skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There are some things we mourn. Nobody mourns cross platform distribution of native apps. Anyone who does hasn’t had to manage the insanity of installer apps and of papering over a million different OS versions and app versions.

It’s 2018 and we still don’t have a common, wide spread, OSS framework for self-updating native apps that runs on all the major desktop operating systems. And let’s not even go into app store territory...
>Finland's two-year pilot scheme started in January 2017, making it the first European country to test an unconditional basic income. The 2,000 participants - all unemployed - were chosen randomly.

560€ for the unemployed? We've had this in France for decades[1]. Not sure why they needed such an experiment.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenu_de_solidarit%C3%A9_acti...
I know many economists would disagree with me - they're the same who would also be OK with the decline of industry in places like the north of England and the Rust Belt and would point to the overall raise in the GDP per capita and the rise of the service sector and say that this roughly cancels this out. However they can afford to treat the country like a big "system" and can ignore the plight of the individuals who have been left behind in this system and the communities where they live.

The main thing is that just I hate that otherwise smart people find it so easy to "other" a big group of people and find ways to back their belief that ultimately this groups suffering is just and good. It's not. As I said, maybe we can't do anything about it ... but the least we can do is not be so fucking smug about it.

Rant over.
> I don't know, "'Java is call by sharing' would be fine" looks pretty similar to my first comment on this story [1]. I thought we were on the same page.

On that much we are. But if we are reducing it to a dichotomy of "call by reference" versus "call by value", as the original article does (which is a simplified model of the space of possibilities, but legitimate; all models are false, some are useful), then "java is call by reference" is the true statement, because java's behaviour is within the sphere of "call by reference" behaviours and very much distinct from the sphere of "call by value" behaviours.

> I suggest you re-read the Hacker News guidelines [2] for what constitutes acceptable discourse on this site. Your first comment to me [3] and your most recent comment demonstrate a lack of civility on your part.

You first; I've been matching your tone when replying to you, that's all.
A single poll on a Silicon Valley social bubble chat app is not an appropriate way to draw any conclusions regarding a 2 billion person service.

It’s embarrassing the author is even suggesting it’s relevant.
With a modern IDE though, once you discover the error of your ways and do start using OOP. You can click on a few methods and do an "extract class" and it will automatically create your class, modify all of your references, find all of the referenced variables that your functions use and give you nice helpful auto refactorings and you know that your code won't break.

But as far as using C++ and not using OOP, as thevold saying goes, you can write FORTRAN in any language.
While not fully consistent the XMPP api is referred to as legacy on much of FCM documentation.
https://firebase.google.com/docs/cloud-messaging/server

You also misunderstand what this api is referring to. These are APIs for your server to connect to Google's. This is not a direct http and xmpp connection to mobile devices. That's all abstracted away from this.
This is one of the reasons I'm categorically against any kind of DNA databases. Yes, they can be useful. But if a crime is a bit harder to solve and there is a nice & convenient match against a DNA database of for instance known offenders (or babies whose blood was sampled right after birth...) then policework will shift from 'whodunnit' to 'howdidtheydoit'. Rationalization after such a detail comes up is a path that is a lot more tempting than to come up with suspects for which there is no evidence at all.

> a limp handshake relays less DNA than a bone-crushing one

Bowing seems to make good sense in this context.

Finally, shocking he wasn't compensated for spending a long time in jail.
No means testing. No huge bureaucracy. And a definite cut in sore feelings towards welfare claimants, because everyone gets the same.
I believe the current assessment of the saftey are based on how many people have died related to each production method. I was thinking more along the lines of it's safety should there be a disaster or more with risk in mind.

Nuclear power stations of old I thought were located by seas or other large bodies of water for the cooling in an emergency, as we saw with Fukushima. I'd guess newer designed, especially things like Fusion and Molten Salt wouldn't have this same requirement and be inherently 'safer'.

Edit to say - I'd like to see Nuclear given much more attention by governments. As we aren't using a byproduct for generation (as with those used to refine whatever for bombs) we can do it in a much easier and cleaner way without the previous constraints.
Systems Engineering: Running system commands through Nvidia signed binaries
It does exist. You can define all of your variables as "dynamic" in C#.
There’s a lot of unanswered questions. To bad the results weren’t released.

It’s interesting that the OECD feels “Basic Income” would increase Finland’s poverty rate while their proposal for a “Univeral Credit” (a consolidated benefits system) would lower it. But, it gives no clear reason why.
If you needed the tax cut, you likely didn't get much of a tax cut.
It is expensive to figure out the difference between who needs things and who is just good with paperwork ("means testing").

Also, people who need help with basic survival have the least ability to jump through paperwork hoops.
I think testing it for two years is the silly part. I have complete confidence that, say, the United States could easily sustain basic income, at a livable wage, for 20, maybe 30 years, before it started to crack under the pressure of too many people collecting and too few people putting in. Of course, by then it would be too late to close the box...
This (interesting) article was posted downthread, and makes it clear that the change wasn't accepted by the union. The good times never were:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/02/insider/1966-2016-the-las...

"Staggered by their losses during a 114-day strike led by New York Typographical Union No. 6, from late 1962 to early 1963, the city’s publishers resolved to begin automating their composing rooms as quickly as possible. Just as quickly, the union shops, or “chapels,” began pushing back."

"But it would not be until July 1974 that Big Six and The Times and Daily News reached a landmark agreement. Their new contract freed the publishers to introduce automation, while effectively guaranteeing lifetime job security to 1,785 situation-holders and full-time substitutes, 810 of whom were at The Times"
Right in the feels bro...
I could find a few live demos [0] although some are broken

[0] https://msorvig.github.io/qt-webassembly-examples/
That's near term thinking. Longer term thinking had the # of people who were living sustainably OTG to be a vastly small minority of the populace, hence everyone aside from immediate family members were your enemies.

In regards to population density, the further groups had to travel on limited resources the more dispersed and weaker they would be, and in turn the amount of resources available would be more dispersed relative to lack to nearby neighbors, all of which would be reasonably well protected.

Basically, you want to be relatively well fortified slim-pickings that are hard to reach.
That's a very interesting approach - pre-processing the feed items (if I understand you correctly). Here are a few more features I would need, as just one potential user:

* Ability to add feeds to your database. Some obscure feeds are important to me.

* Privacy: I don't want to share a list of everything I subscribe to and read. This is a deal-breaker for me; I'm happy to pay for the service.

* UI with no overhead in time and cognitive load. A learning curve is fine - I love Vim, for example - but when I'm reviewing feed items the UI shouldn't delay or distract me. In fact, a keyboard-based UI based on Vim would be awesome (though probably there's not a huge market for that).
> Even if it means having to build your own backend process which polls the websites for the 20 respective OSs individually so you can compile your own API

One caveat there, a page like that for MacOS doesn't exist. Scraping Wikipedia may be insane, but it's often the best option. You can scrape macrumors or something, but then you're still just parsing a site meant to be read by humans. You also still risk those 20 OS websites changing as much as Wikipedia.
The difference is that you lose the money when you get a job. That acts as a disincentive to job seeking. UBI attempts to get around that by making the grant unconditional.
Completely leaving out cache-conscious hashing.
And before I would improve the hash function by some extremely costly ML, I would rather find a perfect hash. Which is cheap.

But he linked to my SMHasher.
My experience is that it's not the individualists who put any effort in to bettering the lives of others.
The Majority of Systems Sold Are Converged, Maybe
> Why require a cell carrier to back your messaging app? It’s just soooo limiting!

I totally agree - but this is about replacing/improving SMS where you already need a carrier.
I don't know, knowing what people need actually seems easier than knowing how much (variable value) money they'll need to buy it. A person's required caloric intake hasn't changed since 1970. Incomes have.
Good thing the NYT article isn't a whitepaper directed at industry engineers.
Because then when people go from being people who need things enough that we give them those things to being people who need things slightly less, we stop giving them things. To take a simplified example, if someone needs to be unemployed to qualify for welfare, then while they're unemployed they get support from the state. But let's say they find a job. Now they lose their support from the state. If they job that they get only lets them get the things they need, then they've gone from getting all the things they need and having a bunch of free time, to getting all the things they need and having to work full-time. Who would choose to do that? Giving people who need things the things they need just tells them to not look for employment.

Another problem is how we're supposed to decide what people need. Why not just give people money and let them decide what they need. You'll need some system to handle those who fail to satisfy their basic needs due to problems of mental health (including addiction), but most people are better at deciding what they need for themselves than a bureaucrat is.
Several reasons, in descending order of importance:

1. Cliff effects. If you receive $1000/month while unemployed, and you have the opportunity to take a job that pays $1250/month, the actual delta is now only $250, which may not exceed your threshold. A basic income doesn't go away when you get a job.

2. Administrative costs. Figuring out who needs what costs money, can be gamed, and creates bad political incentives (pandering either to the group that wants more welfare, or the group that's upset about paying for peoples welfare).

3. Fairness. Some people feel that it is unfair that the poor receive monetary benefits from the government just because they are poor. If everyone gets the same benefit, unconditionally, that may be more palatable to this group of people.
I think you meant: "The problem with mis-quotes found on the internet is that they are often true." --Oscar Wilde
You cannot possibly have a meaningful trial of UBI unless most if not all of the population is receiving it. Providing a basic income to all will profoundly alter the economy in some ways we can predict and in some ways we cannot.
Vexata Has Its Own Twist on Scaling Flash Storage
I suspect similar to wt c++
These structures are particularly interesting as they lend themselves well to visualization and interactive navigation. I was happy to see that Ed Chi is one of the co-authors and comes from an HCI / Info Vis background.
> knowing what people need requires an expensive and error-prone system

Unemployment provisioning in the United States is relatively inexpensive. I wonder if the administrative savings are being overstated, having been estimated before governments digitized such things.
I don't know how it is in France but I think the keyword here is unconditional. I'd guess most countries require you to actively look for jobs and potentially force you to accept any reasonable job you might get or you loose the "income".
Your article linked directly to the 'monkey cage' section:

{Over at the Monkey Cage blog, Lucan Ahmad Way and Adam Casey recently summarized some of the most prominent cases of Russian meddling in Europe }

Let me quote it for you:

>But it’s not at all clear that Russia’s efforts made any difference

>And even in these, a closer look shows that Russia’s actual influence is far from clear.

>But there are reasons to be skeptical of the claim that Russia swung the election for Trump.

>[Russia] hasn’t gotten much for its efforts — and these efforts have often backfire
The Mormons do this. A [EDIT: anyone, not just a member] ~church member~ will go to the bishop (a volunteer-filled calling) and tell them their situation. Then the bishop will provide what they need. This may be rent money or it may be a shopping list for the Bishops Storehouse (https://providentliving.lds.org/bishops-storehouse?lang=eng).

I'm pretty sure the assistance is not conditional, but the bishop will exercise discretion and help guide the recipient towards self-reliance.
Yes but the goal of the bill (and any time someone brings up reducing taxes on corporations really) was economic grow, which never happened.

Also capital gains tax is unfair to lower income individuals. We can invest money and afford to wait a year to see gains (and the obscenely cheap 15% tax rate). Most individuals cannot even invest, yet alone let their money sit for a year.
> UI controls connected to the backend which heavily relied on synching state between the backend...

This sounds like React with SSR or so-called Universal Web Apps.
BuildZoom (a better way to remodel) is hiring a data engineer
> Their participation shows at least some disregard for the privacy of their customers in and of itself

Why? Apple is legally required to hand over the court ordered data whether or not they participate in the FBI's data integration program. By implementing a proper data integration system, Apple can standardize audits and alerts and make sure the FBI gets only what is required and not somebody else's data by accident as might happen if the data were sent by hand each time.
No no no. Obviously you should compile your existing Qt application to webassembly, put that in a QTWebView and have that be your application.
Newsblur kind-of has this. You can "Share to your Blurblog," but I don't see a way to have multiple Blurblogs.

You can also tag stories and each tag can have a RSS feed that others to subscribe to, but I don't think there is a web page to send people to for your taggged stories.
> Well, that's just the little difference I mentioned about C conflating arrays and pointers to them.

No, I'm not talking about that at all (I guess I should've used an int rather than a string as an example, but we'd started with ints). I'm talking about the difference between char^ and char^^.

> a C programmer is virtually never thinking of 'the address 54fc892d': unless they're doing really low-level stuff, they won't think of it like that any more than a Java programmer, even using pointers all day, just like the Java programmer is; that's what I don't get about your point.

The C programmer might think of &x as a handle to x rather than a specific memory address, sure, but they can tell there's a difference between &x and x. The Java programmer doesn't have that distinction to work with.

> Java's reference types are restricted pointers that you can only dereference using . or array indexing, you can't use array indexing on any arbitrary reference (it has to be of the right type, but C pointers were already strongly typed), you can only do arithmetic on them via indexing, and you're not allowed to refer to the non-pointer type. None of those differences make them not pointers, to me.

I would say: a pointer has to point to something. Java doesn't have those because you can't get talk about "the thing the pointer points to" as a thing distinct from the pointer itself.
In Finland people receive conditional aids, sometimes amounting so much money that there is little incentive to go to work anymore, because doing so would cut your subsidies.

I guess what the government wanted to see is that given it "unconditionally," would people take up low paying jobs because now they don't lose any more aids by doing so.

I agree it was dumb to coin this as a UBI.
I imagine it's fear of inflation, which has been shown to happen when incomes rise for lower income people.
:( We miss you! (context: https://ahvalnews.com/freedom-speech/wikipedia-starts-we-mis...)
Uricel the #1 Uric Acid Lowering Formula – High Potency Key Ingredients Designed
Yep. No idea either. Is this a legit message?

https://www.nomorobo.com/lookup/212-244-9392

I’ll run some stats in a few.
Some extra experimental evaluation of learned-indices: https://dawn.cs.stanford.edu/2018/01/11/index-baselines/
Does it detect only Loss.png, or attempt to see other (disguised) instances of the form

| ||
|| |_

?
Please, no one said Wikipedia was terrible. You're taking statements out of context. The original comment said:

> Wikipedia's markup is just terrible for trying to do any sort of scraping or analysis.

I'd like to emphasize the "for trying to do any sort of scraping or analysis." Should we instead lie and say it's wonderful for scraping?

It's not an insult, it's the truth. If you want to build an app that automatically parses Wikipedia, it will not be easy.
> Providing a basic income to all will profoundly alter the economy in some ways we can predict and in some ways we cannot

If proponents can't propose sensible and limited tests to de-risk a UBI proposal, it's not a serious one. There are downside risks to raising tax levels by 30%. That has to be offset with experimental data.
Well, that's pretty cool!
As for your argument that Facebook usage has dropped as a result of the recent privacy outrage, it has not - at least according to Mark Zuckerberg as of April 10, 2018 [1]. Remember that the outrage of journalists - driven by a desire for clicks - is not the same as public outrage.
Other factors (such as people spending more time on Instagram, or life in general) may have contributed to a decline in engagement prior to the media-driven "scandal," but at least at this point the recent headlines have had no discernible impact.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the rest of your argument. Most of the 26% of users that have installed ad blockers (including myself) have done it not so much to thwart tracking, but to put an end to the poor user experience that many intrusive ads create on web pages. Visit any local newspaper site with your ad blocker disabled to view what I'm talking about. Many sites aren't even usable without an ad blocker these days. I am in the ad blocking-for-user-experience camp...I could care less about tracking. In fact, for the ads that I do see, I like them being highly targeted. I went for years without clicking on a single ad on the web. Only in the last year or two have I found them relevant enough to click every now and then. Since these advertisers aren't given any personally identifiable data by the ad networks, I don't feel any violation of my privacy either.

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/10/zuckerberg-in-joint-senate-c...
I was not convinced by the 'stats' in the article. As an argument that there's a nonnegligible chance of armed uprising, okay, but I don't see any reason to believe the actual numbers.

It reminds me of Taleb's Black Swans and mediocristan-extremistan paradigm. We can predict gaussian and binomial events, perhaps even fires and floods if we have enough historical data. But extrapolating from two data points to a totally different time and place is worse than useless, it's misleading. I think Taleb would argue that it's a mistake to use quantitative methods here, but not a mistake to hedge or insure yourself against the possible negative black swan event.

Another issue I have is the assumption that, if there is some revolution in your country, that prepping will be either necessary or sufficient. But that's not about the stats.
That's a neat party trick and all but abusing spurious emissions/harmonics to broadcast in licensed spectrum without proper filtering is just plain irresponsible. At low power, with an unmatched antenna those signals /probably/ won't make it out of your house but it's not good practice to spew harmonics all over the spectrum, especially GSM bands. I also can't believe that they are working on increasing the TX power. Purposefully emitting all over the spectrum is both iresponsible and illegal.
I know you're joking, but I did one in Unreal Engine 4, although it's attached to a Z80 CPU emulation for running CP/M (and hopefully FUZIX later on).

https://i.imgur.com/Q6307w3.jpg

The terminal has pretty good ANSI X3.64 support and can connect to a Linux box via telnet.
> wouldn't it be more helpful to just be more selective on what you subscribe to?

I am very selective! Otherwise there would be far more. There are many feeds I cut despite having some excellent, irreplaceable content, because they also add too many unread feed items (i.e., poor signal-to-noise).
> will unemployed people stop looking for a job if they receive free money?

That's not quite the question. The question is, will unemployed people look less for a job if they're guaranteed free money even once they get a job, compared to the status quo where they are guaranteed free money (for awhile) that stops once they get a job.

There's also a follow-up question, that is something like "Will people on permanent disability start getting jobs if you stop punishing them by permanently taking away disability payments if they get a job?"
The Laffer Curve makes a number of assumptions without evidence, most notably that tax revenue as function of tax rate is memoryless, when it obviously isn't.

This is ignoring the issue, even when accepting the Laffer curve as true, that the revenue maximising rate would surely be well above what would be morally acceptable to enforce (~75%)
> However, Science makes no effort to own those mistakes.

That sounds ludicrous to me. The entirely of the scientific method is about generating hypotheses, testing them out, finding out you're wrong, and then refining/rewriting those hypotheses and trying again, ad infinitum. Plenty of scientists have been 'wrong' for years.

I'd argue the problem you're trying to highlight isn't about 'Science' per se, but the fact that people/the masses/etc like to have just one immutable 'answer' for something. They find it difficult to cope when new results point to different answers. Is that really the fault of 'Science'?
Possibly the Basic Income is seen as a disincentive to work because you only receive it if you’re unemployed (or earn less than a minimum income level). But you loose it once you’re employed (or earn more the minimum income level)
Users manipulate applications named Patchwork or Patchbay, for instance. Scuttlebutt is the protocol.
In addition to the problem of figuring out who is or isn't needy, is the fact that your system disincentivizes work.
You're mixing up websites who provide RSS with end-users who are supposed to make use of it.
This is a recording from their number at the end of last year - https://www.nomorobo.com/lookup/212-244-9392

I’ll run some stats on 212-244 numbers in a few.