skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's not true at all. Most economists agree that it's not optimal to tax-advantage home ownership over renting and most economists would agree that state and local tax deductions warp incentives and resource allocations away from where they'd be if the state and local taxes weren't deducted.

The consensus opinion among economists is that the house version of the bill does reduce the amount of consumption that can be structured in a tax-advantaged way but that it's not appropriate to cut taxes right now.
> literally if you didn't have deductions out of $100k you might have a $30k take home.

That is just not true. Up until very recently, I had ZERO deductions I could take. I made over $100k in San Francisco and my take home was about 65% of my income.
There used to be a time when content companies needed to carefully select their network transit partners in order to make sure the bits their customers were paying them for had the best chance of reaching them (see: the existence of the CDN industry). It seems that those times are over, and the internet will be legislated to be 100% reliable and capacious..
It's still a concession to homeowners that renters don't get.

We want taxes to be fair, no?
It doesn't, the tax bill is generally good for lower income people who take the standard deduction. Everyone's screeching about it because of the people in the top income brackets are saving the most, which is a total "no shit" moment given how much more they pay in overall.
Yes, categorically. If Aetna signs an agreement to pay health expenses and fails to follow through they face three major consequences:
- They can be sued for breach of contract.
- They can lose market power as their brand loses public trust.
- They can face fines from government regulators.

I think you are ignorant about how things work in the U.S. There haven't been strong regulators for quite some time. The average person has neither the money, time, or willpower to fight an insurance company. The legal costs can be quite high. The time required to get a favorable ruling that actually gets enforced is often times quite long. Witness Exxon and the time required to get them to pay for the Valdez accident.

In an ideal world your point would be relevant. We do not live in a truly free market. We live in an environment of regulatory capture. An era of force arbitration which is well known to favor the corporation. We do not live in an environment where corporate malfeasance is properly punished. Look at the fines banks had to pay for knowingly laundering drug money. It was far less than the profit. BP famously has leaky oil pipelines in Nigeria because it can get away with it. Comcast has virtually no public trust and yet it continues to profit greatly. Your view is not justified by reality.

It is well documented that health insurance companies hire people to look for loopholes. To delay and ultimately try to deny coverage. This is not disputable.
I'm not claiming that it does.
If they're signing Ubuntu's ARM shim loader the same way they're signing Ubuntu's x86-64 shim loader, you can use it to boot an arbitrary kernel in non-EFI mode. I am using this on my personal laptop to to boot Debian stable with Debian's kernel - grab shimx64.efi + grubx64.efi from Ubuntu, put them in the ESP, and write a little grub.cfg that sets $root and $prefix to the Debian partition and runs `normal`. Since you're exiting UEFI boot services before running unsigned code, Microsoft (apparently?) does not care.

Also, if they're signing any Linux distro's shim loader, shim allows a physically present user to enroll their own key or disable secure boot. See method 3 at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UEFI/SecureBoot/DKMS .

(I don't actually know if they are signing any Linux shim for ARM - https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UEFI/SecureBoot/Testing#UEFI.2FSecur... implies no. Which means you can't use any version of Linux on it, unless they change their policy.)
Mountains Don't Know Borders
Or so you thought.
First, this article would've been much better off using medians instead of means. High earner outliers tend to skew stats like these.

Second, it's interesting to see people who were in favor of tax increases suddenly change their mind when it hits them. While I agree that tax cuts for the rich seem unnecessary, some tax hikes for the upper middle-class aren't out of line compared with a Democrat led tax plan. I wonder how much our own personal interests in our money affects how we view tax plans? Most people, no matter how rich they are, seem to want those just richer than them to be taxed more.

Finally, although the removal of the SALT deduction will cost me significantly, I'm not sure I understand how the deduction makes sense. Why should a state raising their taxes mean you have less of a federal obligation? It only makes sense to me if states with higher taxes use less federal resources.
I'm approaching from the opposite situation - I have a paid off house in my lower cost of living state and am relocating to the Bay Area for a job next month. I will not be selling my current home, nor buying in the Bay Area, until the fallout of this tax bill is known. At the very least, housing prices may come down where I'm going, but likely not where I'm moving from (since the mortgage interest deduction on most homes around here will wash out with the doubling of the standard deduction, but even if it does, it's percentages of far smaller numbers comparatively). Meanwhile, it sounds like nothing's changing in what I'll be able to deduct as a landlord. At least, that's my thought.

That said, it's always been a little odd to me that we could deduct our mortgage interest and property taxes, but a renter cannot even though they're paying a good portion of that on our behalf.
It's common for hardware security tokens like this to limit themselves to self-generated private keys. The intent is the device needs to provide a guarantee that the private key is not otherwise accessible, whereas it would be if the user generated it, perhaps wrote it to disk, provided it to the SE, and perhaps SEs on other devices.
Who are the ultra-rich getting a tax cut?

I'm under the impression that it's the corporations getting the biggest big tax cut in this bill -- so possibly your employer.
As far as I understand, they don't emulate the x86 instruction set, but instead cross-compile it to ARM native instructions. That means that whatever implementation details are behind the patented x86 instructions are irrelevant, since there is no emulation of those instructions, they are just replaced by equivalent ARM instructions. Intel will probably still sue, but I expect them to settle out of court.

http://www.techradar.com/news/a-closer-look-at-windows-10-s-...
I agree with davexunit. Your analysis is flawed. First, you characterize state and local income and property tax deductions as "loop-holes." That's an interesting bit of logical acrobatics. In reality, the Senate bill hardly closes any loop-holes, and creates a myriad of new ones. For example, the whole pass-through craziness.
Whether or not they drive on it is irrelevant. The project is handled by the Virginia state government, not anybody in DC.
Disclaimer: This bill adversely affects me as well, and I'm not in favor of it, but:

>This tax bill utterly fucks me, to the point I'm considering selling my house to get ahead of the inevitable housing crash.

Can you imagine any type of reasonable tax reform that would not cause someone's tax to go up? Just the fact that some folks' taxes will go up does not make it a poor plan.

If your deductions are about $60K, then whether you feel like it or not, you are rich. And most tax overhauls would likely tax wealthier people more. This bill is a bit problematic as it taxes people in the upper middle class the most - whereas the rest of the lower/middle class and upper class get a break.
>>I cannot see this bill as anything short of theft

Welcome to libertarianism ;)
An Excerpt from “Keef,” a Novel About the Magical “Witching Drug” (1897)
The government was subsidizing your lifestyle -- owning an expensive house in a state with a high income tax. It does not want to do this anymore. It makes as much economic sense as other subsidies do.
Props for figuring out that taxation is theft though. Maybe next time don't vote for state government with highest state income tax in US?
As another member of society, I think you need to rethink your position on what it means to be a burden on society.

You are not a burden just by not having a "productive job, paying your own way". You are a burden if you deny people their essential human dignity, by forcing them to conform to your vision of what they should be in order to eat. You are a burden if you take for yourself a surplus and do not use it to supply those with a dearth. You are a burden if you lie, cheat, steal, and assault. You are a burden if you do not respect and appreciate the hundreds of people working in harmony who helped each other to ensure you survived to adulthood with enough education to write your own opinions.

If all you do is sit on a couch with a cannabis vape and a game console, you're no burden to me. Some people keep house cats, and have no problem feeding them without getting much of anything in return. A "non-productive" human may yet do something. It might not be great, but could be at least marginally useful, if we allow them the time for their calling to mature and motivate them to action. Or they could just be a dud for their entire life. I don't really need to make a monkey dance in order to throw it a nut.

I don't particularly need you to take care of yourself. I may even be willing to pitch in with others to take care of you, on the conditions that you first do no harm to others, and then that you give back in whatever way you feel you are able. But that generosity only extends as far as what I think you may need. If you want something extra, you're going to need to give a little more before you get it.

We are way past the era of "no work; no eat" edicts. Thanks to our machines, we don't have a labor problem any more; we have an information problem. The systems in place for connecting creators with consumers, to everyone's mutual benefit, have never been entirely adequate, and haven't scaled very well to a world of 7.6 billion people.
Hacking an Alexa is probably one of the more difficult ways to bug a hotel room.
I went to an open house in SF Saturday. The realtor had been planning to list the house in February but the seller is so worried about the tax situation they put it on the market and want it sold ASAP.
I think it's a an practicality thing. Getting these systems powerful seems sorta solved, but getting them easy to use seems tricky. AFAIK it's similar to computer formalized proofs. We can do them, but it's super verbose and tricky to make it convenient enough to be worthwhile.
Simplification is a red herring (notice how corporate state taxes are still deductible). Republicans needed a pay-for for reducing corporate/passthrough taxes and eliminating the estate tax. It just so happens that high wage earners in high tax states tend to be Democrats.
Scotty: Do you mind a little advice? Starfleet captains are like children. They want everything right now and they want it their way. But the secret is to give them only what they need, not what they want.

La Forge: Yeah, well, I told the Captain I'd have this analysis done in an hour.

Scotty: How long will it really take?

La Forge: An hour!

Scotty: Oh, you didn't tell him how long it would really take, did ya?

La Forge: Well, of course I did.

Scotty: Oh, laddie. You've got a lot to learn if you want people to think of you as a miracle worker.

http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0001544/quotes
Two issues here:
1) I thought the GOP was in favor of strong local governance and believed money is more efficiently allocated at the state level. This action flies in the face of that.
2) _Generally_ the states who are penalized by this change in tax policy already pay more in federal taxes than they receive in benefits.[1]

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/which-s...
Taxes aren't based on how much you benefit from government.
Progressive tax rates make sense because the wealthy can afford to pay a larger share of their paycheck to support shared society. Not because they necessarily derive more benefits than the middle class.

If we taxed people based on the benefits they receive from the government, then the homeless would pay a fortune.
I think there is always a demand to instantly transmit value across any distance or borders, which cryptocurrencies do very well as long as they have any value at all.
I thought twice about that word “mindless” but I stand by it.

I was explicitly not talking about Tony and Taylor I was talking about creators who put in “an order of magnitude less effort” and get a million views per video.

Much of that content is mindless. Not all. And I’m not judging mindless entertainment. Mindfulness is one thing, not everything. But I think it’s a fair characterization of the typical in the segment I described. It’s worth noting that to get to that level of viewership you typically need to be producing very consistent content daily.
Relax. You’re not subsidizing anyone. Homeowners pay a larger share than renters to begin with. And if you know anything about Western society, home ownership creates stable societies—that’s why ownership is encouraged.
I don't know about you, but that's where and what by i want tedious, error-prone work handled - out of my way and by the computer.

If you have some simpler, better alternative to html, css, and JavaScript for websites, more power to you. Over here in the real world, though, we've got stuff to do.
Wow this is an idea that I hadn't even considered before! That any smart contract is just a little piece of code with an API and an Ether cost. I'm getting so many ideas for cryptokitty horse racing...
Yes. Custom Mode is the override that normally allows you to disable their whitelist.
Depends on if you mean rich for California, rich for the USA, or rich for the world.

Oh wait! They didn’t think wealth was relative, right?
Yes, liberals love high taxes when it hits someone but themselves. No one likes paying taxes.
Technology and Development (T&D) is directly related to computing, not content acquisition or sales. Computing costs are significant in this category, since they point them out explicitly in the notes. 64% savings would show up, since we know that 3rd party cloud costs increased by $50M over the last two years. For the number of instances they must be using, the costs must be running well over $100M.
That's all fine, but IN CONTEXT, OP is still getting robbed. They're paying higher taxes while the super-rich pay lower taxes.

They could have passed a bill that eliminated those deductions and gave corresponding tax breaks to the middle class. They could have passed a bill that skipped the tax breaks for the super-rich and actually cut the deficit. I'm OK with paying my fair share if we were actually solving problems.

But no. We've gotta pay higher taxes while still blowing a hole in the deficit? In what world does that make sense?
"It seems like a transfer of power from the states to the federal government."

Bingo, remember that the next time some politician tells you they are in favor of state's rights.
It looks like the data is available for scraping:

https://www.expresslanes.com/historic-rates

You "just" have to pull it all in and present it nicely.
I am not sure I follow you on people being worried about a BTC drop from their own selling of BTC. We are in a bull market; one person selling BTC for USD on an exchange is not going to have a significant impact.

"so they move into tether hoping to buy back in after bitcoin goes down without having to do the expensive/difficult bitcoin-usd move."

How does this help them avoid an expensive bitcion-usd move? They will still have to buy btc with tether and then do a transaction for USD incurring blockchain fees.
Wow:

> “To be fair I was in the wrong, but it really hurt to see that relationship come undone from an outside attack,” he said. “It was a huge setback and I've learnt my lesson.”
Maybe the lesson was still setting in, though, because Chong then appeared to offer me a bribe of his own.
“Is there any way we can set up a partnership together to distribute content?” he asked, in the same email. “Happy to explore remuneration.”
You can't buy a decent house in the bay area on 200k.
Fortunately, it's not just my office that’s publicly supported net neutrality. (My office did submit its own public comment in support of net neutrality because we had an issue we wanted to address that was unique to our experience.) Several other state AGs submitted a comment in support of net neutrality as well (available here: https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10717283141719/2017.07.17%20Att...)

You are right that a broad bipartisan coalition could make a big difference. Some other state AGs have reached out to us for more information about the problem and about my office’s investigation, and we’re providing information to any of them that want to investigate and act on behalf of their own states’ constituents whose identities were misused.
Hi Eric, we've seen a lot of back and forth on net neutrality issues between administrations. How do we solidify the ground so it's not tied to one party or another? And if this goes through (as it looks like it will), are there legal recourses that you're prepared to use? This feels like it's going to be a consumer issue as much as a communications issue.
So you lost your special interest deductions and now have to pay taxes on your actual income? Doesn't sound unfair to me.
Two questions:

----

1. What about the property tax deduction? Why are property taxes deductible, but income taxes are not?

----

2. How do you feel about the mortgage interest deduction? A very similar question could be asked.

Two families both make $250,000 a year. One took out a $750k mortgage and one took out a $300k mortgage. Why should the second family carry more of federal tax burden than the first?

I don't have the right answer, but it's something to consider.
Why should you get to make all those deductions in the first place? Just because you bought an expensive house doesn't mean you should pay that much less tax than a renter living in the same county as you.
I think Microsoft is just realizing what Apple realized 8 years ago: ARM is the next x86 for the type of devices that people want to buy.
Isn't vendor lock in great? :) This is why I started using my own domain for emails a long time ago. Still have some stuff on my gmail, but I've mostly broken free.
> When the federal government gives high tax states tax cuts, that means those areas give less to the federal government, meaning those generally rich states end up getting federally subsidized by the poorer states.

Except those generally rich states are, in fact, currently net federal tax subsidizers of the rest of the country; this tax reform will actually reduce that because the rich people who are concentrated on those states will get huge tax cuts, whereas poorer people in the rest of the country will get big tax increases.

> Shouldn't the richer areas help pay for the poor?

So, what you are saying is we shouldn't adopt a tax “reform” that massively reduces progressivity transferring tax burden from the rich too the poor?

If so, on that much we agree.
Android security alert: Google's latest bulletin warns of 47 bugs, 10 critical
Seriously, none of you has access to his tax records? ;)
The parent comment suggested that these devices are already sending all of your conversations to Amazon. Which they are not. Of course the potential exists for devices to be compromised in the future, and that is something everyone should be aware of when putting one in your home.

I have seen more than one comment suggesting that Amazon currently stores everything it hears in passing on their servers. I have seen no evidence to suggest that is the case. Informing people on the potential risks is fine, but spreading FUD is not.
In an era of increased government surveilance and personal intrusion, why should Americans be ok with more oversight from a broken organization like the FCC?
If you just want Ingress with Envoy, Heptio now has the Contour project:

https://github.com/heptio/contour
I get these all the time from SV startup PR firms. "Story Idea: 5 innovative new uses for Docker/Containers/Mongo" etc. it's one of the fastest ways to ensure I never write about something.
It sounds like you actually don’t think the bill is bad.
They should treat the internet like they treat electricity. It doesn't matter if you're using it for a hair dryer or a work light or to charge your phone- you get it the same as everyone else for the same price.

Why aren't we de-regulating power companies too?
This money would not have paid a single claim, ever.

That is the essence of my point and we agree on this. Yes, if the CEO did not get this $500 million it would have gone elsewhere but certainly not to paying claims or enhancing healthcare for anyone. We agree on this point.
California already pays more to the federal government than it takes out. It is subsidizing poorer states, not the other way around.
> actual technical discussion about the matter for the purposes of illustrating to others that its largely an undefined, impossible to enforce concept. In fact, the idea is impossible

NN means an ISP cannot place artificial speed limits on packets that I send or receive, based on the contents of the packets; e.g. the protocol, the port, or the destination address.

NN rules have already existed for several years, for the full specification see http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015... . This is a widely accepted concept so if you want to support your argument that net neutrality is "impossible" you'd need to rebut what this actually says.
Unless your Echo is being tampered with, the microphone data is only recorded and transmitted when you say the activation word.

In both cases, you have to trust the manufacturer that the device behaves the way they say they do.
I agree with you and I think that's why, despite good intentions, this fund might be a little misguided. On their site they discuss how they are sticking w/ the tried and true of what they know in terms of VC investment in tech companies. You can't fault them for that since it is what they know and are used to.

The issue with that in context of the geography of where they are looking is that yes, there will be talented tech workers out there and entrepreneurs (within the tech sphere) that they might stumble across. What could be more necessary in terms of stimulating economic growth is looking at non-tech entrepreneurs in this areas, or at least ones that are not some version of an internet company.

There are probably a lot of folks out there that have ideas for companies, ones that might be hyperlocal or regional, that could be good, sustainable businesses but won't grow like a unicorn. Their costs might not be so much personnel but capital expenditure. They might not be sexy investments. But, if the intent is stimulate economic opportunities in 'forgotten' areas, this is the more likely scenario than finding a superstar developer in a haystack.
No, this is a hit on the upper middle class. The actual rich aren't feeling the pain.
Intel lawsuit in 3… 2…
> People have been clamoring for more taxes on the rich.

But this “tax reform”, in net, does exactly the opposite.