skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You're probably looking at the wrong thing here.

People who enjoy what they're doing typically look past how mightily life, the government, and the suits are screwing them. In my own business, I absolutely hate the admin tasks, but the people and the actual productive work more than make up for it.

Try to find something that you actually enjoy doing. The rest will probably take care of itself.
> This thinking is hurting me though because it makes every job I ever had barely tolerable, slowly creeping towards miserable after enough time.

Profound changes in life are not easy, and feeling miserable is a sign that you probably have to change something.. Personally, I believe that people that are willing to change their lifes when circunstances ask for it are courageous. Most people will keep feeling miserable by inertia and fear of change.

As a little bit of more practical advice, have you considered going freelance or teaching? Something similar to what you're feeling now also happened to me, then I went freelancing and am currently teaching. I'm immenselly happier and get to learn lots of new things so I can be a better teacher..

Wish you good luck!
How do you define a socialist country?
You make yourself unhappy by focusing on what your boss or company owners are doing. Don't think about them, they are external to you. Focus on what you want or like to do.

You can try starting a consultancy business. Start as a freelance and grow that. Anything you do you must work hard and create value for others. If you do this consistently you will eventually move into a position where you are comfortable. The best way is to start by doing what you like and engages you, and at the same time the resulting work creates value for others. This doesn't have to be a startup with a product, consulting is always easier to start.
This leaves you with a few options that haven't been brought up.

Have you considered working for a nonprofit or a governmental agency? The pay probably isn't there, but some people wouldn't want to work anywhere else. It can be tremendously rewarding fighting for your favorite causes rather than your boss' latest second house, as you said.

Not all big company corporate cultures are created equal, either. A lot of people love working for the big 5 and even though you're still making a boss rich (as in, richer than anyone else in the history of time rich), these bosses don't waste their time flaunting their wealth in front of you and demoralizing you. Change the world, do interesting work, and get rich far faster than an average startup.
Yeah I don't know, you'd need a lawyer to weigh in on that. Contract law and all the stuff around mutual agreements and consideration (the monetary kind) is pretty fundamental. You can always walk away and use a different database. If they put a set of x conditions on a doc and you sign it and hand over a huge check I'd guess a condition would have to be actually illegal for a court to invalidate just that part of the agreement.
To elaborate: it's not stolen if you previously signed a contract that the employer can have it.

Otherwise every trade would be theft right?
To be fair almost none of those points, while completely valid, are within the FCC's charter.

The only regulatory mandate the FCC has with regard to internet is to ensure that ISPs offer uniformity of pricing and service as those schemes cross state boundaries (interstate regulation of wires and transmission), which isn't the problem net neutrality aims to solve.
> You can talk about rights and due process all you want, I’m not disagreeing with any of that, that’s great for people who can afford it. I’m talking about the practical outcome of this for average Americans.

Rights and due process apply to everyone, not just people who can afford it or people the police like. Telling someone "don't assert your rights because you're poor" is telling them to self-subjugate; that's awful advice not only because it hurts the person, but also because it actively harms our system of justice.

Again, everyone has the right to an attorney and the government must give you one. It's in the Constitution. A busy, tired public defender who is competent is still better than not having a lawyer. An incompetent attorney is also still better, because "my counsel was incompetent" is a solid way to win an appeal of a conviction if it can be proven.

> The practical outcome is that for every 1 time this advice prevents you from accidentally incriminating yourself, there will be 20 times that it just makes officers dislike you and abuse their authority over you, especially if you’re young and especially if they can tell you’re poor.

Do you have any evidence of this at all? That is, do you have evidence that going along with what an abusive officer tells you to do is going to prevent them from abusing you?

If an officer doesn't like you and is willing to abuse their authority as a result, what are you supposed to do? Let them? You aren't going to stop them from doing so by "being nice," plenty of people are polite to police officers and get in trouble anyway.

Let's play this out:

If you say "I want a lawyer," and the officer arrests you and charges you, but you're innocent, the lawyer is there to prove your innocence. If you answer the officer's questions, you have no idea whether they'll arrest and charge you or not, and if they do, they now have evidence that will make proving your innocence much, much harder to do.

If you say "I want a lawyer," and the officer hits you over the head or continues to scream questions at you, then arrests you and charges you, the officer has just committed a crime and their testimony is now suspect. Things proceed as above, but your lawyer now has ammunition to use to help you in court.

Both of these outcomes are better in the long term than this bizarre "go along with whatever because the system sucks" approach.
There are arguments against socialism, but pointing to a small country who's been embargoed by a local juggernaut for decades is not a strong one.
Abbyy Screenshot Reader 11 Crack and Serial Number Download
Or maybe most people just don’t have such a simplistic view of the world?

People who advocate for socialism just want the rewards of capitalism without any of the risks.
The informal makes more sense, BTW.
Yes, I agree, that happens a lot in Asia, and it bugs me no end. That's not what I meant by my Raji example, though.
But you've said what s/he said - you liked the default, but the default changed. That's what you both agree on. Had you not remained on the default search engine, your move would have been retained. This leaves the question of whether a past change first away from the default and then back would have been counted as a choice to be retained or as merely the default.
I don't know how many times I couldn't pay with my Visa because system is down or slow today or transaction gets rejected for whatever reason. I believe there's a subset of whole Visa thing that always works, does what it supposed to do and processes everything it supposed to (while cashing in few percents on each purchase) but it is far from perfect from the point of view of the user.

The real difference is that visa has percentage fees on volume and bitcoin has fees dependent on number of transactions want to do at the moment. It's sensible since to avoid trusting single party bitcoin nodes all keep all thansactions that ever happened. Incentivising people to limit their number is a good thing for bitcoin network.

But thanks to that bitcoin won't ever be Visa 2.0

For me bitcoin for payments should work similarily to how prepaid phones work. You land in another country, you buy a card from local provider, you charge it with bitcoins and you usr it to shop.

I think bitpay is already doing something like that.
As the article hints, the concept of an individual is a very slippery thing in filamentous fungi. A single hyphal network can contain genetic material from more than two parental spores, and while a bi-nucleate condition is typical (in a "stable dikaryon"), genetically different nuclei can cohabit different regions of the same mycelium at different times, and even established nucleotypes can be completely displaced by newly-fusing types. This all leads to quite different genetic situations from those that delimit individuals in the usual sense.

In this study, somatic compatibility of isolates (their readiness to fuse into a single mycelium) seems to have been interpreted as an indication of clonality – that the isolates are completely genetically identical. (At least it was by the BBC; the abstract of the linked paper, which is all I read of it, is vague on this point.) That would make the determination that this is a single individual fungus rather unassailable. But it's not clear to me at all that we can assume things are so simple.
Hi dlet, Glad to see someone else on the same train of thought. I am a product designer and have made the same commitment to myself. I didn't want to dive deeper into programming without also learning the underlying CS at the same time.
HeLa would fail the latter portion of the definition provided in the article:

> The record-breaking A. solidipes clonal colony passes the test based on a definition of being made up of genetically identical cells that can communicate, and that have a common purpose or can at least coordinate themselves.
This is a sentiment that I think is termed "technological utopianism" and it has limits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_utopianism
NexTravel (YC W15) Is Hiring a Full Stack Developer to Modernize Travel
The 20th century has thoroughly proven out the naivety of this position. Political and economic systems conform themselves to reality, not the other way 'round, for better or worse.

The reality is that we live in a world of scarcity, and have unchangeable biological impulses toward hoarding resources and other exclusionary survival behaviors. Capitalism provides the _most fair_ solution under the unchangeable physical realities that govern human life.

You can't wave a political magic wand and do away with all unfairness in the world. A lot of people tried that over the last 100 years. One quick honest look at the wreckage should be more than enough to disabuse anyone of these ideas.
There is social democracy and there is socialism.

I am totally with social democracy like your European examples where health care, education, and other things are basic rights and investments that everyone in the country should enjoy.

That said, nobody in Norway or Sweden are guaranteed jobs and the working culture is actually pretty similar to the most of the west, including having to work for demanding bosses.

True socialism is a nightmare that guarantees nothing more than everyone has the same, which is usually very little.
Can you elaborate? Specifically:

* Out of the dozens of countries that have/had socialist governments (let's ignore those where US intervention prevented that from happening, against the will of the people) why did you choose Cuba?

* What failings of Cuba do you attribute to socialism, and do not see happening in capitalist countries?
Hardcore socialists apparently think that’s true. After all, if the other person wants it, they must be taking advantage of me! They all operate from a fixed pie / scarcity mentality, and must have missed the basic economics class where you learn that parties can trade where ALL end up better off than if you didn’t.
Yea when I lived in a poorly insulated half basement, I'd keep all the spider's alive on the corners and edges, and they killed a prodigious amount of bugs. Was hard to remove all the carcasses without destroying the webs above.
Since many with more knowledge than I are saying the stock market is overvalued and Bitcoin is vapor based I'll offer you invest in something you can add value to and resell or keep for your pleasure.
No no no, that's just payment channels. Lightning is multi-hop payment protocol on top of the traditional channel idea. Alice has a channel with Bob, and Bob has a channel with the Pizza company, and the Pizza company has a channel with its employees for salary and tips. On delivery, Alice pays Bob, Bob pays the Pizza company, and the Pizza company keeps some and forwards on just Alice's tip to the delivery guy. This is coordinated and setup in less than a second of communication among the parties along the route (meaning Bob and the Pizza company need to have their nodes online; but there can be non-routable offline signers at the endpoints; the Lightning routing is an online protocol however), but the payment is atomic -- intermediaries like Bob only get their money if they forward it on (minus a reasonable micro-fee), and either all channel updates happen or none at all. It only takes about the same amount of time as a point of sale credit card transaction to setup and sign, and completion of the atomic signing step is finality of settlement, so long as the parties remain online to check for preemptive or fraudulent channel closure.

Lightning allows sub-second transactions with finality of settlement for any routable path along a peer-to-peer network of payment channels. Because of the six degrees of Kevin Bacon idea, anyone can pay anyone else on the network with a dozen or so different hops in the worst case, each hop taking a really small fee, like a hundredth of a percent. A true peer-to-peer electronic cash system, if you will.

As in this example, your long-lived channels as an individual are likely to be with your employer or payroll company, your mortgage company, your telco, your favorite restaurants, and other other regular payments you make or sources of income. As an organization your channels will probably be with your suppliers (accounts payable) and major customers (accounts receivable), as well as payroll and office supply companies, etc. But you're able to reach everyone on the network through these starting points. This allows you to do things like proactively "pull" in funds from accounts receivable to cover expenses, by routing through that part of the network. It maps pretty well onto both the individual and corporate use cases.

It also allows micropayment in bitcoin again.. the cost of a payment is basically the cost of maintaining these online routable nodes, and the message communication, which is probably sub-cents in the limit. It's possible you can, e.g., do a 5-cent payment per article view on a news website, or per song played on a future Spotify, etc.
Bitcoin and Litecoin
Also, IIRC, there are some pretty huge catfish in those rivers. I think I remember the photos in the article.

And there are some pretty huge catfish in other areas too, like the Mekong giant catfish and others.
I was deliberately invoking the irony of using diversity to promote competitive environments, yes.
> My boss getting a new Tesla or yet another house from the extra profits doesn't make me happy.

Hang on, last I checked everyone still gets employed in China; Denmark; Finland; Netherlands; Canada; Sweden; Norway; Ireland the same way they get employed in all the other countries. All the bosses in those countries you mentioned still drive the new Telsa and have bigger houses. So wouldn't this kind of socialism not actually be a solution for the OP's problem?
There's a lot that I agree with there. Capitalism is different from the free market theory. Yep.

However, left to our own devices, I do think that businesspeople and entrepreneurs just want an unfair playing field. I sure do. I don't like Thiel but competition is for losers captures what I'm trying to say here. We may start with Don't Be Evil but if we can be evil, we will be evil and we can be evil. That is why we have evolved to have laws and regulations and then that is why we have further evolved to regulatory capture. It is our nature.
Yes, freelancing, but then you will probably feel
dissatisfied that you're not soing something meaningful and that the lack of socializing depresses you.

I believe the problem
isn't the work, but inside of you. Have you tried improving your own life? Getting a meaningful hobby, volunteering, building a meaningful circle of friends, moving to the city that you love most, finding a significant other that you love above anything else, starting a family. Those things really fill your life with meaning.

Apart from that, if you don't want to be working at a company, you need to build your freelancing agency and you need to be good at it, so that after a few years, you have a client base that pays really well and other people do the work for you, so that you only need to work 10-20h per week or less. Then you can focus on the things above that really matter.
Freelancing by contracting is risky. The company you work for maintains the right to fire you for no reason whatsoever, and you would not be able to earn unemployment. Also, unless you are a particularly skilled employee or are working in a hot market, you probably won't be paid as much after considering the fact that you'll have to pay for your own healthcare, your own liability insurance, do your own taxes, and deal with the considerable gaps in employment since freelancers are some of the first that are fired at a company.

Freelancing may work well for the top 5% or 10%, but it's not a good thing for most.
I'd be surprised if you weren't aware that the fee isn't proportional to the amount being transacted. A $10 fee on a $10 transaction is outrageous.
As usual, Uber throwing money at people to clean up after their mess.

Where is this money coming from? You.

Stop. Using. Uber.
I don't think anything like "true socialism" could exist. Just like "true capitalism" or a "true scotsman".
Flaws in those who are brighter also tend to be more visible, in my experience.
Marx wasn't really advocating that there is a fixed pie which needs to be forcibly carved up. Mostly he built his ideas around the distinction between different kinds of "value", particularly the labour value and exchange value of goods.

His clever insight, the basis of his theory of exploitation, was that labour value and labour power are different. The labourer sells labour power. The difference between the labour value of the good and the labour power sold accrues to the capitalist.

One of the several ways he was wrong was that prices aren't really set by labour value at all. All economic value is subjective, influenced by many factors. The average amount of labour is neither here nor there.
[Day 17] Zero to MVP in 30 Days – Not Hitting My Goals
By including China, I'd say, very broadly?
This sounds like a terrible idea. Maybe if one is a 15 year old kid, sure, for shits and giggles. Why would a researcher do this, damaging their reputation in the process? And what good does it serve anyone?
Ha ha ha. Ya. Glancing over. Irony :)
Then people will move to Ethereum and EOS (or whatever competing blockchains get scalability first). With interoperability of blockchains, transactions can be done on alt blockchains that are cheap and fast instead of on the Bitcoin chain.
Fixed and added a little FAQ. :)
Too complex for an HN post and ultimately my definition will far too short, so I'll just cop out by saying "I know it when I see it".

Usually defined by a relatively more weighted public sector ownership and operation of the factors of production. It's about worker control. And my overall feelings of it is relative to places like the U.S. which practices a form of democratic-ish corporatist oligarchy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it
Well seeing how most Americans haven't been getting the rewards of capitalism(wages have been stagnant since the 70's, regional inequality + healthcare + housing has made the actual COL much higher), it makes perfect sense that people would start pushing for something different.
The person you replied to gave 2 specific examples of Oliver making calls to action. If you're going to refute that point, you need to provide examples as well, not just vague assertions. Remember, the meat of Oliver's show is the 15-20 minute segment that is well researched, credits sources and contains a call to action at the end. The most famous example is probably Oliver's video about Net Neutrality 2 years ago galvanised support for it and is used even today to explain NN to laymen. Its absurd to claim that the show promotes cynicism when Oliver always exhorts his viewers to do _something_.

If you're objecting to a "its 2016!" at the end of a throwaway 30-second joke then you're being too sensitive IMO.
As opposed to non-emergencies, where humans are pulling a DoS attack against Nature.

Saw the fires cresting the hills from home this week. But what do people expect if they build a long string of homes into chaparral? The long urban-wildland boundary denies access to nature, until it is reclaimed by the fire.

It sucks having lots of friends lose their homes, but those homes never should have been built in the first place. When Venturans got a chance to vote on new houses in the hills, 85% of us rejected it. And thank goodness, because 100% of those homes would be ashes by now.
TL;DR you perform a new transaction that depends on the prior, unconfirmed transaction. To do this you have to pay double fees for the new transaction to make it attractive to miners to confirm both.
I hope she took them to the cleaners. Whatever makes executives think they can get away with this is an open question, I also strongly believe that regardless of whether or not the woman pursues this there should be some kind of criminal penalty for the executive(s) involved assuming they are found guilty. And then there is the question how they managed to obtain these records in the first place, the local authorities really should be interested in that.
For those who don't understand what this is about: one of the tactics that trolls like grubles use is referring to Bitcoin Cash as Bcash as a form of derision. Bitcoin Cash does not call itself Bcash and the term Bcash is considered derogatory.
That's a problem that hasn't been solved (yet).

That shouldn't diminish all the other things that BTC does successfully.
History of Iphone from year 2007 to 2017
http://www.wirelessrouterprinter.com/2017/12/history-of-iphone.html
I have to object to the use of the word "we" to describe the actions of people many generations ago. Basically nobody today would approve of the first case, and proponents of the second case aren't part of the "we" who would be reading this comment.
I am in the same boat. As someone in IT, I find that most organizations don't value my incredible achievements... this year, I made a decent sum of money selling a seasonal product. My long term goal is to start one or more businesses with the blueprint from "the 4 hour workweek".

I have started to become an entrepreneur because there a billion different ways to make the world a better place (some are marketable) and in part because I want to be rewarded for the value i produce instead of the time I put in.
The Brown Snot Takong Over the World's Rivers
But also secure boot and full disk encryption and SGX.
".. use it correctly": As in excluding the kernel component in freebsd-update.conf or how do you mean?
Perhaps your point was poorly made such that even a smart person couldn’t figure it out.
Lessons learned from making a Chess game on Ethereum
For the last 50 years, the pie has gotten larger and larger. And yet, the median slice is getting smaller. How big does this pie have to get before everyone is allowed to have a bite?
I used to believe that also, but it turns out the FCC does the FTCs job when it comes to telecom and the internet (anti-trust etc) in the context of media. Personally I think that's the most important issue here, in my opinion the FCC is doing a job the FTC should be doing.
I wonder if Craig was really involved in this:
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-zero/issues/detail?id=83...
> Where is this money coming from? You.

> Stop. Using. Uber.

No, I will not stop using Uber.

If you have a problem with them, feel free to stop using Uber. I have no problems with the company or service so I, like the millions of other riders/drivers, will continue using Uber.