skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That makes me recall that "47% paid no income tax".

If we all go to socialism directly, we will be all equally poor. If we stay with capitalism, a gap between rich and poor is part of the deal. Tax rate is one of the key method to stabilize the society, as the poor is the majority(the 80%, or the 99%) and if they struggle for too long a revolution is for sure to happen.

capitalism + welfare to the disabled(only the disabled please) + tax seems like the best solution still.
You can create an account with gift cards paid in cash, so I wish them good luck.
because tax stamps are only acceptable to apply against some constitutional rights but not others
You are likely wildly underpaid then. I live in a fairly affluent area and right out of college I started above the median income for my city, which was considerably higher than the median income for my county.
What % of discretional income did the top 3% have?
I don't understand what exactly you're arguing. I would appreciate it if you'd explain clearly exactly what you are arguing for or against and how it relates to the comments you're replying to.

Neither I nor Animats ever stated that the war on drugs (or Nazism for that matter) were good things. I think that's entirely clear from even a cursory reading of our comments. In fact, I even stated that you can throw away all the bad stuff but keep one good thing.

It sounds to me like you're arguing that since the war on drugs is bad, we should never do anything affiliated with the war on drugs again. That's silly, and isn't an argument to anything anyone even came close to saying. Computers and cell phones are used in the war on drugs, should we get rid of them too?

Again, you're massively misrepresenting every argument that's been stated in this thread and using it to hold the moral high ground with the easy "Nazis are bad" argument. Of fucking course they are. Maybe read past that? Because it's not edgy. It's not "ends justify the means". It's an actual fucking argument that you're completely ignoring for an easy win.

Shame on you. You should aspire to be better than that.
> If you ask them about what the 1% SHOULD pay they often pick numbers that are actually below what they actually DO pay.

Not if you ask about the percentage of their income and wealth generated yearly that they should pay. Typically someone will say the mega-rich should pay at least the same percentage as them, per individual. And typically the mega-rich do not in fact pay that same percentage or more. Thanks to capital gains and hiding wealth overseas and in corporations, the mega-rich pay way less as a percentage than the middle or lower class do.
Pretty much anyone who wants to play with applications for cryptography. Cryptocurrency stuff immediately comes to mind, but also things like identity management, code signing, communications, password/secret management, voting, and I'm sure there's more.

I think the better way to say it is that if you are just building apps, then you probably don't need this. But, as an example, I was just thinking about hacking together a workflow for writing/deploying signed Javascript, so a Javascript version of this library would have been perfect.
There will never be enough pay for swes to buy homes, because there aren't enough homes for everyone - and so if you pay them more the prices will go up, but in most of SV there isn't that much room for more houses. Don't get me wrong, I'm in favor of more money for swes (I'm a swe!) but I disagree with that point.
I’m reminded of Freeman Dyson’s essay in Edge some time ago. [1] I was struck by this statement:

“The fundamental reason why carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is critically important to biology is that there is so little of it. A field of corn growing in full sunlight in the middle of the day uses up all the carbon dioxide within a meter of the ground in about five minutes.”

[1] https://www.edge.org/conversation/heretical-thoughts-about-s...
Must you ruin it with the “fanbois“ comment?

Are all the people currently watching him repair PCs on YouTube fanbois?
If it's anything like bicycling, and it seems like it should be vaguely comparable, I'm sure the couple of pounds (1-2 kg) makes a noticeable difference in real world use.
“Quotation is a serviceable substitute for wit” - Somerset Maugham
I'm ok with minimalism, but interning strings in a simple array with linear search only scales to ~100 entries. a hash table can be written in 15 lines.
Australian cable (Foxtel) was ad-free until 2000-ish if anyone can remember?
If we have laws that we don't enforce, then we should strike them from the books.
If we are not willing to fund enforcement of a law, we should not pass it.
This will show us what we really value as a society.
SHOW HN: 5 Must Have JSON Stores for Front End Developer
This is highschool math. Lets say you someone earning 70k and someone else 30k. Even with a flat tax rate of 10% the 70k earner pays 70% of the tax.
Remember that national income taxes are but a fraction of total government revenue. It does not include, among other things, consumption taxes (like VAT) which disproportionally affect lower-income people. Nor does it include social security, which has a similar bend.
knowing practically nothing of this, and more specifically the cytoarchitectural makeup of various cortical regions, I am curious with the following questions: (I dont have a mature lexicon for formulating my questions on this subject - so please take an ELI5 perspective on my questions)

1. Does the stimuli for which a region is responsive to dictate the cytoarchitecture found in that region? Or conversely, does the cytoarchitecture dictate the response-nature of that region?

2. Can we find commonality in cytoarchitecture for regions which respond to a certain stimuli across species? (Is 'touch' always handled by the same cytoarchitecture of brains regardless of mice/men/mammal/reptile/etc?

3. re: 2. - Is 'touch' always handled by the same cytoarchitecture in all Humans? What, if any, differences in cytoarchitecture may be found in language handling regions for people who speak Japanese vs French? Or deaf vs hearing?

4. Is the mass of a a particular region along with its cytoarchitecture corollary to ones given intelligence

Lots of questions....
The very publication you’re subscribing to also shows ads to it’s print subscribers. I don’t think ther was ever an implicit promise that subscriptions remove ads, I’m not even sure why you’d expect that from a publication that’s been doing it that way for decades...
I think you and the other replies here either 1) assumed too much about what I was saying or 2) made some mental shortcuts because you've had this conversation before.

I'm not making an argument against taxation here. Ostensibly, the reason we have taxes is that many people would not chip in if they weren't forced (free rider problem). It's hard to imagine that anyone would sign up for a SaaS-style military service.

The OP, by their own admission, is not a free rider - they're ready to help! And there are many immediate ways to help in a way that is, empirically, more efficient than taxes that would fund public institutions in the United States. The other great thing about that approach, aside from speed and efficiency, is that there's no long, drawn-out gridlock associated with getting your money into the system. Year-long political fights that result in maybe a .5% increase in a band of income tax is...let's call it a process.

To wrap up/sum up, people that want to give can make better spending decisions than the government generally has shown. This is not a replacement for taxation since most people do not seem to want to give to charities.
Now, if we can just garner enough user support to get Spotify to remove the 10,000 song limit, that would be awesome.

https://community.spotify.com/t5/Live-Ideas/Your-Music-Incre...
47% of the population doesn’t pay any federal income tax at all (Mitt Romney’s famous quote from the 2012 election). How can they justify demanding the rich “pay their fair share”?
You're forgetting what "easter eggs" are IRL - chocolate eggs hidden in a back yard that people have to look for.

The analogy applies to computing in 2 ways: they're hidden, and it's something desirable. Niether of those ways apply to what Mozilla did. Therefore it wasn't an easter egg and you trying to pretend otherwise is just confusing.
Snaps size computation in the article is wrong according to official documentation
https://docs.snapcraft.io/t/the-snap-directory/2817
Do you think marginal utility factors into fairness?
> This assumes that salary is all that motivates people.

First of all, much of my argument is about the effects of one company paying more for the same work than its competitors.

The company in my example pays its engineers better.

So there's no assumption that these engineers would rather become janitors if it paid the same. There's a much more reasonable assumption that given equivalent work, they'd rather be paid more for it.

As for people flocking to professions with the best pay prospects: that is not only logical, but has been proven many times over, including in our specific profession. I can link you some curves if you haven't seen them already.

Of course, there will always be exceptions. But even then, it's not a reliable way to recruit thousands of hard-working employees.

If engineering paid exactly the same as being a janitor, some of the most brilliant candidates will take a part-time job as a night guards, and spend all their time reading calculus books or playing chess.

P.S. even brilliant people won't willingly go into $200k in debt to attend an elite school for engineering just to be saddled with that debt for the rest of their lives. They'll become night guards and spend their time reading physics textbook for fun.

P.P.S. anecdotal evidence: some of the most brilliant people I know studied physics or pure math in top schools, then switched to tech because it pays.
One thing that is important to understand is that the income tax only makes up about 50% of federal revenue. The next major source of revenue? Payroll tax. Income tax is a progressive tax. Payroll tax is definitely not progressive.

According to this source [1] in Fiscal Year 2016 income tax made 47.3% of federal revenue and payroll tax accounted for 34.1%.

I don't know what the exact numbers are if you take both taxes into account, but I do know that the headline [2] is at best grossly misleading because so many people are going to forget about payroll taxes.

[1] https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-are-sourc...

[2] "Top 3% of U.S. Taxpayers Paid Majority of Income Taxes in 2016"
Do you have any reason to believe judge would flip his previous statements in his sworn testimony?
That’s mostly irrelevant. If you had a trillion dollars in muni bonds and no other income, your federal tax rate would be zero. (And that’s a constitutional thing, too).

The other aspect is long term capital gains rate. Raising that has historically hurt capital formation, which, while it hurts those at the top, creates situations like the late 70’s for the rest of the population.
That seems like suboptimal policy - even to a layman like me. For one, if you're not making money off an asset you're already paying a "tax" in terms of opportunity cost.

Second, it feels unfair - taxes are the price we pay for prospering in, and benefiting from a just society with strong property rights. So if you're not profiting (either investment/business returns or earned income), why should you pay tax?

Third, for something that has a fairly cut-and-dry definition, income is already fudged and mis-reported on so many tax returns. Property valuation is way more subjective; think about things like art, patents, copyrights, real estate without comparable sales, software, trade secrets, brands and trademarks. Correctly and fairly taxing it seems nightmarish, might require far more bureaucracy. It would certainly be more intrusive - the government would need to know every single item of value that you own.

Of course, I'm no expert and maybe there are places that have successfully implemented a property-only tax system that includes non-real property.
> It is naïve to believe that every problem can be treated like this.

Is it really? I can make abstract models of all kinds of things and still get accurate predictions. The movement of single atoms in a gas is very "complex". Still thermodynamics can make precise prediction about pressure, temperature and volume of that gas.

Of course you always have to check if your model is accurate and if the abstraction does not take a very important part of reality in consideration.

How are humanities helping me with that?
I recommend checking out https://bit.ly/2RIt4MF I've purchased multiple xiaomi's from them and their customer service is fantastic, I've always received my phones within 9 days.

Check out the note 6 pro, 4gb ram 64gb storage.

Also look into the /r/xiaomi subreddit as there's a ton of information on compatibility and satisfaction.
Your hypothetical is not the case (as you can see in one of the graphs in the article).

I don't know what "fair share" means exactly, but the 3% in question make far less a % of national income than they pay in income taxes.
I couldn't agree more.

I am Italian and I think it is only Italian bad administration's fault.

All bad choices taken in the last 20 years are showing their effect now.
These statistics are meant to be polarizing... income taxation may need fine tuning here and there, but seems to be generally fine.

That the top 0.0001% pay a smaller tax rate than the top 1% needs to be fixed though.
If you're interested in the current state of Climate Science, I strongly recommend that you read the IPCC reports as a starting point rather than read popular articles. (Starting with FAR 1990, it'll help with seeing how the ideas evolved over time)

https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_d...

Also note that as the AR reports get published, the models consistently get more complicated and improve. It turns out that you can get a fair amount of headway with a simplistic model (CO2 will generally drive the temperature up), but if you want to explain the variation that is observed, it gets more complicated. Given that the amount of warming has been consistently underestimated by the IPCC reports[1], it's fair to say that, for the most part, scientists are aware of the failings of their models and are being cautious in how dangerous the potential outcomes are.

The press, being the press, tends to sensationalize science with "Conflict! Intrigue! Breakthrough! Physicists vs Biologists! SUNDAY! SUNDAY! SUNDAY!". I suspect that these misleading characterizations have a bigger impact on people's perception of Science than the actions of scientists themselves.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_Panel_on_Cli...
How sports teams, athletes and fans reap the rewards of big data
Discussed on HN:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17877616
Sure, it was never my main point to begin with. I agree about the real solution, as I stated elsewhere in this comment thread: build more housing, especially efficient housing.

Still, I find it amusing when people complain about "filthy rich engineers" who can only afford to live in shared apartments with roommates in SF...
The run-down of companies that didn't hire him and name-checking the people involved put me off the whole damn thing before I even got to the stuff at Google. Who does that?
User fees are a much more accurate way to charge heavy infrastructure users their fair share.

The better police, schools, etc. in wealthy communities are funded by the higher property taxes there.
$100kish is not a lot in context though. Products like magic leap have raised hundreds of millions before PMF.
Not sure what you mean by "discretional". Disposable (after-tax) income? Or discretionary income (which depends on where you draw the line for a "basic standard of living)?

In either case, this is irrelevant to the fact that getcrunk made a false claim.
If you flip it around, and ask, how much of your total income is used to pay taxes and fees for federal, state, and local taxes, the ones at the lower end will be paying a much higher percentage of their income.

This is simply false.

One can certainly argue that our tax code should be more progressive than it is, but denying that it is progressive at all is contradicted by the facts.
The NY times recently ran a story about Jared Kushner paying no, or almost no taxes after showing a loss by using some legal, but creative accounting around depreciation. I've heard the same thing about owners of sports teams.

So, when it comes to the 1% it can be hard to measure who's actually in it.
So next time you hear about a tax plan that "benefits the rich", this is why.

It's really hard for a reduction in taxes to benefit the poor because they pay so little in the first place.
True, Don Marquis will lose meaning after reparations.
It can be considered in terms that wealth would be effectively entirely without meaning (whoever was stronger than you could just club you over the head and steal it) without strong organized governments.
What do you mean? I really didn't mean anything nationalistic. All I am trying to explain is how China may have lost the trust narrative and that is it. I really admire China and continue to be impressed by the rapid progress they have achieved in the past decade across a no. of fields. However, now they are at a stage where they can't just make decisions unilaterally for just for their own benefit. If they do, then they start losing trust and face repercussions like they are.

The parent commenter is on a mission explaining how China is a target of some anti-China propaganda. My goal was to showcase some examples where he might be wrong.

I apologize if this came off as nationalistic.
If newspapers could have a woeking business model without advertising I'm sure many would. The theory on the web is that if you take away ads for paid subscribers you'll not be able to ever add them back. Personally a cheaper subscription with an ad-lite, or tracking-free(GDPR opt out style) experience and a full price subscription for no ads seems like a fair deal. Thoughts? Disclosure: I work at a comscore 50 publisher. We are currently ad only and designing a subscription product so feedback is very welcome and timely.
The trick isn't getting them to pay the majority of income tax, the trick nobody has succeeded at (but desperately want to) is to get them not to want a proportionally larger say in the government for that money.

IE people want rich folks to simultaneously pay most of the money the government is getting from income taxes but also

1. Not get a larger say automatically

2. Not spend a lot of money on politics to try to get that larger say.

Regardless of whether one thinks these are good goals, neither is really happening right now, nor has it ever really happened (at least in the US).

(and the position that you just have to take away enough of their money through taxes that they can't afford to do that is clearly silly in a variety of ways. About the only thing it shows is that you can't scale your government effectively)
I've been using it since beta, and I've seen it once.

After three years and 48 pages of community feedback, technology finally advanced far enough to implement the incredibly complex feature of preventing duplicate songs in a playlist:
https://community.spotify.com/t5/Implemented-Ideas/Way-to-pr...
It's easier for VCs to take advantage of inexperience and ambition. Most suicide bombers are young too.
Inferno: "An extremely fast, React-like JavaScript library for building modern user interfaces"

I thought it was going to be the operating system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inferno_(operating_system)
Those months aren't "off", they're spent doing course prep, professional development, and other admin tasks. And during the school term, teachers spend at least a couple of unpaid hours a day on marking and lesson prep. And their contact time is spent wrangling a large group of immature psychopaths who don't want to be there.

It's not as tough as some teachers make out but it's nowhere near as cruisy as it looks from the outside, either.
I'm sorry but I should've made it clear that it's the few in the Chinese govt that are doing this. Average joe Chinese folks only want to live out happy life like every average joe everywhere else.

So I'm sorry that I came across as "boo China" or any of that sort.

However, I were to be banned for that kind attitude (which I apologized and I clarified), would that same rule apply to folks who are "boo US" or "boo UK"? Because there are many here who are angry at western nation govts for spying on citizens without warrants (and, rightly so)?
> I wouldn't call that "collaboration" --it's one of the three forms of R&D spending I mentioned above ("government as benevolent monopoly").

The difference between government funding and a 'benevolent monopoly' is that in the first case an entity that does not directly benefit financially is providing the funding, while in the second case the entity providing the funding has a financial incentive to do so.

And that's ignoring the fact that they listed the government as one source of funding, the link provided being an example of what they are talking about, not the sole instance. At least according to their comment, some funding for such things also comes from 'scientific charities'.
I'm just happy that D was mentioned. Yay, D! Also, D's metaprogramming is an utter joy, almost lisp-like, without the craziness of C++ templates. Give it a try!

An intro to one ingredient of the magic of D metaprogramming, compile-time function evaluation:

https://tour.dlang.org/tour/en/gems/compile-time-function-ev...

An example of the kind of introspection available in the D stdlib:

https://wiki.dlang.org/Finding_all_Functions_in_a_Module

This one's really cool, a library that lets you build an entire grammar of your choice and evaluate it at compile time:

https://github.com/PhilippeSigaud/Pegged

Nim's metaprogramming seems quite similar, and I sometimes wonder if perhaps it took some inspiration from D.
I think they are in support of the uncommon practice of the wealthy living in those tax havens.
Middle earners are at best holding steady in the US. Inflation doesn't always capture the full picture since inelastic goods (housing, healthcare, education &c.) are taking up a larger fraction of the paycheck.

The top 10% are doing fairly well, the top 1% doing better and the top 0.1% are making out like bandits.

I don't have a good solution, but the current state of affairs is unsustainable.
Next sentence - "the average age of entrepreneurs at the time they founded their companies is 42"
Chinese hypersonic aircraft creates plumes of light during test flight
A Future Where Everything Becomes a Computer Is as Creepy as Feared
The fact the US allows their money to go while they stay in the US is the point of contention.

If rich people want to actually leave then that's fully their right to so, but mysteriously that doesn't happen very much...