skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I just googled "advertising as fraction of gdp" and the two top results are 19% [1] and 1.17% [2], respectively. It's almost as though random pages on the web are not to be trusted.

The OP's argument, to a large extent, would seem to me to hinge on this number, though I'm not sure I can work out the relevant math on my own. (If anyone else can, I would definitely like to see it)

[1] https://www.ana.net/content/show/id/37679

[2] https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/273094/us-adv...
How long were you poor for, and how did you get out? And what was your prior educational history? I think it's awesome that you were able to do so and that you have and had a resilient mindset about it. I don't think everyone in that boat necessarily fares so well. But I'm open to being educated.
I never had to Bing how to quit nano.
There is only one remote job offer on their page.
It's my observation, a hundred times a day, living among a mixture of Asian cultures and traveling to various Asian countries (can I call them Asian countries? They are in Asia, after all) for the last two years, that a lot of these folks work really hard and will not say no to more work. There are lazy people everywhere, but the ones who work will work themselves to death.

I did not say Jerry Yang thinks the same way. I said I imagine he could. It's a thought experiment. Can you imagine what kind of life it must be to think that suffering is the mark of success? Open your mind and think about that. What it must be like. How it must affect your kids. How you must have been affected as a kid. Why, what geopolitical factors created that cultural norm? Think. Think. The point of the comment was to think.
+1 to uninstalling nano

I get stuck in nano like other people get stuck in vim. I definitely prefer vi as the default editor. But I understand that this does not apply to everyone.
MSFT isnt trying to do that, just read the blender article, the link provided says what MSFT uses it for. And I think Blender stands a chance to gain some good AI assisted toolset if that is what they use blender for.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/uploads/prod/2019/0...
Half of their stuff goes over my head. And I have to watch videos multiple times, but very interesting channel indeed.
I agree with all your points, but I'm still optimistic.

The biggest two issues are that anything related to finances is heavily regulated, and that third-party services integrated into repositories/blogs/posts create lot of friction for users. It should come down to 1 button: donate fixed amount immediately. It's easy to press that button few times, or to press the button every time you update to new version. Simple is good.

One way around regulation would be for each online service to have a independent credit system. Like karma, but you can also spend it to reward others. Communities would reward each other for creating content. Independent entities could offer to exchange your GitHub credits to Reddit credits. Those entities could also handle exchange to and from actual money, with credit card fees and necessary financial regulation isolated to just those entities. Let the market regulate itself.
Money is not equal to wealth, money is a device. That's the first and most common mistake in economics.
UBI is a way to reshuffe the cards of modern economy and hope that'll fix some of the current problems. It certainly won't allow everyone to drive a Ferrari.
The lack of offer to rent areas are high rent areas
Where people think they are well educated and well informed. You give us a lot of credit. Most of us are ignorant about a lot of things we have strong opinions on.
>Tell that to the users that don't know what ^ stands for

If you run `nano` it shows a message that you can get help using 'Ctrl-G'. In the second paragraph it tells you what '^' stands for. It will be a problem if you somehow ended in nano unintentionally. Even then someone can figure that it means either 'Alt' or 'Ctrl', that is the modifier keys.

>I just don't understand how this is possible, except if you're doing very basic edits (even in that case...)

Some people prefer or/and find easier to work with a modeless editor.
What about transitive packages? With NPM in particular, I have a feeling that donations would be diluted to the point of being meaningless.
I guess I'm old. GOML!

This doesn't sound like a way for open source projects to get money to me. It sounds like a way to get thousands and thousands of bad developers to spam me to support their tiny open source no effort project. For them to fork someone else's project and ask for money for their fork. etc...

Note, a similar thing already happens on patreon where people ask for support for their piracy activities. They run a blogspot blog with pirated movies/anime/porn and expect you to sign up to support them on patreon for helping you pirate stuff.

Basically the easier you make it collect money from random people the stronger the incentive is for bad actors to try to get some of it. I don't have a solution but in my defense I do sponsor 3 open source projects at $!00 a month each. But I'm sure my money is going to people/teams who are really dedicated to their project and not just one hoping for some coffee money for their tiny thing.
A UBI normally trades away the safety net and social services for a stipend. Perhaps one explanation is the US has partly done away with that net in exchange for a stipend of $0/mo.
The only thing really keeping me on GitHub is stars. I have a fundamental objection to entrusting open source to Microsoft.

If gitlab implemented this feature Id probably move tomorrow.
> You could reduce income inequality while also increasing poverty

So let's think about what it would mean to do that.

In one case you could have some people who are just above the poverty line and if you took a little bit of money from them and gave it to people below the poverty line then the first group could end up below it while the people already below it don't get enough to end up above it. In theory that's "increasing poverty" but only in a strict technical sense which isn't even inconsistent with the result still being a net positive. Also, that wouldn't be possible under plausible rate structures because anybody in the approximate vicinity the poverty line would be receiving more than they pay in taxes and the net payers would be making significantly more than that with no reasonable possibility of falling into poverty as a result.

The other possibility is that the program somehow causes such a dramatic amount of economic damage that more people end up below the poverty line than started there as a result of increased involuntary unemployment etc. But the poverty line in the US is $12,760, whereas the most commonly proposed amount for the UBI is $12,000, so that seems incredibly unlikely -- people would have to be unable to find a job making $760/year, in an environment where employees have greater leverage. And you could preclude the possibility entirely if desired by making the UBI e.g. $13,000, which would just outright directly eliminate poverty.
Thank you so much for that link. I think I got mislead by heise.de into thinking that this issue with Chrome WebView existed.

Since I have had issues in my app with Chrome/Android WebView, I will start experimenting with GeckoView. I didn't know it existed as a component. Thank you so very much!
What's stopping a nation for voting itself more than 0 UBI now?
Swarm was interesting, but it seems that both SwarmKit and "Classic Swarm" are dead[1][2], with no real activity since 2018.
Kubernetes, for better or for worse, has clearly completely won. Not that this article isn't interesting for it's own sake, but it's just something to consider.
1. https://github.com/docker/swarmkit/graphs/contributors 2. https://github.com/docker/classicswarm/graphs/contributors
Well, Starbucks (overpriced garbage coffee) is something like 50 times more expensive than making coffee at home.

If you work in an expensive city, pay $2000 for one room, good luck finding a room for $40.

It is precisely the problem that you cannot opt out of the housing market, at least when you need a calm and safe environment to think.

Even when you don't, it is probably illegal to set up a tent somewhere, and legal camping sites are pretty expensive and horrible, too.
Covid 19 – 80 of the 100 patients had lasting heart damage?
I generally agree, but their solution (fund boring research, publish only in journals with high standard) is in direct contrast to what they stated earlier. It's basically saying yes, we have bad incentives, but we could ignore them. That's not going to happen; shiny new research will attract people and funding. Especially more than "boring" what we found before was indeed a finding-research.

Now, I don't have a good solution either, unfortunately. What might work is that we require replication work for a PhD or have a certain percentage of a journal dedicated to verification. That, combined with some meta-studies to reward people with citations for replication, might work without fully swimming against the current.

It's a hard problem, really.
>“UBI lets all the poor people leave” is not convincing at all.

The value proposition for service workers in high-COL cities like SF is probably already bad. How would UBI make it worse? At least it'd be easier to move away from those areas. Maybe cities would have to pay serivce workers more to make sure they stay.
> UAV compressed hydrogen tank systems with fuel cells in the 800-1600W range

They didn't say how they would be using the hydrogen. I haven't been able to find it again, I did read about an article about a long endurance (days), high flying plane. It was powered by hydrogen. It burnt it. As I recall it was in an ICE, but at 50% efficiency using it as jet engine fuel isn't such a bad idea. It has an energy density of 120 MJ/kg, 3 times as much as normal fuels so it makes sense either way, if you can contain it.

In other news, the country where I live (Australia, 6th largest exporter in 2019) is contemplating exporting hydrogen. Why? Because if renewable power continues on its current price trend it will be cheaper to produce hydrogen than it is to mine the natural gas we currently export. Again, I presume no fancy technology - it will be burnt just like the natural gas is.
I'm not so negative. The double slash provides a significant visual differentiator that a single colon would not. It may "waste" paper but it saves time.
What we have now already is subject to democratic processes. In fact, that is the only reason UBI is even being discussed.
As you said yourself, UBI's increased demand doesn't really help from a "benefit-for-society" point of view, which is the only point of view that matters. We don't encourage people to maximize profits because money is good, we do it because you usually need to create actual value/benefit in order to do so. When something makes sense economically but doesn't benefit society, that's an economic failure.

I have heard about the Bullshit Jobs theory and I find it unconvincing (I admit I haven't read the whole book). The meaningfulness and value of a job is not determined by the laborer - as suggested by the "do you think your job makes a meaningful contribution to the world" surveys he cites - but by the employer.

The value of something has always been determined by other people who want it. It doesn't matter what David Graeber and his unhappy laborers think or say, something isn't bullshit just because they say it is. Many of the examples he mentions (doormen, content curators, PR) are valuable things that people want enough to pay for, yet his opaque judgment deems them "bullshit" simply because he or someone else thinks they're worthless.

History shows us economies that failed because some people thought they could plan them with isolated judgments of what society should value. UBI as a solution for Bullshit Jobs follows in the same tradition by personally judging whole swaths of jobs to have no value, then proposing a plan to get rid of them.
Agreed. Investing the time to learn to use vi properly will pay off hugely in the long run.
How to Fight Against Big Tech’s Power
Idea: In layout place replies horizontally. Then you will see more thoughts. As of now many thoughtful comments are burried.
It can tell you something about hiring practices. The quality of the host of a restaurant probably shouldn't tell you about the staff in the kitchen, but in reality if they made the choice to go cheap in the front the the house they also very likely made the same choice in the back.
What is their growth rate? If it’s flat then I see how the valuation is so low..
The more I think about it the more the UBI system starts to makes sense. Essentially I think taxing the ultra rich could redistribute wealth to the rest of society which would give them more buying power to stimulate the economy. Those that don't want to work can live on a minimum UBI monthly check but they wouldn't be living great which gives them incentive to look for a job so that they can raise their living standards. Even a McDonald's job could taken by someone looking to earn extra cash for whatever goal they have, probably wages would have to rise a bit so encourage people to go work there instead of just living on UBI but that's in general a good thing.
The community didn't own the land, so didn't lose it; It's more accurate to say - the community still has to manage the land (e.g. policing, fire service) so property tax always needs paying, and should be relative to those services.
> Also, there are a number of factors at play, a number of different futures that could have been resulted if there were no slashes just by chaos theory[1]. So, speculating in the hindsight is not fruitful.

This sounds like an argument that one should do whatever, because whatever can result from it.
You "reduce" UBI by increasing income taxes - that way the reduction only affects thos who can afford it.
I have been in a lot of stress lately because of the workplace dynamics. Initially I couldn’t even know if it’s actually work related or if I am going through some kind of health issues. After thorough investigation I kind of realized its mostly the work pressure which is acting on my nerves and causing me to trip. Here is the rough approach I followed to start debugging myself.

Physical: 3 major components...

Sleep: Are you getting the right quantity and quality of sleep.

Exercises: Are you getting enough physical activity? Make sure your routine involves some sort of sport which you are excited about and one which takes you out in nature and sunlight.

Nutrition: Monitor what you are putting in your body and more importantly when. Cook food, real food. Make sure you are taking the necessary supplements like Vitamin D( most are deficient).

Mental:

Meditation: I am still trying to get the hang of it. Hearing a lot of great things and trying to spend at least half an hour in a sit.

Journaling: Game changer for me. https://neilkakkar.com/the-human-log.html

Learning: Last but not the least reading, listening or watching to new and interesting ideas and people.

Spiritual:

This is personal and you need to sit with yourself and analyse what's working and what’s not. Take some time off and listen to yourself. This is always the most tricky one.

Hope this rambling is of some value! Cheers!
The biggest little lies tech CEOs told Congress – and us
You mean "caret". "Carat" is something else: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carat_(mass)
Now that work from home has become much more acceptable, I doubt it.

WFH directly affects the relation between work and place to live. If that doesn't greatly impact rents, neither will UBI.

On the other hand, if it does,
there's not much more to gain for UBI.
Just move to other town? Is that a feasible solution?
I've always been curious about what data structures are used to store spreadsheet data. Are there any online spreadsheets just creating, dropping and altering SQL tables as needed?
I believe this as well, thats why we created: https://inflectioncommunity.com/nation
It should be easier for the poor to get mortgages if the bank knows UBI can be relied on. Landlords will lose some leverage as a result.

If target and walmart, currently competing for business on opposite sides of the same street, both raise their margins on food and clothing in response to the implementation of UBI then they are clearly colluding and I would hope that an enormous antitrust thing would ensue.

But I'm no expert. You may be right.
I'm sure it could, but maybe before building a 4500km undersea cable, we could try and decarbonise the energy grid of Australia itself, currently the number two per capita emitter of CO2 in the world.
Titans of Tech Testify in Their Trust-Me Suits
I cannot help but remember the time when I got lost during scuba diving because my new torch was metallic enough that my compass gave bad direction..
I get that and to be honest I think I'm getting UBI a bit more as well, and it sounding a lot better to me now.
Nano is my dog in the Vim-vs-Emacs holy war.
An open market will always favour the landlord, so you'd end up with more homelessness, or more slum housing and ten-people-to-a-room at the very best.

We've been trying these approaches for centuries now, and they always end the same way. There has never been a "free" market which hasn't vastly increased inequality of opportunity across the population as a whole. Why is it so hard for proponents of "free" markets to accept this fact?

UBI simply highlights that money is a proxy for political power, and there's no way - short of violence - that those with limited power can access personal or political leverage in any system which over-rewards concentrations of power.

UBI will improve nothing, and may make some problems much worse. The real solution is improved public education at all levels, limits to advertising that promotes selfish greed and consumption, regulation of the press to eliminate the deliberate dissemination of obvious fake news, good public healthcare, higher taxation for giant monopolies and their owners, improved regulation to end the financialisation of everything, much improved public infrastructure, stronger unionisation and other forms of collaborative politics, and easier and cheaper access to capital for small business of all kinds.
Lawmakers Lash Out at Big Tech’s Leaders
Prices are set by the government via zoning laws, sky high prices for new land and importing millions of new people like in Europe.

Where those in power comfortably sit in inherited properties and wonder why the plebs does not eat cake.

I believe in the free market, but the housing market is not free.
The Nordic countries do not fund their welfare states from resources, they fund it from general taxation.
> but that system has a massive cost overhead: to determine who qualifies and who doesn't, to support it there's a complete system of lawmaking, administration, monitoring and fraud detection and prosecution (and probably a cottage industry of fraud assistance as well). I have seen some back-of-the-envelope calculations detailing how those costs don't cover the whole cost of UBI, but I don't think I've ever seen a comprehensive overview.

The back of the numbers estimates make it sufficiently obvious that the claim that these costs are a miniscule fraction of the additional cost of a UBI for UBIers arguing otherwise to have never attempted to produced a comprehensive overview. Assessing whether people are looking for work is relatively expensive in terms of administrator time, for example. But the administration system ensures that only 2% of the working age public actually get that benefit, not 100% of the population (or even the 20-30% of working age people who aren't economically active but aren't actively looking for work either). There's a reason nobody's doing studies to understand whether you could cover [most of] the costs of paying a benefit to 100% of the population by removing some of the admin staff that check the eligibility of the 2% currently receiving it, and it's the same reason perpetual motion machines aren't tested.
I think higher education in top colleges

is priced in a similar way.

>I think rent in high-COL cities is more determined by high demand there than landlords' personal assessment of the residents' average incomes.

A landlord doesn't have to personally assess the average income of the residents. The high demand will roughly do the assessment for them.

>With UBI, people would be more free to move away from areas with high rent.

This is something UBI allows, but I'm skeptical whether people will actually do that. Remote work also allows people to do that, but until the virus it hadn't really been considered as a serious option in the vast majority of workplaces.
Some savings are automatic. If a social program targets low income thresholds, and UBI raises some people above that threshold then fewer people draw on it. It costs less.
Universal Basic Stake would be more in tune with the idea of Capitalism 2.0

Instead of everyone being born with nothing (except that provided by their parents), everyone would 'own' a share of the national wealth. This share would provide a UBI, and eventually transition into a retirement fund. The bulk of the capital in the share would be in safe income bearing assets (interest rates will need to go back to ~5% for this), but a potion could be allowed for spending at the discretion of the individual, to cover large purchases such as deposit on a house, or a car. You would be able to pay into your stake if you wanted a better retirement or to save for something.

This would be financed through a sovereign wealth fund, constructed from taxes on natural resource extraction (e.g. Norway), but also heavily progressive wealth taxes (perhaps increasing up to as much as 20% each year on personal wealth above 5MM USD). Such a wealth tax acts to counterbalance the natural accumulation effect of capitalism, i.e. the rich getting richer only because they are rich.

People will see it not as a handout, but as a way of participating in the capitalist economy. If the economy does well, then the stakes will increase. There would be a sense of ownership and (hopefully) a stronger feeling of social responsibility flowing from that connection.

However a UBI/UBS should only come after universal benefits in kind: Healthcare, public transport, professional policing, transparent and democratically accountable governance, education according to ability not ability to pay, high quality housing stock, consumer protection standards, environmental protection standards...
Even if you have 1024 separate processes not sharing much of anything, there are still locks in the kernel running them.

For example, a pair of threads (inside one of those 1024 processes) synchronising with each other will often go through the kernel to do so. In Linux this uses the futex syscall; Windows etc have similar. If to do that the kernel takes a lock that is shared with other processes, even if just for a moment, even if it's hashed on address and memory space, even if it's a spinlock and there's little contention, that lock causes memory traffic between multiple cores and separate processes.

Same for processes that are reading the same files as other processes, or (for example) running in the same directory when doing path lookups. There's a lot of work done in Linux to keep this scalable (RCU), but it's easy to hit scaling barriers that nobody has tested or designed for yet. Once 1024 core CPUs are common, of course the kernel will be optimised for that.
I don't think size over the wire is the concern. The annoyance is URL's in print or read aloud and typed manually.

Browsers have since alleviated this by adding "http://" automatically when you type a domain name.