skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's a good financial decision for a business that is supposed to maximise profit for shareholders or employees or something.

But this example is not about that. First to answer your last question, it's the despotic shithole kind. The point being, the reason is completely arbitrary.

This is about a billionaire who can already buy whatever they want, regardless of said tax break. It won't make them directly happier because it doesn't allow them to buy anything they couldn't otherwise buy.

The point of the example is that given this is the case, we still have a built in biological desire for "fairness" and if this billionaire would realise and observe this desire having no logical basis, they would not fight it. (assume fighting it is not as enjoyable to spend their limited life time as they could be doing something else with the money they already have)

In an analogous situation, five people go to a fancy restaurant and for some reason four of them get 10 plates of food, and one gets 9 plates of food. Assume the restaurant is so generous one person can't possibly eat more than 2 plates anyway.

Why is it easier to imagine simply not making a big deal out of it and enjoying your meal(s), in this situation?

(Especially considering that the meal example is 100x more unfair)
Definitely a top feature of crystal lang. Not having to worry about what the default was to the second positional argument while using the third is satisfying, not to mention that it's basically optional self documenting, too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income

> The expression 'negative income tax' (NIT) is used in roughly the same sense as basic income, sometimes with different connotations in respect of the mechanism, timing or conditionality of payments

potayto, potahto
Occam's razor strikes again.

What's more likely: That Apple has been sneaking a 60% cut under thousands of companies' noses for a decade and they're all super chill with this because of...what, charity? Or that a handful of business owners on Twitter are just not great at interpreting figures?
The history of, well... everything, seems to refute this: very little harm seems to come from digging in your heels even if you are factually wrong.

Most of the time you can lie, distract, and slander your way out of any sticky situation. The same biases that got everyone believing the original lie will take over and your support will be deepened.
>I find it very sad that we live in a society where there appears to be no way of gracefully changing fundamental paradigms.

That is a feature, not a bug.

Society is incredibly complicated and is an intrinsically chaotic system resulting from the beliefs and actions of hundreds of millions of individuals. The system has generations of iterative 'fixes' to problems and with delicate balances negotiated and fought for by various groups across tens or hundred of years. What makes you think you think you can rebuild it better? What makes you think you can account for all the things that the system does well in your new 'paradigm'? We saw with various revolutions (e.g. French, Russia, and Chinese) that when you try to upend even a bad system and rebuild from scratch with a 'new paradigm', it leads to something much much worse.
== I find it very sad that we live in a society where there appears to be no way of gracefully changing fundamental paradigms.==

People who have benefited from this paradigm have most of the power and aren’t going to give it up easily. Typically, things need to get very bad before significant changes are made.
> Working remotely has a very high cost, but it only gets visible in the long term.

True, but it's not clear that cost is higher than working in an office over the long term.

In true internet-discussion fashion, there's lots of absolutes people talk about when discussing remote-first, remote-only, and dynamic working. As ever, the answer is "it depends".

Some people will benefit massively, some people will have to sacrifice massively, and most people will live with less extreme and different pros and cons.

> It is important and it has tons of benefits for the team

Depends entirely on the team. I know "it depends" is always a cop-out, but truthfully, any working system is going to depend massively on the work and the team dynamic. Having any of these grandiose statements on how work should be done fall down almost immediately when trying to extrapolate them to more than an individual company (or even beyond a single team in a company).
> What happens in 20-30 years once the system has been entrenched.

What about a scenario where we get one big step closer to a vision shown in Idiocracy? A world where people don't need to struggle may be great for some self-directed people, but I suspect it will be ultimately terrible for many (even if they won' see it that way).
I agree with all the problems and analysis this article does, but disagree with (most of) the solution. Socialism seems to be the answer to me. Not the top-down, government controlled socialism described by the author, but a form of socialism that still has markets for most things. The only major difference in this solution vs. capitalism is that workers would own the companies they work at, not rich shareholders who have no interest in the well-being of their workers beyond what is necessary to keep productivity up.

UBI may still be a part of the solution, but applying UBI with the current system will be capitalism 2.0, and therefore won't fix anything long-term. It'll simply be a band-aid.
I have the opposite problem from Vim novices. I genuinely cannot exit from Nano.
It's the software ecosystem that has changed, not the definition. Spyware was always included. You can check the history of wikipedia article on malware if you don't believe me.
I use hard/soft naming for persistent/transient (disk/RAM) data in my database, I find that analogy works there too.
This addresses the lack of convenience in existing tooling, but not the core of the problem of FOSS sustainability.

I believe to solve the problem two things must happen:

* Users evaluate how exactly much they benefit from particular software and services, and how much they'd lose in utility if their option of choice disappeared.

* Maintainers find out what matters to real users and offer them good bargains to fund their development roadmap and maintenance service level.

See https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/3735cd917...
I can't see inflation not catching up with whatever UBI provides within couple of years. In the example above, rent will go obviously up, as will prices of products and services. When everybody has more money, I for sure can ask for more for my services/products.

As for dependency, the money won't magically spawn on the table, they will be earned by state on taxes and then paid to citizens/residents. So you depend on who is in power anyway since there will be many rules, exceptions etc. It brings another new universe for corruption, leftist politicians to promise (and deliver) higher payments that next generations will have to pay back and so on...

All these mental games, me, you, everybody... we can't get the full picture of everything mixing up with everything else - economy, mentality of individual and groups, greediness, black swan events, selfishness etc. and come up with a nice simulation how it will end up all joined together. That's just wishful thinking and people pick up side which they prefer, nothing more.
> Pretending it doesn't exist would cause more trouble in the real world than letting it be

I don't agree at all with this point. RDBMS types for example are non-nullable by default. Protobufs, XML and many other exchange formats also have optional types but not null added to every type. If you want better interoperability with programming languages, I think it would be better to go after e.g. IEE754 support.
What do you mean by "heuristics"? What I described was how flann works.

It is not only on those benchmarks but is one of the reasons they exist in the first place, since it instigated a lot of the research into approximate nearest neighbors.
Database of every fatal shooting in the US by a police officer in 2015 and 2016
> You lose the one huge opportunity in adult life for making new relationships - and that's at work, in the office.

Eh, there’s enough anecdata to swing this in either direction.

I have not grown up in the US, so I’ve truly started my social network from scratch when I began my professional career almost two decades ago. The people I’ve become friendly at work make poor friends.

Perhaps my definition of “friend” is different than yours, but I expect to have a trust based relationship with a friend. If I’m having trouble at home or trouble with money, I expect my friend to hear me out, offer a shoulder and maybe give me some advice.

I wouldn’t tell such things to anyone I’m “friendly” with at work. Don’t get me wrong: I like these people, but would I want another team’s manager to know that I’m deeply in debt or fighting bitterly with my spouse? I’d think not. This is America: land of dog eat dog. People will use such information against me without hesitation. Corporate politics are real here.

Remember: when a “friendship” begins in a context of making money, it’s most likely no friendship at all. Surely there’s the opportunity for an occasional exception to slip past this rule, but don’t you go around thinking that it happens as a base case.

Lastly, work isn’t the only place where adults interact. I’ve met lots of people through my kid. School and sports teams and other places where my child is involved: there are human adults there too. Those other parents are better than colleagues in many ways. For one thing, you’re not bound to them in a commercial context, so there’s no incentive to play politics. People are more relaxed because it’s more purely a social environment rather than a business one.

And what happened to meetups? Yes, the pandemic has put a damper on those, but they’ll be back eventually.

Edit: PS: Had I not been working remotely, I’d never have found the time to show up to my kid’s sports practice or school committee meetings. Commute and office shenanigans always eat up that time. That’s just life. One door closes and another opens.
It's not included with a default Void installation, either. It must be a charitable move to encourage greater use of Vim ;)
CodiMD, self-hosted, real-time collaborative markdown notes
U.S. Economy Contracted at Record Rate Last Quarter
This thread shouldn't be about how the guy was a meany poo-poo pants, but about what is it with today's world that makes people fall for the most unbelievable things based on the flimsiest of evidence. People with harsh words speaking the truth are far less worrisome than mobs being suckered by obvious falsehoods based on 10 second video clips, a random tweet, or some random post on HN's.
> If you expect tech companies to keep paying SV salaries after they shift to remote-first, you’re in for a rude surprise.

This isn’t a bad thing though. The world is bigger than SV or London.
It has been discussed to death, but for the sake of argument, let's review these two completely opposing factions, who both agree that UBI doesn't work:

Zero Hedge on why UBI doesn't work: https://safehaven.com/markets/economy/Why-Universal-Basic-In...

The Guardian on why UBI doesn't work: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/06/univer...
You're possibly right. Which doesn't make them less toxic or more frequentable, still.
Regular desktop Excel supports multi user collaboration on workbooks saved in onedrive exactly the same as excel online/Google sheets etc do. You can see what other users are working on and their changes are synced instantly. The only annoyance is when one user changes a filter and it changes for everyone.
"Ctrl+x", "y" or "n" if you need to save, then "Enter"
I'd hope some of the existing static analysis tools can figure out a name was changed faster than my tests!
We currently have a floor (SNAP and food stamps, food banks, and soup kitchens, homeless shelters). UBI is about more than not starving.
Well, here is a link:

https://tinkeredthinking.com/?id=836

Also, I don't think the generated text is plagiarized. But it may have been selected. It's quite scary.
>The first solution is some form of nationalism, where countries enact tariffs and attempt to bring all production back to the country instead of producing it overseas. This will create higher paying jobs for those whose work was previously outsourced to cheaper countries. However, this creates less wealth overall as work is no longer given to where it’s done most efficiently. This breaks the primary component of capitalism.

On the other hand more countries learn to make things more efficiently, instead of relying on the industrial monopoly of a few efficient factory-countries like China, Japan or the US (with which they might even have competing interests).

More efficient product != more efficient society using said product.
I was exposed to this as a teenager some 20 years ago (when it was called StarLogo) and it was one of the main reasons why I got interested in collective behavior and emergence.

I've also been lucky enough to meet some of the people who worked on this during my career...

Truly a great educational tool!
My anecdotal evidence: when I'm working on a VPS or making changes in terminal on my non-windows devices I wouldn't know of any other editor that I could use that is not Nano.

Occasionally I've been taken to vi or vim and I wouldn't know how to cut/save the file. So I appreciate Nano for exposing those actionsore clearly.

Maybe the alternative would be to ask user what editor they want to use whenever they try to edit a file - yet suggest Nano as the default for those who have no experience on any other editor.
This channel makes me feel dumb. It all goes over my head but he is explaining it like he is teaching a group of 10 year olds.
Nah, aligning with the trends is anything but courageous and admirable. Especially if one was very vocal about opposing them. Double especially if the move is out of one's control.
For fucks sake if you are trying to make money, why are you doing open source?

Or, to put it another way, if you are doing open source, why are you so hung up on getting paid for it?
I don't think this allows you to see flagged comments. There is an elite group on HN which are allowed to flag comments and these really will be hidden from everyone.
It’s been too long since I last played around like this. This put a bee under my bonnet and has me wanting to try something similar. It’ll be a disaster no doubt but I’ll learn from my mistakes. Thanks for posting.
Long-Sought Blood Test for Alzheimer’s in Reach
I don't understand what you mean by this. UBI redistributes income - wouldn't it obviously be funded via taxation? USA would be able to afford a much higher UBI than Sierra Leone would because US income is higher. What determines how much UBI can be issued if aggregate income is irrelevant?
This seems way too cool, and I'm not even particularly interested in these kinds of hacking areas, but I'll be sure to follow this project and I'll consider backing.
Tooth tech could help dentists diagnose problems more quickly
> What are the causes of poverty?

Value capture by capitalists. Perverse incentives of means-tested welfare programs. Making choices that are suboptimal from an expected value perspective because they are better from a risk perspective when you can't afford to take risks.

> Prevent them.

UBI prevents or reduces all of those causes.

> What are the barriers to mobility in the job market?

People not having the resources to take time off their current job to retrain, either via formal training program or taking temporary lower-paid work in a different field, among others.

> Alleviate them.

UBI does.
In principle there's no difference between a negative income tax and UBI funded with progressive taxation. Either way, some people pay more than they get, and some people get more than they pay. The net cost as a function of income can look identical for each.
A UBI funded by progressive taxes will always be a negative income tax, net-net.
There would be massive housing price and rent inflation.
Here you go[0]. Basically they're treating it like ad revenue, where each view nets you a certain amount.

[0]: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6306276#YouTube_Re...
Thanks. Well, now I can't make that joke any more!
I think the point is, that these type of articles are like fairy tales. I wouldn't be surprised if Quora would be the first to announce an in-office only policy when the pandemic is over. If it turns out so, then the whole interview and the post is worthless. That's why time and long experience/exposure matters.
On the other hand, just yesterday the headline was "Barclays: We want our people back in the office". <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-53579428>
I don't read that at all:

> In the event that Apple refunds any such price to an End-User, You shall reimburse, or grant Apple a credit for, an amount equal to the price for that Licensed Application. In the event that Apple receives any notice or claim from a payment provider that an End-User has obtained a refund for a Licensed Application, You shall reimburse, or grant Apple a credit for, an amount equal to the price for that Licensed Application. In such cases, Apple will have the right to retain its commission on the sale of that Licensed Application, notwithstanding the refund of the price to the End-User.

"an amount equal to the price for that Licensed Application" sounds like we're on the hook for the full nut.

"In such cases, Apple will have the right to retain its commission on the sale of that Licensed Application, notwithstanding the refund of the price to the End-User." Sounds like they get to keep the 30%, no matter what.

Like I said, it may not be enforceable, in the real world, but that's what the agreement I have, says, verbatim.
Is this... The Conquest of Bread
More importantly (for Google sheets):

Easy to share

No need to backup

Cross platform (works on Linux)
~1000€/mo, regular VAT is 7% for essentials like groceries, 19% for anything else, with a few exceptions.

The average worker's income tax rate is ~40%, but they'll also have to pay for health insurance (included in welfare at a subsidized rate), pensions etc.
Tangential but a project I'd like to see supported more financially is FreeCAD, used in many corporations of all sizes, big and small, like Behringer for instance. It's very powerful and capable but incredibly buggy.
"When will we finally each have our own residential 3D printed nuclear fusion reactor?"

I'll have to scratch the above as one of my passphrases :) .
That does not mean that you should do it for free (which might still be a contractual breach, btw).
>How are you more at the mercy of the rich if you have more money?

Because it's not about mere money, but about power. Getting double the money you get now doesn't make you more powerful than e.g. Jeff Bezos. In some instances it might make you less (e.g. if the cost of living increases because of the extra money circulating, if you start depending on the extra money, etc.)
I'm going to offer users something if they sponsor the project by looking in the GraphQL data. Today there are no simple ways of just asking github: "for how much $ does user X sponsor user Y" and much less per project!

I think that is the only way to get open source revenue! Unfortunately that means you either need a service or some closed source part that guarantees that revenue.
Thanks for your reading!
Victor Borge's solution for any nebulousness around punctuation for Alexa and other voice-activated devices is sheer genius! ...And, so funny and cute! Having seen this little bit reminds me that I have not seen/enjoyed nearly enough Victor Borge material! Thanks for sharing this video!!!
what is (was) "seeker-net"?
The Architect of Tomorrow (2017)
This looks great fun! As a child I loved my red tamogotchi and carried it everywhere. Backed!
Alzheimer's risk factors may be measurable in adolescents and young adults
It is a regulation, but not a prescriptive one. Separating instagram from facebook doesn't, on its own, limit what either site can do, but it limits how much power is concentrated in a single executive board. More importantly, monopolies are incentivized to stay in the public's good graces to avoid being broken up if the threat has teeth. Consider AT&T in the mid 20th century: for fear of getting broken up they generated tons of research at bell labs and allowed others to pursue every technology that wasn't narrowly related to providing telephone service. This arrangement produced a slew of inventions such as the solid state transistor. This came to a halt when AT&T was broken up. Since anti-trust laws were gutted in the 80s and 90s, the telecom monopolies have reformed, but this "keep the people happy so they don't break us up" mentality has not returned with it because there's no serious chance that they will be. Such regulation, and the threat of regulation, does not promote competition, rather it mitigates the negative effects of the lack of competition.

And frankly this whole thing is something of a sideshow. Yes Facebook and Google and these tech giants are monopolies, but if any of them actually go off the deepend its not too hard to switch to an alternative, and the services they provide are hardly life or death, and they don't even stifle innovation much. Indeed many of them have taken the AT&T route and started labs which produce useful opensource developments. If you look at pharmaceuticals, banking, insurance, retail, air-travel, telecommunications, and so forth you'll find gross anti-competitive behavior which holds society back and can cause terrible problems for people. I would argue that most of these issues are a direct result of regulatory capture, but even if you do believe regulation to do more good than harm it should be focused here first. It would be farcical if facebook were to be prescribed how they format their friend data while a pharmaceutical giant gets carte blanche to charge whatever they want for a coronavirus vaccine.
Sounds like Minecraft.
There's nothing wrong with Capitalism 1.0. It's all the 'Crony Capitalism' upgrades that we need to uninstall.

UBI incorrectly assumes its capital that has kept people from producing, when it's skills. And then you're assured people will use UBI to acquire skills, but capital isn't what's preventing people from acquiring skills either.

UBI is, at its core, taking money from people producing and giving it to those who aren't. And that's not a recipe for economic growth.

There's certainly a place for public assistance, but UBI looks an awful lot like putting lipstick on the pig of wealth redistribution.
The number of papers which are refuted, in the sense that a serious error is identified that invalidates the main conclusions of the paper, are a vanishingly small percentage of papers published.

This doesn't mean that a vanishingly small percentage of papers are wrong, only that it is very hard to identify errors because papers usually don't contain enough information to fully reconstruct the results. There are a lot of assumptions of good will in the system.
I don't think there is any good or service for which we have transcended "scarcity".

Even with food production, actually manufacturing food is dirt cheap now, but it's the transportation and logistics that's the hard part — I.e. the scarcity is in the supply chain. The pricing system works remarkably well at addressing this scarcity, provided the buyer has money to pay for things. Per the OP, the diminishing returns might be overcome by fixing the "buyer does not have money to pay for things" constraint.
That doesn't invalidate my statement. I made it contingent on the fact that it is in the agreement. You should take this up with OP.
I wonder which editor the Nano devs use. It would make for an ironic anecdote if any used Vim or Emacs.

Not to say they couldn't edit their own source in their own editor, I'm sure it's quite up to the task. But I am curious to know.