skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Riddles use technically defensible but deeply unintuitive and counter-common-sense interpretations of words grouped together to reach 'clever' equally-non-commonsensical conclusions. Honestly, if it were an AI coming up with them and not a human, we'd just write them off as errors.
> Since carbon emissions are associated with […] great-tasting food

I feel like that requires some explanation. I’d say emissions are higher for cheap products, especially food.
Are these study's preregistered? It seems like there is so many degrees of freedom the researcher could easily take a stroll through the garden of forking paths.
I'm fairly sure "it's their birthday, so they get a tax break" won't work.
Yes, having a large unconditional "standard tax credit" with no phase out would just be another name for a UBI.

Realistically what you have to do at that point is to use a flatter rate structure instead of a phase-out so that the credit is paid back by the time you get to higher income levels, but that's much better than the existing nonsense where the marginal rate structure goes all over the place from sometimes >90% at low income levels (from phase outs) to ~20% in the middle and then back up to 30+%.

You get a strongly progressive effective rate just from the credit, so at that point you can use something like a 35% fixed marginal rate and simplify everything else too. Interestingly this also means it doesn't even have to be an individual income tax. You could use VAT or charge payroll tax to employers and get the same result without individuals even having to file tax returns anymore.
Photopea.com seems to have matched photoshop UI and runs in the browser. It's not open source but from what I understand it's an one man project which means it's possible for a small dev team to create t an open source photoshop alternative from scratch.
The root of the problem is that open-source donations are made on a per-project basis. To support a project via GitHub Sponsors or OpenCollective, you must create hyet another auto-renewing monthly subscription for each project you want to support.

I don't think the author's description of GitHub Sponsors is exactly correct. Technically, the sponsorship is at the user/organization level, so if you make a donation it goes to the organization/user, which may have MULTIPLE projects going on. This is the way I have set it up for our company Plyint (https://github.com/sponsors/plyint).

Although I would very much like GitHub to implement a pool of organizations/users, which is maybe what the author meant?
If wealth redistribution is wrong, why are you encouraging us to give our money to the richest person in the world?

Wealth is redistributed all the time, and because of an economic system that rewards already being wealthy, most of the redistribution is from the non-rich to the rich. UBI is an attempt to mitigate that imbalance by providing for people's basic needs when the market has failed to. It doesn't solve all problems but it's a start.

I agree with you that GDP isn't a good metric of success to optimize for, though.
Campaign contributions by the staff of Twitter:

[1] https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/individual-contributions/?...
One should not miss Figure 1 of the arXiv preprint, which is, alas, absent from the final PRL.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1909.11090.pdf

It is among the rarest journal-article figures in physics. If I'd been asked to referee the paper, I'd have campaigned hard to keep it in.
I think haggling is a big sign of an immature market. But I’m not sure that really touches on parent’s point that there can be both.

And I’m not sure parent really touches on my point that the bazaar part of amazon is just noise.

It’s worse than unreliable junk. A vendor is showing up and dropping their orange painted lemons onto amazon’s orange display.
A fun way to not be terrified -

"What would happen if the Moon were replaced with an equivalently-massed black hole?"

https://what-if.xkcd.com/129/

Also need one for lava, but looking up quicksand is one of the few that might make it worse for you.
The robots will paper clip everything before then.
> Why give free money to everyone? Clearly a rich person doesn’t need a monthly check from government...

Because then you need to test for means, and that means you have to hire new bureaucracy to conduct those tests, and then pay their benefits and pensions and travel expenses, and then you need to hire additional bureaucracy to address occasional loopholes in your checks, and then 10-20-50-100 years later you're back to square one with massively bloated self-serving bureaucracies conveniently appropriating dollars to save pennies.

That's what drives UBI advocates bonkers about the current benefit programs. For example, food stamps benefits. I say anyone with an SSN should be able to apply for one and get it electronically. It helps farmers, helps food availability, and is generally spent locally. Instead we have layers and layers of bureaucracy ensuring Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates are prevented from receiving SNAP benefits.
You think anyone of any company that employs more than a small handful of people can guarantee that a company policy has never been broken?

I don't see how you can guarantee this without also scrutinizing and monitoring employees to a level that would feel incredibly invasive.
We're working on python web backends and react frontends for a large automotive corporation. The salary is average for our area, but like most we don't advertise with a salary and still don't get much interest. I've had an ad out now for a week and have received < 10 applications.
I would imagine that cases should follow a bell curve - sure, the exceptionally good cases where you feel you saved someone's life are rare, but so are the terrible cases that haunt you at night; and most would fall somewhere in the middle.

That said, I would also wager that the curve can be skewed towards one side or the other depending on the location, timing of your shift, or any other factors.
How is this similar / different to Johnson-Lindenstrauss? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson%E2%80%93Lindenstrauss_...)

The principle seems very similar: find a simpler representation that preserves distance.
Write to your MP. Not that they will do anything - Maybe you'll be luckier than me and wont get a canned response about how they are "working hard to stop this" without taking action.
rich people can buy teslas and green energy. you’re wasting your time thinking this will help poor people. it won’t. it’ll reduce the rich’s consumption but everyone else will still use poor people tech and end up getting carbon taxed. maybe redirect your efforts to something useful.
Theres 2 points here;

> I definitely would choose not to work or work less if that money came free from government.

Is that a bad thing? Say We went from participation rate from ~65% to 40%. That could be good, we stop trying to force people into jobs unnecessarily as we automate + it might encourage dirty jobs like cleaners to be better paid and balance the wage market as people have a way to walk away.

Point 2: Generally I agree that UBI is a bit of a pipe dream for now. I think we'd be better off doing some 'guaranteed job' system where we focus on societal roles that add value but dont compete with free market. Give people a guaranteed 3 day a week job for basic living wage type deal and earlier retirement ages. Use this as a transition point to hopefully automating much of the world and some system of UBI as we slim workforce needs.
I think that statement is backwards.

Are you asserting that the government (and the public) will get more utility (benefit) from the extra 1 dollar on its $2.7 billion budget (increase of .000 000 04 percent), than I would from the extra dollar in my net annual income (on the order of a thousandth of a percent)?

That's a pretty incredible contention.
Pretty hard, have to solve self driving trucks first, there's already just 1 person on a truck operating the remote arm in places where roadside bins work (ie basically anywhere other than the urban core).
The nice thing about a carbon tax is we can stop nitpicking over what qualifies as a significant contribution to the problem.
Ever seen all the kinds of things people put out for the trash, and how dumpsters can be overflowing in various different lots? It won't be easy to automate.
When the carbon tax was introduced in Australia the tax free threshold was increased from $6000 to $18,000 and additional tax benefits were given to low income and welfare recipients. Anybody earning less than $80,000pa at the time were better off under the carbon tax, and anybody earning above that were in a position to make purchases to lower their impact.
Hence why we are here.
I'm curious about those non reputable articles you found.
> Minimum wage law made child labor unprofitable.

Despite minimum wage, there is extensive child labor in agriculture in the US, because there is a gap in child labor law.

Which suggest that minimum wage didn't make child labor obsolete, banning child labor did.
Especially in postsecondary education, which is artificially limited and will absorb some factor of all the additional subsidies it's given.
It isn't discussed because the closest equivalent it can be compared to is communism, which is the last thing any network or studio wants to be seen as advocating regardless of how accurate or realistic or good or bad the depiction may be.
Well I would hope so, considering Pixel phones cost double or triple what Nexus phones did.

I remember when Google bought Revolv and then stabbed all their customers in the back by bricking all their home automation and then graciously offering them a discount on a new Nest home system.

Google would remotely brick pacemakers if they stood to make money off doing so and anyone who thinks they can be relied upon long term is a bloody fool.
Inflation is not flat. When the money currently chasing luxury items like exotic cars or fine art switches to rent, produce and other basic goods their price will rise, it just will.

Real inflation does not require an expansion in money supply because inflation is not flat across all areas of the economy.
I don't see how this is any different from the current group of "unskilled" workers who aren't valued (even if they are "essential"). At least with UBI they can live reasonable lives and create their own meaning, through community or art or activism or religion. Any of which are better outcomes than sacrificing most of their time on bullshit jobs which break their backs and/or their spirits.
> There would be no intermediary, such as GitHub, paying for the transaction fees

It sounds like there would also be no intermediary handling taxes. Each person receiving donations would be liable for dealing with taxes themselves, which could involve having to deal with the tax systems in every country/state in which one of their donors resides.

Unless your plan is to just ignore taxes and hope any tax authority that might want to come after you won't be able to obtain jurisdiction, you really want anything that involves accepting money from all over the world to go through some intermediary that operates in such a way as that intermediary is the merchant of record for the transaction.

There also might be issues with sanctions. If your country has sanctions against country X and you accept donations from someone in country X that might violate your country's laws. An intermediary can handle keeping track of that, making sure you only get donations from places that your country allows.

This could be even worse than the tax issues--at least with the tax issues it is other countries that might be trying to sue and/or prosecute you. With sanctions violations it is your own country, which is usually a lot harder to successful blow off.
> Were these cases people who would otherwise have engaged in some creative endeavour (music, programming, art, tinkering, whatever)?

Exactly. Those who will be driven to work anyways will still work. Jobs that need staff, restaurants, manual labor, etc. will pay more, or figure out how to operate with less staff.
This type of thinking, and the inability to see it even when pointed out, is why we have BLM.
There are expensive and inexpensive ways of approaching accommodation, clothing, food and transportation. The fact that so many things which used to be considered luxuries are now thought of as essentials (and that were once considered sensible but are now considered extreme thriftiness) goes to show that people actually want the frills of a lifestyle where they work hard and can as a result afford luxuries in every area of their lives.
>Or they may eat farm-to-table and shop at local farmers' markets. On the other side, step into any Wal-Mart or dollar store, and almost everything there was manufactured and shipped from Asian continent.

This is my main concern. The reason the gillets jaune were protesting was due to taxes that had an outsized effect on low income and rural earners.
"Even the most hardcore anti-capitalists have to give respect to how the combination of capitalism and technology has worked to lift most of the world out poverty and provided us with the security and comfort only kings enjoyed just a few century’s ago."

wut? "most" of the world? does he mean most of the usa? statistically, most of the world lives in poverty.
This was a waste of time.

A 1 year study produced concrete details that can be investigated. Then the most senior congress people get 2 minutes of sounds bites and no progress is made. It is a farce. There may well be real violations of public trust or illegal activity, but this is not the way to effectively examine those reports.

They don't even let the CEOs talk long enough to commit perjury. It is a dog and pony show for congress and the CEOs.
Charging 30% to competitors that it doesn’t charge to itself isn’t really a problem because of opportunity cost. If an Apple product takes revenue from a competitor that’s paying them 30% then they still have all the costs of running their competing service and make less money from their 30% cut. The margins have to be really good for such a thing to be worthwhile.
you have no sense of math. if you forcefully took back every mansion and giant boat from the rich and sold them at auction for double their value, you wouldn’t even fund the medicare/medicaid budget for more than two years.
Sure, but I think the bone of contention is whether a carbon tax is a viable mechanism for funding UBI.

The reason why a carbon tax works well to efficiently reduce carbon emissions is pretty much the same reason it can't work well to transfer wealth.

EDIT: Another way to understand the relationship is that because consumption increases faster per additional income dollar as you move down the income scale[1], any actual wealth transfer is likely to result in greater carbon emissions.

[1] This paper has some graphs: https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/wp-content/uploads/2...
There’s also RxDB which builds on top of PouchDb: it has a graphql plugin so you can have real-time data as well. I’m using it experimentally with Hasura+Postgres. The only drawback is that I can’t figure out a UI that indicates which documents are saved offline for a user.
In the article they use the prelude to train it to respond to nonsensical questions with "yo be real", so I guess if you could adequately mimic Chris Tucker's style of response and the sorts of questions that would make him impatient, it should work?
That part seemed more speculative.

I imagine most likely this is being used as an alternative hypothesis if we search for the undiscovered planet and fail to find it. Simultaneously if we become more certain about the observed gravitational effects, the probability of a PBH would increase.
Assume that happens, and that no effective countermeasures are derived. How are poor families worse off for having the option in the first place? It's not like Booker is proposing to take the money from some other service offered to the poor: Booker proposed paying for it by increasing taxes on capital gains, which poor people weren't paying to begin with.
What's important to know is that the seller chooses if they want their inventory comingled or not. And that comingling allows for faster delivery.

That said, I would really like it if it could be a choice given to the buyer as well. Or at least make it clear when you're buying and getting something comingled.
There’s more truth to your first statement than anything else that exists.
The more significant difference is that you lose unemployment benefits when you start working again, whereas with UBI there's no disincentive to work.
I prefer Yanis Varoufakis' idea of a universal basic dividend. A percentage of all shares should go into a public equity trust like a wealth fund for society, the dividends from which are paid as basic income.
Fascinating. And kind of funny. I wonder, are there any YouTubers who walk through the math in papers like this? Asking because it seems really interesting and sometimes it's fun to learn bits here and there from applied math rather than always working up from the fundamentals.
Unrelated, but I feel strangely sad reading this, agreeing, then going...

Wait, that’s a very arbitrary and general statement. Is this a bot?

(I know (hope, given I’ve read your comments before... :) you’re not, but still, a sign of the times I guess...)
Yeah, this is currently a big problem with property tax in some places and a land value tax would only make it worse. I think it would accelerate the move to big multi-story apartment buildings that can get more revenue per sq.ft of land. Which I guess if you're worried about the housing crisis could be a good thing.
As an absolute percentage, yeah, it's not that big. But considering how frequently most people fly vs drive, it's a decent chunk.

Regardless, thanks for the references. I didn't know actual figures for air travel, it's a bit less than I thought.
child labor still exists, literally kids operating sewing and mining machines
Is there any proof that automation will destroy jobs? Citation needed.
Harvard Univ Professor Charged with Tax Offenses and Lying about Chinese Ties
If the web really did take over you don’t think platforms would be any less restrictive when they control the main browser on their respective platforms?
It could on a reasonably good glass tty over a low-latency connection, just not on an old one over a high-latency connection.
"emotional actors"
I was mistaken in my original (now deleted) tweet and have been corrected by a few people

Apple does not keep the 30% commission on a refund the refund happens as you’d expect. I don’t know where I got the idea that it worked the way I thought it did

This was a follow-up by the tweet's author.

https://twitter.com/twolivesleft/status/1288625617873694721?...
I personally know someone who gave a two week notice at Amazon and had his manager ask him to stay out the quarter. It's all about relationships and reputation. People with a proven track record of quality work and strong ethics are valued there.
I don’t really have a problem with this (as you mention, stores have had their own brands forever), but you may be interested to know that not all Amazon brands are clearly marked and there are a lot of them: https://qz.com/1039381/amazon-owns-a-whole-collection-of-sec...
> I’m a huge fan of capitalism and free trade, as laid out in Adam Smith’s genre defining book The Wealth of Nations.

> Strangely, even though we’re in a golden age of hyper-efficient production and trade, the overall GDP growth of the USA is slowing.

We don't have pure capitalism and we certainly don't have free trade, couldn't those be valid reasons why GDP growth has been slowing? Rules, regulations, and laws have only been increasing and corporatism is winning. It's a memory leak. This isn't the result of capitalism, this is the result of businesses colluding with government to create coercive monopolies. Natural monopolies don't exist in this country, they are all spawned out of the nation states' monopoly on force.

I also disagree with the premise that wealth inequality is necessarily bad. If everyone's quality of life is increasing over time, that seems good for everyone, right? It's a terrible metric to base economic policies on.

Having said all that, I'm a reasonable person. If we replaced the current welfare programs with UBI, I'd be excited to see that experiment play out. I think eventually the cost of basics (in particular rentals) will increase to meet the new income floor, and people will inevitably say "UBI doesn't meet basic needs anymore, we must increase it." Haven't we heard this before? We read about it all the time with minimum wages. After reading the arguments for it (which seem bountiful and raises red flags for me), I'm ultimately skeptical, but I'd be willing to give it a shot and I think it is better than the systems we have in place today.

Things that are too good to be true usually are.
You're correct about how the outputs work, but the practical reality is that currents end up limited enough by the FET's on resistance that nothing gets damaged. Yes, it's outside the spec, but exceeding the AMRs doesn't mean your chip dies. I had a 5V microcontroller survive being put across 12V once. And I had a Threadripper motherboard die by shorting out its CPU Vcore FET, which would send the PSU's 12V rail into the CPU, and the CPU survived (PSU shut down before any damage was done).

If shorting a pin to the opposite rail destroyed your IC people would be destroying Arduinos left and right with trivial mistakes while experimenting, and they wouldn't be able to get away with having no I/O protection :-). You usually don't get >100mA out of a single IO line short - maybe 50mA. Having a bunch of paralleled bus contention can cause more damage (not to the drivers, but to power routing and other shared resources), but at that point you should be hitting PSU current protection limits (which are more important for overall design robustness).

Console modchips of olde (PS1/2/GameCube/etc) worked by overdriving bus lines with a stronger driver (often multiple lines ganged together). No consoles were hurt by this.

I did part of the design and board layout for Glasgow revC, an FPGA-based USB interface board, and I stress tested our IO level shifter chips for short circuit robustness. Leaving the outputs shorted hard to the opposite rail overnight did no apparent harm (bypassing the protection resistors), other than getting the chip nice and toasty for the duration of the test.

Edit: just remembered a personal anecdote. I only recall ever killing an output driver with a short, on a typical microcontroller, once in my life (could've been a fluke). And I've done many stupid experiments. Shorting outputs briefly for experimentation or unorthodox workarounds is solidly in the "no big deal" category in my mind, and it's practically never been a problem. E.g. "I don't know which side is TX and RX in this UART, so I'll just try both" "This device is bricked so let me short out the flash to force it to fall back to bootloader mode", etc.
This hasn't been true for multiple decades at this point. SIFT was originally predicated on best bin first searching through kd-trees to find aproximate nearest neighbors for vectors with over 4000 dimensions.

If you prioritize the bins you search by distance, you are are more likely to find closer points sooner. If you are finding a set number of closest points, then you will have a minimum distance to be included in the point set sooner. If that minimum distance is shorter than the distance to a bin, you can skip it.
Forever?

Surely sooner or later as we run out of resources (and destroy the planet enough) we have to move away from the idea of growth and toward sustainability. These are mutually exclusive goals.
Many more people likely became aware of it thanks to homages in La Mulana.
You have a good point. If existing aid programs ceased to exist, then the tax rate probably wouldn't need to change at all.