skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
So let's accept as a hypothetical we do cap wealth. We all get to vote how much people are allowed to have. Yay. The people who have more have to do what exactly?

They have to leave the country with the fear of extradition at some point?
They have to give away their excess, but who gets/takes the money?
They go to jail?
Who enforces/regulates that people are only earning/saving what they are allowed?

It's sounds virtuous to say "Things would be better with less wealth inequality" and I agree that it would be a better situation, but any means to actually move towards that situation gets ugly fast.
Crime of consumption or mere possession, I fully agree. Even distribution of something like pot, sure. But at the same time, I'm not sure that a rational individual has to agree with the proposition that somebody who's peddling fentanyl should not be put in jail.

(I don't think, from what I know, that distribution of crack would be in that latter group.)
I didn't intend to bash computational linguistics. Those were some of my favorite course I wouldn't have attended more than I needed if I didn't like the topic and gotten something out of it.

It's surprising how often you can get very far with imperfect solutions. ELIZA is the classic example. A simple program with very little code could convince people that they were talking to another human or at least machine with an understanding of their feelings.

ELIZA was coded completely by humans. Of course, nowadays we have more sophisticated ways of doing that. We can throw a few topic tagged example sentences with connected replies at a computer and it will mostly reply with the right answers to similar sentences. This is only possible because computational linguistics provided the foundation for that.

Still many solution are hacky to this day but that is because computational linguistics is more concerned about interaction with imperfect humans than most of the other disciplines in computer science.
You would spend 10% of your wealth on a painting?
The concept of bail negatively affects the poor. Washington DC has a new system where they got rid of the bail system.

They have 2 options: RoR (release on your own recognizance) and hold until trial.

Although not perfect, this is much better than a bail system.
Because real languages allow creating your own abstractions to fill the gaps, Go doesn't. Witness the total lack of decent error handling and data structures; despite probably thousands of people trying their best from user code. It's the iPhone of programming languages.
EFF Security Education Companion
Show HN: Forsh – A Unix shell embedded in Forth
Every battle they win their battle chest grows. Every battle we win we get more complacent and tired of it all.
At least for her, computer technology didn’t result in structural change in the way people live. They had television, phones, cameras, etc., when she was a teenager. She uses her iPhone and iPad as a television, a telephone, a camera, and a combination of television and telephone (FaceTime). Neat and convenient, but not life changing in the same way as cars, planes, moon colonization, etc. Certainly not “magic.”
I wouldn't say "wasted," even if you are not religious. A lot of European and early American history was somewhat difficult for me to penetrate until, as an adult, I developed an interest in learning about Christianity (its history, doctrines of different denominations, etc.) and suddenly a lot of things made more sense to me. If the "religious studies" courses include other religions, so much the better, as I don't doubt that having more understanding of the world's religions would illuminate world history in a similar way for me.
Most violent criminals would do fine with an apartment, a job, an alarm clock and an location tracker.

Even the most invasive surveillance system is more humane that the US prison system.
2 classics that don't require a whole lot of backgrond are:

- An Axiomatic Basis for Computer Programming by C. A. R. Hoare

- The Next 700 Programming Languages by P. J. Landin

The most recent paper I've read is:

- Storage strategies for collections in dynamically typed languages - Bolz, Diekmann, Tratt

I blog about some papers I've read on my blog [0], and these three papers I've mentioned have their own post, where I summarize key ideas of the papers. Take a look if you're interested.

[0] https://blog.ngzhian.com/
Relative to the kinds of things geeks read, I think the title is valid.
Python 3 still has the GIL
The article doesn't provide a lot of information about why he was charged, just

Smith’s saga behind bars began on Feb. 11, 2010, when State Police and federal drug agents said they discovered baggies of crack cocaine inside a safe in his Carrollton residence.

To me that sounds like he was at the customer end of the distribution, dealing on the street. A potential life sentence for that is bonkers.
Hi, I'm a Redux maintainer. Can you give some more details on the issues you saw? What concerns do you have about using React and Redux?
Non-glib answer: Art tends to hold value very well. For someone in that wealth bracket, this is probably a very reasonable diversification + having a significant amount of sentimental value. (it's Davinci, which even for a pleb like me would be neat to have in your living room)

glib answer: More money than sense.

Edit: I realize you didn't have "why would you" in your question and answered something you didn't ask. Apologies. (I nontheless maintain my statements :) )
There is a middle ground here, folks. Legalize some less-addictive and -harmful drugs like marijuana. Legalize possession of small quantities of others. Get rid of three strikes laws.

It's not easy, but we can work toward a compromise that recognizes both that drug use can cause harm to society, and that it often does not. We can punish people who push opioids, while leaving harmless users alone.
Putting AVs on the road before they’re perfect could save 100,000s of lives
It's not really spending. If you look at the resale values it is investing. High art is more investment than consumption (as they say, the rich get richer...)
Frankly, I still haven't seen a single reason to switch to Python3

This typically means one of two things:

1. You've never really looked at the features added in the Python 3.x release series, or

2. You develop abandonware which plans never to upgrade any part of its platform ever, for any reason, and so no conceivable new feature would be sufficient to convince you to do an upgrade.

At this point (1) is untenable because of how many people have written about the useful things available in 3.x, and (2) is disingenuous (but there are still plenty of people who use "don't see a reason to upgrade" as an excuse for "I always planned to abandon this").

Just in case you're one of the people in (1), here you go:

https://eev.ee/blog/2016/07/31/python-faq-why-should-i-use-p...
Freedom exists because, for a while anyway, freedom was more effective at increasing the wealth and power of nations.

This video has a great outline: http://www.cgpgrey.com/blog/rules-for-rulers
It's not a change in direction. It's a broadening of the path. Apps and extensions are still getting updates, and there is no plan to slow down. 1Password X is for people who can't or won't install the apps (Linux, Chrome OS, corporate restrictions, etc.)
Ah, no.
The moment the company gets money, is when it sells the stock. After that, unless the company sells more stock, or buys and re-sells its stock, it receives zero more capital financing dollars, unless it undertakes other financing activity, such as the sale of bonds.

There is no indirect means to receive money, except for profit, and that it is not related to stock.

Profit is ultimately the primary means for company cash liquidity, held as retained earnings, after the company has survived its initial years of inception and growth.
yeah, I use tmux, ssh for this. dev session in a container incase the person does something stupid. hangouts for voice/video
Download counts -- which usually power "most popular" charts -- are extremely misleading, because usually every run of an automated CI system triggers a download.
> 1) How many of these lazy people are there?
> 2) How much economic output is wasted by employers trying to filter these lazy people out of their workforce.

I am pretty lazy but I'm not lazy all the time. I don't think there exists such a classes of "lazy people" vs "non-lazy people". Laziness is a mood, a state. It can be altered by motivation. Income is one important motivator although arguably not the only one.

My point is, if we have welfare state with UBI, we will form in-groups and out-groups just as you describe. The taxes of all the "non-lazy” group will be unbearable high. You will hear choruses of complaints from them. They will resent those “lazy people”. Let’s add some other component like race, language or country of origin and you have society more divided than before. These are just a few of the unintended consequences I would see.

And 15k is hardly enough to sell this program politically. You can get that now on disability.

> You might quit your full time job, but you would probably find some part-time programming work you enjoyed to allow you to afford good snowboards

I can get by on a used snowboard. I could also steal on from one of those “non-lazy people” :)
> It would be neat if money was spread even more evenly.

Change "neat" to "critical", and I'll agree with you.

My gut feel is that the US is close to another revolution. All those less-educated white males with several automatic rifles each are not going to like it when they find out their beloved Donald (oh look, another billionaire solving hard problems!) makes their lot worse instead of better.
FaceTime is a little magical. How often would she get to see and talk to her grandkids without it?

And would people living on the moon have really changed her life either? Unless she was one of them she'd just end up hearing about it in the news and then going about her day.

TBH if I really had to pick the thing that has most changed her life I'd bet it's the shipping and logistics technology that has dramatically lowered the cost of all the consumer goods she buys.
Concourse-piper
dual keyboards & mouse.
Sorry, it seemed like that was being implied here but I must be mistaken.

Perhaps you were simply referring to the normal complexity one would expect out of a diverse crowd of interests from bodies of government and businesses acting in ways that sometimes overlap when you said:

> "deep collusion between the government and the media with lobbying, regulatory capture, government appointments, politicians on corporate board seats"
The parent comment was implying that Linus SHOULD be a billionaire because he was so successful. I'm saying that measuring success with net worth is not a good metric. How are we defining success? I think it is a pretty personal thing. Success is really a question of "did you meet your goals?" and "how far did you exceed them?" or "how close did you get?" Money can help you meet a lot of goals, but I don't see how it determines success.

We can even refine more. What is success to you? Total wealth? Leaving an impact on the world? Finding yourself? Being happy? Money definitely helps with all of these, but when you have the income we're talking about, how does it help you then? There are diminishing returns. The only version of success it substantially helps you with is if you measure success by wealth. And most people don't actually internalize that definition. So I personally do not feel like you can say Bezos is more successful than Gates. Or that Putin is more successful than either of them. Is Linus less any successful? You can't judge that without knowing what their goals are/were.
I think LinkedIn's mistake was letting the lawyers fight over it. They could have just blocked the bots with a captcha and called it a day.
Why is this a surprise? There's a point at which money no longer makes sense - both to the people without it as well as the people with it.

There are many reasons for spending relatively incomprehensible amounts of money for something. One is to show others that you can; it's a demonstration of just how wealthy you are. Another is to try to make something special of the money that otherwise has reached a level of being useless/pointless.

Think a bit in terms of a normal human lifetime. If you aspire to be rich, what amount of money defines that level? Once you reach a level where you can own and operate more properties, vehicles, and even employees than you can even remember, what does the excess money represent?

Ok, this is an absurd analogy. But as technical people, imagine building a multi-petabyte storage device. Practically no private individual has such a thing. Using your intellect, experience, and perhaps ingenuity you can have such a thing. Then what? You store all the porn you have time to download. You save every movie you ever thought about watching. You take 1000 photos every time you go out. It's thrilling! But how much of it do you ever really go back and enjoy?

Frankly, unless the buyer places it in a public museum, I judge it as a hollow effort to find value in excess (which will last about three months). Humans are great at acclimating to new and better, and soon we need more. What else is there?
No known sense organs to pick another environmental benefit. Classic biology assumes such a means to respond by selecting in this case.
Here’s What Happens When People Let Algorithms Design a Concert Hall
Nothing is changing for you. Apps and extensions are still getting updates, and there is no plan to slow down. 1Password X is only for people who can't or won't install the apps (Linux, Chrome OS, corporate restrictions, etc.).
Marketing wins everywhere. Paintings, IT, open source projects, startups, everything. It seems to be responsible for 90%+ value in worryingly many cases. It may be getting worse.

I think in the next few years we will see rise of companies that help customers make decent choices that are not solely based on advertising. We have many user review based solutions but it just doesn't work with most things (not even touching on fake reviews). Even for things where the whole value of the product is about how user feels about it, most users don't have other products to compare. Plus choice-supportive bias.

For tech stuff there are reviewers out there who test many things and which you can trust. Some take them apart and can reason about used components and so on. Not so easy when you are visiting a grocery store or wondering what's the story of the organic food that you are looking at (or maybe it was just mislabled?). Some educated 3rd party could research that for you.

Again, it's different from what we have today because even though it's tempting, sexy and scalable, it can't be just about letting users send opinions and info. It must be expert web of trust. Those companies may end up with a lot of power. But at least in this case if some of them try to misuse it, somebody can stumble upon it and show that they are not trustworthy.
I'll note that those are soft switches at least as far back as the T510, because installing Windows 10 disabled the microphone mute button.
parent post seems quite vague.

i think he means to use these imprisoned drug users as free labour to make money for the state. i believe some private prisons already do that.
It's been clearly and unequivocally stated that a large breaking transition will not happen again.
Uh huh.

That's all well and good until someone decides to apply that reasoning to something else, like, say....the Internet.

You really think all that wireless spectrum is finding it's best use sharing cat videos? High-bandwidth video emojis?

They aren't making any more RF spectrum either.

One man's "common sense solution" is another man's "free market distortion".

And there is PLENTY of land to go around....so.....bad example. You could give nearly every single person on the planet plenty of room to live in Texas. That's without going vertical into multi-story buildings.

Ultimately the best use of people's labor is whatever they want to do with it. If that's buying houses, great. Beanie babies, faberge eggs, gold ingots, whatever.

Do you really need all that crap you own?
This stuff promises sub millesecond hibernation. Things like hibernating between sentences kind of hibernation. Doing that could conceivably extend the effective 'use' time of a laptop with a 99Wh battery to a week or more between charges.
I have codebases that took me years to write and took a day or two to port.
It's not comparable at all. Leaking stories to media organizations independent of the government, who may or may not report it, and who may or may not report it in the manner that the government wishes, is not the same thing as wholesale propaganda on a massive scale.

As the U.S. president regularly demonstrates in his complaints (and as all his predecessors did, to a lesser degree) the U.S. government has little power over the news media and is very unhappy with what they do.

I do think the government's ability to place favorable stories and narratives in News Corp. publications (Fox, Wall St Journal) might be comparable as a propaganda operation. My sense is that that's their primary purpose. But it's still different; News Corp has the choice of whether to comply.
At the moment, yes, they are at the high end of the market. In three years, you can expect that to be either in the process of moving downmarket. In five, they will be comfortably midmarket and still moving downward. And, the cheaper the device, the more corners cut in production. The more corners cut, the higher the likelihood that at least some of them are in terms of security.
"But since the late seventies, money creation is only possible through the banking system via credit."

? I don't know how the Kroner works, but usually a central bank issues currency into the market in exchange for some kind of asset - this is the primary mechanism for controlling interest rates.

Yes, more credit is created through fractional reserver, but this is taken into account.
> The concept of bail negatively affects the poor.

I thought that was intentional :) afaik bail isn't used much outside the US, Canada and UK.

The US for-profit bail industry is the usual case of Americans taking a bad idea to the extreme in the search of a little profit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7omwQLuGJQ was the marketing campaign
Or just be like the cool kids and skip a version. Python 5, or name it after the year. Python 2020 sounds exciting enough to make everyone want to upgrade.
ElsaGate, enabled by Google and Disney (which owns at least network which owns at least one involved channel) and consisting faked videos for toddlers for strategic destruction and some sort of weird grooming. needles? taping people up? humiliating parents? kids driving cars? adults drugging people and getting them pregnant including minors? eating loads of feces? brand products left, right and center? verified accounts? monetized videos? people begging for removal since last year? but oh yeah look what China is doing.

anyone feel like data crunching? crunch this.

https://gitlab.com/elsagate/blacklist/raw/master/blacklist.t...

and while the data is downloading -- because it's not possible that a community of hackers would look the other way when blatant child abuse (that's defined by what happens to the child, not what the perpetrator gets out of it) is going down directly under their nose or even hands, right? right? it's brain hacking, it's technology, it's mystery, it's capitalism, it's SV, what more do you want? nevermind the material responsibility, the real harm done to, the needless additional pain in the lifes of kids who 'just' get left to autoplay on youtube for long enough -- read this maybe:

https://medium.com/@jamesbridle/something-is-wrong-on-the-in...

edit: whoever downvoted this without argument, you'll think back to this and feel bad, if you're lucky and both informed and human enough. no more needs to be said. the info is there, CRUNCH THE DATA.
I find this comment upsetting for a few reasons.

1. It's a blatant example of whataboutism[0], and a discussion of the reprecussions/implications of Chinese social manipulation can be had entirely without bringing America into the picture.

2. Even if we accept that we do the same thing, that in no way justifies it in either place, as you seem to suggest in a comment below

3. If you've read the article you'll see that distracting from the topic is a key tactic the propagandists use to derail discussion. I'm going to be generous and not assume you're in that basket, but can you see why your response might seem tone-deaf in that context?

4. The extent to which China has been experimenting with social manipulation is so beyond the pale of anything that happens in the US. [1][2][3]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System
[2] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/muslims-china-police-state...
[3] https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/07/24/china_installing_mo...
Closest temperate world orbiting quiet star discovered
Everything I need is production worthy. That's obviously an idiosyncratic assessment.
Wouldn't he need someone to pay that same amount or more for the painting to effectively have moved money with this apparatus? And if the next buyer is similarly motivated, isn't the valuation akin to a Ponzi?
That's some of the most short-sighted comment I've read on HN. As somebody else here points out, there are a ton of unhealthy activities (I can think of a thousand) that are not only legal but well advertised. In fact, the current US president owns one of those great places where people can flush their money down the toilet.

You are fundamentally saying all ICOs are a scam, otherwise your comment doesn't make much sense. Because that's false but it's true there are a number of scam ICOs, it's also true we can lower that number. If you read my comment, you probably noticed the part about the need for the ecosystem to mature also.
I think we have to be careful given the article only looks at one side. While in this case it took an absurd turn and is a clear case of "lock this dude behind bars: we don't like him", it is not always that simple.

I would give as an example the patent trolls. They abuse of the court and fill motions after motions (or dismiss early) for the sole purpose of making their case expansive to defend against. A knowledgeable inmate or greedy public defendant could use the same tactics and delay the case only for the deadline to pass. If it can turn a life sentence into a 24 months one, then procrastination and delays are the quickest way out of jail.

That being said, for recurrent inmates, the failure of the system is definitely in the rehab process. In some US states, it seems like the legal system exists only to sustain itself, its elected officials and the industries (lawyers, penitentiary, investigators, forensic) that runs it. This case is apparently a blatant example of bureaucracy indifference. If the fact were shown in their face, they would blame the weather or the defendant own motions to have his rights taken into account. I am not a socialist, far from it. However when it comes to absurdities such as this, it is a clear sign that a proper social net is necessary to avoid a slippery slopes where the incarcerated population will grow and grow and grow. So do the expanses associated with it. Better solve the problem instead of the consequences.