idea what we do here" and/or that they "have no business claiming they're in this business," ends up helping me out.
Three Ways to Find the WannaCry Kill Switch
Laughable unenforceable in CA. Basically equivalent to toilet paper for the employer in CA.
Dangerous and wrong advice. I already knew what the other posters replied with. I was looking for more specific opinions about whether it would be safe to post this link on a Facebook type platform
This article is just a spin of "I don't see how music on the computer is easier than in the radio" or "buying a newspaper will always be easier than reading your news on some weird website".

Bitcoin and cryptotech are loaded with geeks, just not the same ones as the author associate with. And cryptotech do a lot of stuff way better than existing tech. You have to be totally blind not to see it, IMO. :D

It was the same with "noone will need a personal computer" laughed by older-school engineers, or "The Internet is a funny toy with its funny packet switching, but real business-critical communication needs a reliable networking like a connection-based phone system".

Cryptotech (not only blockchain-based) is disruptive, groundbreaking and as transformative as personal computers were. But it took like 30 years to get personal computing to the point where it was obvious. And it won't be much faster this time. There will be blockchains, technologies, standards, businesses going up and down, people getting rich and/or broke, with winners shaping a new world.
To be honest the banks do not know what to do with blockchains.

Their best properties and the banks' needs are not aligned. When you add in stuff the banks need like forcible retraction of transactions, and transaction fees, you have essentially destroyed blockchains. The moment a major bank releases production ready blockchain of their own it will be such that most will not get any real value out of it.

What they are doing (not what they are saying) is that they are trying to figure out how to hug the blockchain technology to death.
Billions of dollars are moved around in cryptocurrency every day, this article just misses all that apparently. It's not a good article, don't recommend for any smart people it's a waste of time.
We prefer to use the term, seeking inspiration as opposed to copying, over here =P
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1wqj8z/will_someon...
Isn't this just a UniquePtr? Ie it allows moves, but references to it are not guaranteed to be valid. The latter is the borrow checker.
This proposal elaborates on the idea of finer pricing to reduce profits in HFT: https://www.chrisstucchio.com/blog/2012/hft_whats_broken.htm...
Are you trying to present blockchain as a technical solution to a legacy software issue? Clearly, there are other, far simpler solutions, and clearly this is not the real motivation behind blockchain. I think Bray's main argument is that the motivation behind blockchain -- decentralized trust -- is something we don't really need. Rather than just state this as an opinion, he points out that even blockchain's supporters haven't been able to demonstrate a need.
What news reports said anything about legacy hardware? The BBC and Reuters articles claimed the NHS suffered infection of their patient records servers and their reception computers.
[I've removed this comment.]
Many of us have already left :)
How many ISPs spoof failed DNS queries so they can feed you ads? That alone would make this useless as an evasion technique.
I'm kind of confused as to what the role of agencies like NSA, GHCQ, etc are in situations like this. Are they supposed to put an end to the attack? If so, how is it that a single researcher beat them to it (presumably with a budget many orders of magnitude less)?

Or maybe this story isn't really accurate and there was no accident...

EDIT:

And if it isn't the role of those agencies to defend the public health IT infrastructure, which agencies are responsible, if any?
10 tries at an answer, and you got closest to reality:

Employment creates a 'risk pool', specifically one that people are unlikely to join just to get insurance. It is one of very few ways to mitigate the "adverse selection" problem, i. e. only old and/or sick people getting insurance, thereby raising prices, and repeat. The other way is an insurance mandate, or, if you want to cut the chase, single-payer tax-funded healthcare for all.
Why exactly was my reply downvote-worthy guys?

Yes I know asking for an explanation causes a lot more nasty voting. This is ridiculous, the site is getting more and more like reddit, and I blame the site's maintainers: There are soooo many things that could be done for a more civilized discussion culture. Like making votes public, meta-voting, requiring explanations for downvotes, a very small downvote pool (e.g. no more than three downvotes per day), etc.

How about somebody would tell me what exactly is missing from those tools I linked to, or what is supposed to be wrong that I wrote? It's not like I insulted anyone. The guy I responded to had a lot less substance in his (short) comments. "It's very superficial" - what is superficial? What is missing? Also, "all I want are two numbers at the end of the process. How long did this take and how much memory did this take." -- well, he gets those number with the DevTools! So what exactly is the complaint? For someone with a question he doesn't seem to try very hard to get an answer. Then someone downvotes posts that try to get more out of him.
Are the IV drip machines running Windows CE or XP embedded? Was there a news report that claimed that IV drip machines were affected by malware?
I haven't spent much time in NYC but I had never seen people go through the doors as passengers until then. It seemed to be frequent/common too. I've since seen this once in another city and it was pretty clear that it was out-of-the-ordinary when it happened.
I get that people don't love work in America in the way you're saying. I think the idea is that in America you're less likely to get a positive reaction to things such as
you're the man and the primary breadwinner:

- You opt to cut your hours from 45-30 and live on less
- You take a few months vacation
- You take a year paternity leave

I know from experience that those can seem irresponsible to
many.
Setting Up a Test Server for Laravel
But VeriSign is not an ISP -- they were the ones running the authoritative root name servers and doing this to literally everyone.
Besides, the right people already have the art market for this role.
If you're going to violate a noncompete, don't tell anyone you're going to work for a competitor. Keep yourself as small of a target as possible for your former competitor's legal team.

- When you quit, tell your now former employer that you're quitting to pursue something other than what was your established industry. Your (made up) lifelong dream of starting your own microbrew brand, Macrome supply business, winery, whatever. Or looking after a sick relative, or going back to school full time, etc.

- Cut off ties with all your former coworkers, at least for the noncompete duration. If you bump into them at the grocery store and you can't get away from them, tell them about how wonderful the beer business is or how your relative is doing.

- Don't put on Facebook or Linkedin that you work for the new employer.

- For the duration of the non-compete, only those closest to you who critically need to know about your new employer, spouse, etc will know.

- Avoid publicly-facing industry related activities that tie you to your new employer for the duration of the noncompete. Giving speeches, presentations, writing article, etc.

None of these are foolproof but they are all common sense. Remember the Monty Python sketch about How To Not Be Seen.
> But it took like 30 years to get personal computing to the point where it was obvious

Gotta quibble with this one. 30 years after the PET shipped we were solidly in the middle of the Web 2.0 revolution.

Yes, ideas take time to mature. No, the PC in't a good reference. By 1981 it was clear where we were going.
> I'd say that bitcoin has already succeeded, just not for the use cases that the author cares about.

It's not a matter of caring. He points out that whatever uses blockchain has (or hasn't) proven successful for, don't amount to a significant economic (or social) contribution. He's talking about objective quantity, not subjective quality.
JavaScript Art is in the URL
Translation: "My feelings make me feel that the statement isn't right. Instead of finding out, I'm just going to say that I wish someone would tell this commenter they're wrong."
There is no such system as "capitalism".

I have not seen a definition of capitalism which was not either contradictory, or which relied on sufficiently general abstractions (utility instead of profit, social contracts and monopolies on force instead of states).

The level of authoritarian control you would have to have over a society in order to prevent a system of government from forming would certainly itself qualify as a system of government. So free enterprise always generates some sort of governing actor, and any mandate that results is, by the transitive property, the result of free enterprise. Since all systems are ultimately the result of free enterprise and "rational" motives, it's hard to argue that "Capitalism" is anything but the trivial classifier, if it is well defined.

I'd argue that the successful policies that Americans incorrectly attributed to the "capitalism" were actually attributable to the sort of meta-philosophy of pragmatism. Which is the philosophy of not really having a philosophy, and never letting any belief become sacred (A philosophy which we certainly do not adhere to now).
You still don't want to deal with even a nonsensical court date if you can avoid it with 5 minutes of redlining.
Sure. But I want to correct you on one thing: the US median income is $52,000. While the marginal tax rate for that amount, when filing as a single, is 25%, the effective tax rate is only 19%. When filing jointly, it is 16%.

You don't reach 30% effective rate (single) until you make $500,000, at which point you're pretty well off. :)
Sadly this article seems to be locked behind a paywall.
They're enforceable in MA.

http://www.shpclaw.com/Schwartz-Resources/massachusetts-cour...
Starting a business that has a profitable business model is easy. Just go to investors with a reasonable business plan, and you can get funded. There are angel investors in every town, everyone has relatives, etc.
Some thoughts: While working in finance I was able to talk to many people who's work was related to economics. Employees at banks and brokerages, governments and regulator bodies. Most had heard of Piketty, and many agreed with his basic premises (r>g, and all it entails). His reach actually surprised me.

But I also had contact with academics, and like the article said, it's not so much that academics are refuting Piketty, but that they simply aren't studying the same problems that he is talking about. From what I've been told, a lot of academic work in economics is focused on incredibly unique and specific problems. It isn't "fashionable" to be studying something so broad and perhaps abstract as inequality.
I didn't downvote you, because I appreciate the effort you put in to your post. However, I think I have some insight into why your post has received some downvotes.

First, you're using some poorly defined terminology that seems to cater to your implicit biases. What, exactly, do you mean by "smart people" and "dumb people"?

Second, you have some arguments here that seem like non-sequiturs. What does it matter that Elon Musk slept at his office? Does a janitor get bonus points for sleeping in the broom closet instead of at his apartment?

Third, the doubt you're raising about self-made billionaires is off topic. That is an interesting phenomenon in it's own right but isn't something Piketty wrote about because it wasn't the topic of his research.

Fourth, your own personal correspondence with Piketty is irrelevant and a distraction. It signals (to us, I suppose) that you care a lot about this topic. The fact that you care a lot doesn't help make your arguments more persuasive.

Finally, the tone of your post here is filled with appeals to emotion, exasperation, and frustration. You're having trouble making cogent arguments because you seem to be heavily invested in your own feelings about this subject. Those feelings are fine, and natural, but they do not make for a cogent argument. There is no point in attempting to persuade others that you are correct by mentioning that you really care a lot and have a lot of emotional investment in the subject.
Last time I was given one of these to sign, it was in a group setting. So, I just didn't turn it in. They never did make a stink about it.

Just because someone gives you a piece of paper to sign, doesn't mean you have to. Wait until it's unavoidable.
Yes, but what impact has blockchain had on the world outside of blockchain?
Redlining the non-compete section is not a minor modification. Some companies are very serious about their non-competes. They will pay you millions of dollars to respect them (and sue you for millions of dollars if you don't). If you try and cross out your non compete agreement they will just withdraw your job offer.

Non competes aren't intrinsically shady or evil. Some companies have business models that depend very heavily on secret IP. It's just another adverse factor you have to add into the mix when evaluating a job, along with compensation, work-life balance, advancement opportunities, etc. Many non-competes are very well compensated, and limited in scope to a particular niche industry, so you could still go off and work anywhere else in tech industry where your IP cannot be used against your old employer. Signing one isn't the worst thing in the world.
Just wait like 3-6 months and they will release this feature
What you're witnessing is manufactured consent[1]. There is no need for the crude methods of propaganda here because it's not even necessary. Compare that with China; people there are fully conscious of government propaganda. From the SMH article, they expected the west to be a land of freedom and democratization of ideas, but what they end up finding is that it more or less is the same thing.

> [2] "A lot of them are PRC students who migrated to Australia or come here to study. I think they are quite ambivalent about Australia, and China. Culturally and emotionally they still identify with China, but they don't like the corruption, pollution, propaganda or the regime. So they migrate here and they have some perception about this country, that it's beautiful, clean, prosperous, there is press freedom and the media is objective, not like the propaganda in China. "Here they expect the media to do a lot better than the media they're used to back there. When they realise that the media here is just as one-track mind about these things as the Chinese side but exactly the opposite, they find it really hard to reconcile with what they're experiencing."

Personally, I find that even more worrying. People here seem to think they are free-thinkers not subject to propaganda when really, the more "oppressed" people have way more understanding of what's going on in the world.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent

[2] http://www.smh.com.au/national/chinese-media-a-threat-to-soc...
"no blockchain of any sort has been scaled to any mainstream consumer financial task."

Maybe the OP could have written a post in 1990, 17 years after the first handheld mobile phone prototype, about the tech "still having not reached mainstream consumers, therefore being a failure."

The OP seems unaware how fast Bitcoin is growing. Not mainstream yet, but it's growing. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_bitcoin#Growth
I also want to know the answer to this.

Should we expect weather forecasters to ditch all their existing infrastructure and move to improbable?

Something doesn't add up; simulations are not MMOs.
Maybe I'm old but I'd love to get a call or a message from out of the blue. It's been a couple years since it happened and I miss random interaction.

I met one of my dearest longtime friends years ago in the late 90 while messaging people on AOL at random in their directory.

That sort of meeting people is dead.
This advice is not meant for people who are being paid millions of dollars to respect a non-compete they fully understand and consent to.
Firebase Hosting – Static Hosting for Web Apps