skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> For writing code. Not hacking, not exploiting systems or keylogging (someone else did that), not even intending his code to be used for these purposes. Just writing the code.

That's quite a misrepresentation of the situation: https://www.wired.com/2009/12/stephen-watt.

> Stephen Watt, a 25-year-old former Morgan Stanley software engineer, pleaded guilty last December to creating a custom sniffing program dubbed “blabla” that Gonzalez and other hackers used to siphon millions of credit and debit card numbers from TJX's network. The breach cost TJX $200 million, according to its 2009 SEC filing.

> Prosecutors never alleged that Watt received money for the software he wrote, or directly profited from the hacks. But they brandished more than 300 pages of chats the two friends exchanged that belied Watt's stated ignorance.

> As Gonzalez and his accomplices hacked target after target, he sent Watt links to news stories describing a tidal wave of debit fraud spreading around the world.

It's like saying "oh, I just made a timer circuit for my friend who I knew was blowing up buildings." Note: the $170 million isn't a "fine." It's restitution. Those are two different things. A fine is used to punish bad conduct. Restitution is used to make a victim whole. Conduct that isn't that "bad" can nonetheless result in huge restitution if it resulted in large damages to the victim. Don't do stuff that can result in huge damages if you don't want to be on the hook for them.
SSH Cheatsheet
Not just the research, all the hard work of peer review, etc. is volunteer. Typesetting and stuff is paid for by the journal. Researchers publishing in the journals often have to pay a per page publication fee in addition to missing out on any royalties.
The name describes the project which "simplifies" 3D polygonal meshes to reduce the number of polygons while minimizing the impact on the visual quality.

The makes the object render (get drawn on the screen) a lot faster which is important to keep a high frame rate.
> Isn't the main benefit of UBI to make it so everything is streamlined into a single program and administrative overhead is reduced?

I would say no. The main benefits of basic income are increased levels of economic stability and increased levels of social prosperity.

It may end up being the case that after we implement a basic income, we discover that our society does not need some of our welfare programs. Then we can eliminate them. But that's not the main benefit of basic income.
I forgot to mention that the conflict resolution commits would be occurring on the feature branch (or a 3rd branch), not on the main dev branch, if that makes it easier to grok.

Anything merged into `dev` would be a single clean no-conflict merge commit that compiles. That eliminates any merge automation issues I've encountered, although other systems might require every commit to compile.

`git bisect skip` fixes bisect, just like any other non-compilable commit on a branch.

You say it "kills diffs", and that may be true for some aspects of a command-line diff. But I find the main place my team is "diffing" is via the web view of a Pull Request. This workflow makes it possible to see the diff via the PR. Each commit shows you exactly how the conflict was resolved. Without this workflow the conflict resolutions are essentially hidden from the web view of the PR and leads to the "hidden code" issue I mentioned in the OP. (Although some newer PR views may now make this possible.)
Airbnb’s VR and AR Plans Will Let You Visit a Home Before Renting It
Any chance of elaborating? I'm curious if GT is a 'real tool' (compared to, for example, SWOT analysis), or a high-level mindset?
Barclays, HSBC Join Settlement Coin as Bank Blockchain Test Enters New Phase
That edit, about NatWest buying up the example domain to "fix" the problem, gave me real good laugh.
It's interesting how simple mindedness can be so unexpectedly expected.
>you could go register nuuolb.com right now

Not anymore!

https://www.whois.com/whois/nuuolb.com

It seems NatWest has quickly gone to secure this major attack point in their otherwise chink-free armour. Does someone want to inform them about nwalb.com as well?
> The USA is at once too big and too small at the same time.

I haven't seen a convincing argument for either half of this, much less the mutually contradictory combination.
Oh, I loved those Radio Shack all-in-one kits too - the spring connectors made it so easy to wire stuff up. Also did a bunch of Heathkits a few years later - color TV for the family, ham radio gear for myself, etc.

I was trying to remember my first experience with electricity and electronics, and it finally came back to me. Whenever our TV or radio went on the fritz (which happened quite regularly), I got to pull out all the tubes, and my dad would take me to the local convenience store where they had a tube tester. I would put each tube in the tester and learn what to set the dials to and what to look for on the meters and figure out which tube was bad. It was a great adventure!

73 de Mike WJ6V
> why Bitcoin will never be able to compete with a well-managed fiat currency

I think you meant to post this in 2011
People spend their entire lives focused on wealth accumulation.

Bitcoin has endowed many people with financial means in a way completely orthogonal to their day-to-day work. Say what you will about bubbles, but this "fund manager's" perspective is healthy check on reality.
Implementing an efficient headless CMS on top of Wordpress
> If the benefit requires other subsidies for recipients to survive, does it actually fit the definition of UBI?

Different people used different definitions of basic income. As far as I know, the most commonly accepted definition says nothing about the amount. But I have heard people say that it's not a "true" basic income if it's not above a certain level.
Monochrome is a nice idea. Windows phone is a good way to achieve the first part. Most of the apps you might use aren't available. Put the phone in "battery saver" mode and things don't run in the background, so no notifications. Battery can last 2-3 days this way
It's kind of a problem if the compile/build step takes rather long. Then you want to avoid having any additional non-compiling revision to check when bisecting.

But I agree in general, if the compile/build turn-around times allow for it, then a single no-conflict squash merge back into devel is definitely a very good approach to have clean and compiling commits, and for identifying the commits/merges that break the builds.
Dude, you could walk into a coffee shop in the UK today, set up a honeypot wifi, and over the course of a day collect a handful of credentials with direct access to bank accounts. Unlike the US, once you're into an account you can send money directly and more or less instantaneously to any other UK account. Assuming every single person is verifying the cert/domain after they click the login link is batshit insane, I guarantee you no more than 10% of people would even have a chance of noticing.
In Australia there is a tax on biodiesel (cooking oil) [1] for this reason, even if you source it yourself. I imagine a similar thing will be necessary for electric

[1] https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/Excise-and-excise-equivalent...
No. And the reason is that by distributing the new money evenly, you're increasing the price elasticity of demand. Instead of increasing the amount of money people are willing to pay for goods, you're increasing the number of people who want to buy goods.

So instead of having an incentive to raise their prices, producers will have more of an incentive to produce more. And as long as you're not coming up against resource limits, prices will stay low. If producers tried to raise their prices, they'd lose customers.

Does that make sense?
I hope that the charity looks to sell or hedge some of this....
It's easy to be outraged by this, but the bottom line is that journals need to make money to sustain their own operations. Research might be tax-funded, but the publishing houses are privately-held entities with employees and payroll (per their wiki page, for example, Nature employs 800 people).

Someone has to pay for expenses associated with maintaining these platforms. Right now its either the tax payers or college students who pay for it indirectly, when their institution buys library access.
I already deleted all my subscriptions.
I'm too lazy to put it back.
I see the irony.
Although I sometimes find it helpful to disrupt my mouse usage. For example when I want to learn new keyboard shortcuts or test a website for accessibility.
Like my kids always remind me, first is the worst. Second is the best. Third is the one with the hairy chest.
It's quite simple really. Do all miners [eventually] agree on the value of a block? Yes? That's a consensus.

True there are other types of consensus that are perhaps 'fairer' but that's not the issue here.

So yes, it is a consensus protocol. It's called Nakamoto consensus, and it's perfectly fine for its purpose.
I left a rather hot-blooded response to somebody else below, but given that your question is obviously sincere, I'll post a redacted version of it here (this is probably bad HN form, sorry):

The trick with Universal Basic Income is that it Universal. It is paid to everyone. That means everyone is both a contributor to it and a recipient of it. So you can't add up the cost without also considering the benefit. If you give me ten dollars and I give you nine dollars, it doesn't mean that you're down by ten dollars. UBI must be looked at in this way. At a national level, it's just a straightforward cash transfer. The national cost plus the national benefit would simply be zero.

But of course what people are really interested in is how much it would cost them.

The per capita Gross National Income is $58,000. To extract a $12,000 UBI from that $58,000 -- via a simple individual flat-tax -- would require a 20% tax rate. However, the person making $58,000 would also receive $12,000 per year in UBI. So they would pay $12k and receive $12k, making the total cost to them zero.

Of course the person earning earning $100k will also have to pay 20%, and they of would only receive $12,000 back as UBI -- putting them -$20k + $12k = $8k out of pocket. So for everyone earning $100k, the cost of UBI is 8% of their net income. Actually -- because about a quarter of this UBI could replace existing benefits programs, the tax increase would be closer to 8% * 75% = 6%.

So although it would notionally require a 20% tax increase (or 15%, if you account for the savings it would create), for the vast majority of Americans it would cost nothing, and for no American would it cast more than 20%. Here is how it would break down:

Income pre-UBI | Income post-UBI | cost/benefit | Tax increase | % of Americans at or below [1]
---------------|-----------------|--------------|--------------|---------------
$0 | $12,000 | + $12,000 | N/A |
$20,000 | $28,000 | + $8,000 | N/A | 35%
$40,000 | $44,000 | + $4,000 | N/A | 61%
$60,000 | $60,000 | N/A | N/A | 77%
$80,000 | $76,000 | - $4,000 | 5% (4%) | 86%
$100,000 | $92,000 | - $8,000 | 8% (6%) | 91%
$120,000 | $108,000 | - $12,000 | 10% (7.5%) | 93% (?)

And those are the hard numbers. To support a national income UBI of $12,000 via a simple, equitable flat-tax, this is what it would take. 77% of Americans would pay nothing and would in fact be net beneficiaries. 9% of Americans would pay up to 4% in additional taxes. 5% of Americans would pay up to 6% in additional taxes. 3% of Americans would pay up to 7.5% in additional taxes, and so forth. A very very small number of billionaires would see an effective tax increase of 20%.

THAT is how you finance a UBI.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_income_in_the_United_...
I wholeheartedly disagree and do not believe you have done anything other than support my thesis.

Fundamental disagreements about something important are the very definition of political / philosophical belief.

If someone does not possess the technical skills to do the job, they can be dismissed from consideration, but "compatibility" with your preexisting beliefs is in no way a valid reason.

Could you legally disqualify me from employment because I disagree with you on this very point? No. But you seem to be saying that you would anyway.
I modded/hacked my school software to get custom CSS themes.
I think the idea of the YC money being insignificant comes from its roots as a program for college students. When you're still mostly supported by your parents, the money isn't as big of a deal since you have basically no expenses and endless runway anyway. But when you've got rent, bills, a family, etc., the money is a very big deal and can easily be the difference between having the runway to make it vs. needing to quit and get a job prematurely.

The parallels with basic income are clear. How many people are out there with the potential to be one of the best in the world at something important, yet aren't able to develop themselves because they started with nothing and are 100% focused on making ends meet? We won't find out until we give all those people a chance.
Okay, forgive me if this has been mentioned elsewhere here, I haven't read the whole thread.

My take on UBI is that it only makes sense as a response to rampant automation that has marginalized a substantial (perhaps >75%) portion of the global human population. Meaning that most people cannot effectively enter the economy and provide for themselves because they just cannot compete against the machines, at some point in the near-future.

In the limit, nanotech and fusion power will put almost all of us out of work (not to mention AI/ML et. al.)

At that point, we have to figure out what to do with all these "surplus" people. The (gruesome) options are: enslave them (N. Korea), or kill them.

One maybe-possible other solution is to just give them money and see what they do.

From my POV any discussion of UBI as something other than a response to a "phase shift" in economic realities due to advancing automation is kind of missing the point.

I actually would like to create a Universal Automation Inc. company and issue shares and get crackin', but I'm lazy and it seems to be happening anyway!
I think the main thoughts/focus areas are:
1.) Remove the pricing power on the primary drivers of inflation (urban land, oil&gas, electricity, non-staple food crops, education, unnecessary luxury novelties) so that people are not indebt
2.) When everything in life is automated/delivered via Amazon drone, people especially those living in a rural areas and/or those not technically inclined for remote SW work) a low cost, sustainable reason to get going in the morning. To me, urban farming fits the bill. If done right, after a small startup cost/environmental impact, the long term steady state inputs and outputs are biodegradable. If you are busy with your tomatoes then you are less likely to channel your energy to less productive pursuits (mindless consumerism, illegal activities, discontentment)
3.) Always on fiber optic video conferencing in public spaces in rural townsquares so that there's less fear of missing out on urban/suburban life.
> There would be no guarantee that people would use that money for basics like housing and food.

Why would you want such a guarantee? You don't think people who need housing and food will buy housing and food with their money? I mentioned this in another comment, but I'm not aware of any kind of epidemic of people who can afford housing not buying housing.

If we do have such a problem, then I agree with you that we should help the people who are suffering from bad judgment. But why not do that in addition to providing them with a basic income?
I'd say they were quite the opposite!

"Semantics" is about the meaning you're trying to express.

"Syntax" is the way you've chosen to express that meaning in this particular case.

e.g.:

def blah
"a"
end

versus

function blah() {
return 'a';
}

Semantically identical, but unrelated syntax.
Return on Hard Decisions
Rather than trying to turn the 99 percent into charity cases and sheeple, I would like to try to foster the next step in the evolution of work so that it is lighter and more flexible and so forth. This is a compendium of some of my previous writings on an alternative to UBI, which boils down to seeing this as the Second Industrial Revolution:

http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/p/ir2.html

I am not looking to help people strive for greatness. That is Sam Altman's goal.

But what I do try to do is preserve freedom and agency for the poorest of the poor. My first attempt to do that is here:

http://sandiegohomelesssurvivalguide.blogspot.com/

My current project for trying to help the most vulnerable people around me take control of their lives is here:

http://independentdigitalworkers.blogspot.com/
The US social security administration spends ~0.7% of its total expenditures on administrative expenses. (Yes, it's more for the disability program, 1.9%.)
UBI is inflationary and discourages people from working. Economists have moved on to better ideas than UBI, like the federal government providing a JG (Job Guarantee) or being an ELR (Employer of Last Resort):

https://www.thenation.com/article/job-guarantee-government-p...

The summary is: everyone who is willing and able to work should get a standard salary and benefits from the Federal Government. We could have a decentralized system for setting up/vetting/approving JG/ELR projects all across the country, but the Federal Government would pay JG/ELR participants directly. This could include all kinds of things, like Y Combinator.

As for profit-sharing "United States, Inc" as Sam Altman proposes, we can do that too. We can set up a government program that says publicly traded companies in the USA will get a tax incentive if they promise to pay at least Y% of income in dividends. The government can take a small stake in these companies, and distribute the dividends equally to all citizens. It can try to track a broad stock-market index in its portfolio to make sure the investment passive (we don't want the government actively investing in companies, it shouldn't be picking winners and losers). Also, with a low-risk portfolio, the program would hopefully stay solvent, leaving the option of liquidating assets should we ever want to unwind this (for either political or economic reasons).

Where do we get the money to do all this? Governments don't need to finance spending when they have sovereign control of their own currency. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Monetary_Theory
> What would stop us from recreating the inefficient welfare state that already exists on top of this new one when some people inevitably blow their UBI on drugs/cheetos/whatever and don't have money for rent? It seems that for this to work we'd have to maintain some intestinal fortitude to say "no" - and that to me sounds like a serious culture change in this country

The US has cut back welfare programs in both nominal and real terms many times, broad increases have been less popular. The fortitude to say no to benefits is not missing from our culture (if it were, the suggestion of UBI would have quickly led to its adoption without substantive debate.)
It's either human nature, or driven by wealthy, prestige-sensitive trustees at the top.
Apparently it scales with the fourth power of axle weight (http://www.nvfnorden.org/lisalib/getfile.aspx?itemid=601), roughly.
Recently I stopped keeping lists, using todo list managers etc. It's destressed me a lot. Time crucial stuff gets noted on a paper calendar, but that's all.

Another +1 for dropping social media. Nothing anyone posts on Facebook is going to change your life
> By pooling our resources, we can live much more sustainably and prosperously.

This is a very good point, and the basis of a lot of Bucky Fuller's work. He phrased it as being the most efficient when working for the good of the most people, and so accordingly all his design had global context. At one point he designed cities with domes over them!
This is mentioned in the article. He also mentioned they didn't buy nw0lb.com and some other domains.
Look for com.<dictionary_word>.plist in ~/Library/LaunchAgents/ where <dictionary_word> is a random word from /usr/share/dict/words (the unix word file).
There were a lot of complaints about Google doing that with .dev given the number of other companies and developers that use .dev for random LAN things, but an HSTS Preload for random LAN things isn't a bad idea in that it can prevent some types of mistakes going to production like bad HTTPS->HTTP redirects in an application. Obviously, Google themselves thought it a good idea to test that in their development environments.
Why would anyone who would be taxed at 90% stay here?
"But, given what we know today and the data available to us, it could also be worth half. "

And it would still be up 900% from last year.
This falls in the same category as the other article "CRYPTO COIN WEAKENS" after Bitcoin dropped 0.5%.

It might be a bubble, but you're still writing about it.
>> but I've never seen an application of it in real life.

Here is one: you and a friend get arrested and are questioned separately, with police trying to turn you.

</sarcasm>
That's exactly what this whole discussion is about though.

The difference between "card surcharge" and "cash discount" is treated as 'semantic' in the merchant contract context, but is it a distinction without a difference from the customer's perspective?
"By giving people money to spend, it unlocks the economy's potential to produce wealth for the people. We won't produce wealth that people won't buy and basic income allows more people to buy more wealth."

Doesn't UBI reduce the economic productivity by both driving up the cost of labor through increased taxation and lowering the supply? Until (if) we are in a post-scarcity world how will lowering productive output ever increase the overall wealth?

I don't see how 1 Apple can offset 1 million unemployed, and really skeptical such a company could grow to that size/profitability under the necessary labor/tax system to support UBI.
What's the expected return per pageview for the average ad? Not more than a few cents either, is it?
Don't.
If the idea is soldi enough, I would suggest a RegA+ offering
MusicXML: Final Community Group Report 07 December 2017
Ah, gotcha. Well, hell! Good luck. Site looks nice.
Yes, Net Neutrality Is Being Stolen from Us in a Fucked Up, Undemocratic Heist
I'm not really surprised, UK banks are absolutely terrible in terms of their product and even worse in supporting clients having valid points. Another example would be MetroBank that recently changed password prompt to a masked password prompt (in addition to already existing masked PIN alongside) ignoring the research proving its a horrible user experience and in fact lowers the security or (not a bank, but still major company) Three mobile provider that asks your for your password while calling in for support. You heard it right, support representative asks you for your password to verify you are the account holder. There is no other way and no amount of explaining that it's insane and won't happen till I'm conscious was able to convince them to stop.
It's not about him though. It's about signaling to everyone else that these crimes are taken seriously and will not be tolerated.
I love that its anonymous and simple and the donations are transparent. Does anyone by chance know if there are restrictions on charities receiving anonymous bitcoin donations?
Yeah he hacked minecraft services to generate a profit when he was 19 or 20, I wish I could do that when I was 19. I dont think I would have known better at the time either.

He's as responsible of taking down Dyn as Mikhail Kalashnikov is responsible for all the people killed by the ak-47. He simply open sourced a tool for other people to use however they like.

He took the plea to reduce the sentence and the legal expense.
Here's CK's blog post:
https://subfictional.com/my-theory-patreon-doesnt-want-to-be...