skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The coloring agent idea is neat, but seems infeasible to me. You'd end up staining documents, clothes, and whatever else, plus you'd have to dedicate custodial staff to reapply it.
They’re not trying to hide it, everyone in Belarus and all over the world know it’s not a real election. By going with a closer split you’d be showing weakness, as if you have to hide it you’re not really in control.
Most merchants bump their prices to account for the fees, without any discounts for paying in cash. This means that the ~25% of US households that are unbanked or underbanked are paying a 2-3% "tax" without any benefit -- further harming the poorest population to the benefit of those with good finances & credit.
To be fair, the presidential election thing progressives are whining is rigged is that their candidate lost despite getting 3 million more votes than someone they didn't like.

That it happened twice in 3 presidents is icing on the "it's rigged" cake.
Well after all these years they were soley sitting on Google's contract money and are yet to create a very competitive and revenue-generating product that users will pay for. Firefox VPN is essentially Mullvad with Firefox branding so there is no comparison with either of them.

Most of all of the products Mozilla has is either free (mostly) or not competitive enough to the point of redundancy. For the typical end-user (who really doesn't see open-source as an advantage) Pocket can be replaced with Chrome Bookmarks and ultimately, Firefox can be replaced with Chrome.
I do, as do most people. When you hear talk about subsistence farmers who live on less than a dollar a day and don't have running water, that's what the "few acres of land to be self sufficient on" lifestyle looks like in the absence of a strong market economy.
the American system of employment is demonstrably broken; Mozilla in SF is bound by hundreds of contradictory and expensive rules for employment, originally designed to make safety and stability for workers, that are now spaghetti-code and are routinely worked around using international channels
> If Mozilla had adopted D instead of developing Rust the world would have kept on turning and they'd be further along compared to where they are today.

D has the complexity of C++ with major drawbacks, (the stdlib was tightly tied to GC for example).

Just look at D's marketshare and its overall time on the market.

If you argument is that literally any Turing-complete language would somehow do then bravo for missing the point of basically every language besides asm.
Talking Resilience with Evan Sharp of Pinterest
Not really. Airbnb has an infinitely more solid business model than Uber, and even Uber went IPO.
Rather than just downvoting, I'll offer another perspective. Sowell's statement is vacuous, just a bumpersticker retort. Rather than engaging in the issue, it simply questions the motives of the opposite party and in fact dismisses their motives as one of the seven deadly sins.

I realize this is twitter and not a well developed thesis, but that just means twitter is a terrible platform to meaningfully engage in nuanced topics. It is a great platform for shallow thinking and insults, though, akin to the excuse, "I have a wonderful proof of this but the margin it too small to contain it."
> Imbalance is not a zero-sum issue.

Yes, totally support this argument.

Most people advocating for rich people's existence is that they can more effectively utilize the resources and power. But they never tough upon the imbalance itself.

The imbalance has 2 aspects to it:
* Utility: Does imbalance proclaims efficiency.
* Morality: Is it moral to have imbalance.

Of ucz, both aspects need themselves to be balanced. I.e., we do encourage people with the obvious talent to enjoy imbalanced power and fortune. Like the young Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, and now Elon Musk. It is more utilitarian, and more moral to have these people enjoying more imbalanced power and fortune, then the older Steve, Bill, and Elon; in the sense, that when they are less talent, they should be pushed to be less entitled, and prefer a more moral position in the imbalance.

I mean, what Bill Gates does is not particularly more brilliant than a government directed research organization. Then why do we allow such a large fortune sit there without being spent for the people, after all, the fortunate was not earned by Bill the individual, it's a symbol of attribution through the capitalism system.
Fogg has some good thoughts on positive behavior change. James Clear, who wrote Tiny Habits, is another good person in this space who writes reasonable stuff.

Self-plug for an overview on research into the habit formation literature that I recently cleaned up. Covers many evidence-backed interventions (of varying quality) for habit formation and removal.

https://mlu.red/52436366310.html
The article wasn't what I expected.

As I read it, his main point is a valid one. If you want change, you have to participate in making that change. That participation is not limited to once every 4 year vote ( in US ), but rather an ongoing participation in society.

There are some valid criticism of this approach ( demoracracy doesn't scale well; it does work well on more local level, but you don't want to have a vote for every little issue ).
> the debate over whether Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation were an agent for good or an agent for helping Bill Gates sleep at night was a huge thing when I was in graduate school.

¿Por qué no los dos?
Was it the anniversary of this tweet?

Aug 7, 2007: My buddy Steve Searer is keeping things rolling over at http://officesnapshots.com/ He is already up to 26 companies!

I think if you had stuck with only "Web 2.0 Startups" your initial audience's interest would have fizzled out eventually. It's brilliant you were able to pivot to an audience with a more professional interest, an endless stream of content, and better advertising opportunities.
This is a great resource. I used it along with another practical tutorial (https://www.thonky.com/qr-code-tutorial/) to complement the official QR code standard when I wrote my own QR code encoder in Common Lisp: https://github.com/mare5x/LispQR
What are some of the implicit assumptions in your view?
Front page: https://l.sr.ht/RfrR.png

Reading an article: https://l.sr.ht/ZSwt.png
No.

It would have been exposed as being a dead end with no backwards compatibility. The GS was essentially a completely different architecture from its predecessors anyway. Compatibility was maintained with the Mega2 chip. Apple wouldn't have been stuck for a couple of years with barely any software on their "flagship" product.

The GS would have killed the Macintosh if they raised the clock speed, gave it some higher video resolution modes, and developed something like the Macintosh Toolbox in ROM for it.
Mercantilism?
Rust has gained so much traction at this point with other major companies (Cloudflare, Microsoft, Dropbox, etc), because of the unique value it offers, that I assume it would have to be picked up if it got dropped by Mozilla.
Likewise, "a rising tide floats all boats" is a lot more convincing when the tide is rising and the boats are floating.
I think what this idea is calling out is that whatever you sent in the email a year ago is probably stale now - it answers the question for that time, but not necessarily for right now, whereas a wiki should have versioning.

Unfortunately once you update the wiki, it also grows stale after that moment, so in someways intractable :)
I don't think it's impossible for elected officials to be liked for 5 or 6 terms. In Germany Merkel is so well liked that most people (>70% according to polls) are actually sad that she doesn't want to run for a 5th term.
You can easily have "a few acres of land to be self-sufficent on". Clearly you don't value that, so you don't have it. If you actually value it, go get it.
They get a fortune from Google and still don't let me customize the controls except by a new API that doesn't take effect in a tab until the document has loaded. They just need to manage what they have better.
Therefore, it's not a real problem that Jeff Bezos owns 10% of Amazon. You wouldn't be any better off if he owned 9% or worse off if he owned 11% instead. It's a wedge issue.
This isn't untrue but I think it's a naive approach. If that money was divided between the governments to spend for their citizen's welfare then they could also invest it to benefit their citizens.

The question (the big one that America is super divided over) is which actor is better at allocating goods for public well-being, a billionaire who has proven (probably) they have good business acumen or the government that (ideally) exists to work for the benefit of the people.

I have my personal opinion but I wanted to neutrally (I hope) highlight that this is the heart of the issue.
The free open source software approach has its own limitations. Developers and companies need to make money to be viable. Software is a class of product; it takes work and resources and simply can’t be all free.

This is going to be a problem going forward. I feel bad seeing developers sometimes begging for donations. Why should software be free?
Wealth is not zero sum, but whether the wealth a worker creates is kept by him or sent to an heir in a dividend check is zero sum.
Actually I suspect there may be a connection between the currency the economy uses to divvy up scarce resources and whether wealth is zero sum. If wealth were tied explicitly to the amount of gold humanity had extracted from the earth then the sum total of both are assumed equal. In that case, wealth definitely appears to be zero sum. It could even become negative sum if some quantity of gold is being made useless or unavailable. If currency is not tied directly to some hard-finite asset like how ever much gold has been pulled out of the ground then maybe wealth can be positive sum.
> Immediately, the author assumes that everyone is playing a zero-sum game

Is it not true that when the books are balanced at the end of a period, wealth resulting from economic activity within the period ends up distributed among the public such that not every person does not end up with an identical amount? If so, is it possible to state this without simultaneously believing that economics is a zero-sum game?
Could they be running out of cash, and given COVID-19 is not dying down in the U.S., could the investors are forcing a cash-out? In this case most of the employees will be wiped out right?
> This system is a failure for everyone that isn't in the 1%

Honest question: compared to what?
This invites a couple of questions. One, do the spammers care that the content is actually visible? Two, does spam come from more accounts or the same accounts?
Here it is in graph form:

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/average-real-gdp-per-capi...
Fiscal stimulus is when the state pays money that it already has (or that it borrows for the purpose) into the private sector so that private entities will have cash and engage in spending.

Monetary stimulus is when the central bank increases the supply of money in the economy to control the value of a unit of currency as measured relative to units of goods and services, which in theory can have similar effects on people's spending behavior.

Either can be done with any degree of fairness or unfairness.
And neither necessarily has to be done by the mechanisms through which the world's governments have historically tended to do them.

I agree that I don't want a few unelected central bank officials making decisions about wealth distribution. That doesn't mean that congress can't specify a different mechanism for them to introduce money into the economy.
I don't believe there are israeli domestic flights, but if there are they are insignificant.
Expedia started as a Microsoft division before it was spun off into its own company.
How Big Is New Balance?
Can't think of anything but progressive taxation and redistribution of such taxed money. The power law comes from various positive feedback loops on the market, so it sounds only fair that if you want to clamp it down, you need to inject a strong negative feedback loop into the mix.
TL;DR - https://rescript-lang.org/

Future of BuckleScript and Reason now both called ReScript.
Comments moved to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24121166, which was posted earlier and has more background.

That one is another third-party article. Not sure whether the press release is the best source here. (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...)

Edit: the press release wins (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24124788).
If you say you want it government run after stealing it (lets not mince words here) and aren't using a government run one right now kind of undermines the sincerity of your arguments.
>What's the tangible evidence that the world is a positive-sum game?

LEDs. To take one very specific, simple example, though feel free to substitute in everything from computers to engines. Fundamentally, we have both increased our average energy budget per person and we can accomplish far more of what we want to do for far less energy. Taking the basic general goal of "I wish to have visible photons available to me at a sufficient level for my eyes to work well at arbitrary times and places", compare the total costs and % of resources converted to the goal vs wasted as heat/losses/externalities of say torches to oil/gas lamps to electric arc to early incandescent to later incandescent to halogen to fluorescent to LEDs. We can now do with single watts for tens of thousands of hours and pennies of silicon/impurities what would once have taken dozens to hundreds of watts to kilowatts and lasting just hundreds of hours, tens of hours, or even mere minutes.

Increasing abundance and efficiency for human goals is the definition of increasing overall wealth. Even given imbalance in ultimate distribution, the pie has absolutely grown larger. Massively humongously wildly larger. Positive spirals thankfully abound, such as better nutrition and knowledge of infectious disease at young ages yielding better outcomes and life expectancies for the rest of their lives. None of this is to downplay the importance of keeping inequality from going too far, but to even suggest it's a zero-sum game, that world economics are actually the same right now as they were a hundred or a thousand years ago, is frankly ludicrous.

Edit:

>E.g., a product costs $X, owners get too large of a % of that compared to employees.

That makes absolutely no sense as a standard or line of reasoning. The total sum has nothing inherently to do with how its divided, are you sure you're clear on definitions here? When something is zero-sum that means that for anyone to gain a larger percentage, someone else must necessarily lose a smaller percentage. But when the total sum itself is increasing then somebody could be gaining more and everyone else could also be gaining more, just not as much more as if it were equally split.

Also, what is "too large of a %" and how do you know? And if the product costs $X, but previously other competing products cost 7*$X, and as a result the company is many times the size it would be otherwise, and in turn the % the employees get is still an absolute amount far larger then it would have been anywhere else, now what? Rather then thinking about fuzzy "proper %" it seems better to investigate power imbalances, human limit edge cases, information asymmetry, cost externalization, etc., that affect the equilibrium of the system. Of which there are many!
The stock market did not go up because of the increase in people's incomes. It went up because of several trillion dollars worth of cash injections from the Federal Bank. For everyone else, unemployment has pushed to 10% on the low end and I'll repeat the part about 40 million people looking at evictions by the end of the year.

And "rich people usually get rich through capital markets" is just a fancy of way of saying they have ownership of everything and profit off of other peoples's labor
While this is all true, comparing the turnover in the tech industry with other sectors - even high-paying sectors - our industry does seem a bit crazy, so it's worth figuring out why this is happening and what we could do to fix it.
Yes it is wishful thinking... January will be worse then now if covid is similar to historical pandemics.
The time I told my CEO I lacked motivation
Always struck me that this nonprofit has some of the most beaucoup waterfront real estate down at EMB/Harrison. And that it shared the building with one of its partners, Google.

Is that scaled down / restructured too?
A thread of the best places to post your startup
Not a zero-sum game, the pie is growing etc are some of the reasons we tell ourselves so that we (the middle class knowledger workers) can sleep at night. I bought 'Winners take all' last year, but finally started reading it recently and finished more than 50%. I would like the commenters to read an author's work before criticizing it, otherwise you are the one who is making assumptions.
Both of the studios I frequent have moved all classes to online. In the cases of the classes I've gone to the number of people in class if now larger, no longer being limited to the size of the building or location of the student.
Socialism with Chinese characteristics?
The maximum surface temperature on Ceres is -118C. How would you get to -20C without geological heating?
I appreciate the fixes to what I said. I mistakenly thought Microsoft offered a more generous RSU package.

What I wanted to emphasize, mostly, was that there exists a tier of companies that offer stratospheric compensation primarily through equity, but there are many more people working at other publicly-traded companies that offer RSUs that are worth closer to what you might consider to be a yearly bonus.
Yeah, I couldn't agree more. RSS is flawed in many ways (really difficult to work with sometimes hand-written XML), but I love how decentralized it is.

Awesome with your work! Keep fighting the good fight :)
Compared to the wealthy who have enriched themselves
Website to Learn about the Rise and Fall of Companies
AFAIK non-profits can receive donations bound to a specific purpose - they just don't like the accounting headache?
Ironically, Google supports the Mozilla project

https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/01/22/so-why-i...

Which means as Mozilla dries up, its only support is "Google."

Meaning, soon to you, a chromium firefox based browser no different as to Edge, Brave or whatever else is out there.

tl;dr Mozilla is propped up by Google. Google is no bueno.
You're right. Perhaps Apple should start with a box then build the iPhone to fit inside.
> How's that the fault of the wealthy?

It is the fault of leadership, but the US leaders in particular seem to be an extremely wealthy bunch (or at least they claim to be).
It seems to be the key attribute now.
Is there any evidence anywhere that Mozilla's decline is caused by labor regulation?
bias is not bad
Money isn't infinite, but billionaires don't have a billion dollars of money. They have a billion dollars of assets, and it's very possible to create new assets without creating new money. When people say e.g. Zuckerberg is worth $100 billion, that doesn't mean $100 billion of money has flowed to him or is locked up in his vaults.
On the other hand, money is one of the most plentiful, elements of the economy.

"There are 10^11 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers."
- Richard Feynman

Money is also the most fungible element of the economy. Given monetary policy, particularly the Fed's policies of the last decade or so, it is also not good faith to assume money as a constant.
I know there are a whole host of issues, racial inequality, climate change, pollution, etc, which I consider to be 'one percenter problems' now. I'm just trying to save enough to retire one day and keep a roof over my family. Fixing global issues is a luxury. Maslow's hierarchy and all that...
There are a wide range of policy tools that the U.S. failed to use with regards to Kashmir and the oppression of Muslims in India, up to and including sanctions. You can disagree on the efficacy of any particular policy tool, but something with economic and/or diplomatic consequences must be done. Academic research has shown that even the threat of sanctions can help. I'm not holding my breath that Trump will do anything to improve the situation. He has a very warm relationship with Modi.

We should not wait for the arc of history to prove strongmen wrong. We owe it to the oppressed peoples of the world to advocate for non-militaristic measures which help reduce or eliminate their oppression. Some self-doubt is healthy, and the West has done a lot of bad things in the past. We can't let that self-doubt paralyze our foreign policy though. The world would devolve into a worse place. Obama misused MLK's belief on the arc of history (bending towards justice) to justify what is increasingly looking like a terrible foreign policy regime (hands off on Russia --->Syrian genocide--->refugees flooding Europe--->alt-right backlash and Brexit--->Crimea --->alt-right worldwide--->widespread election manipulation--->shaky NATO and EU--->hyperventilating Eastern Europe--->emboldened strongmen--->??? But wait, there's more! Do the claims that sanctions can cause WWIII seem hollow now? Is it becoming clear to everyone that Russian imperialism and Iranian imperialism need just as much scrutiny and backlash as Western imperialism?).

On that note, sanctions on Belarus are very limited. Here's the thing with sanctions: sanctions on one bad actor can be dodged if there are other, larger bad actors who aren't being put in their place. However, systematic sanctions, against all major human rights abusers, would be really hard to dodge. That is especially if we give them a well-defined route out of the sanctions regime, where sanctions are gradually relaxed until the abuses are stopped.

“A man dies when he refuses to stand up for that which is right. A man dies when he refuses to stand up for justice. A man dies when he refuses to take a stand for that which is true.” — Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Do GPS sats stop transmiting while over adversary tertitory? No. But GPS is a military project.
> Have you considered living in a place that doesn't require you to do "gig work" on top of your regular job in order eat? Isn't that the world we want?

I love this line because raising uber prices to meet the demands of Big Government will be cost prohibitive for most people. That means, a) uber drives get less than before, and b) fewer people will take uber, and c) the people that do will have to pay more for it.

So... you've just increased the cost of living for everyone, making it harder to live on a regular job.
Wealth leads to power. Power is zero sum.
The labour theory of value has been proved irrelevant for 200 years now. Quackery of that nature should not be promoted in this day and age.
I read Giridharadas' book, and I found it to be pretty narrowly focused on hypocrisy of the wealthy class. Sure, there is a lot of undeserved back patting about how much good people are really doing in the world, but that's probably always been the case. I would have preferred a serious treatment of the ways in which the world has been improved through the mass reduction of deadly infectious disease, famine, and extreme poverty. Steven Pinker's Enlightenment Now explores these topics. To read Giridharadas, you might think that all social ills are caused by the wealthy in society, which made it harder for me to take his side on everything.

Still, his main point stands that elites should feel bad about their concentrations of power and that the link between money and political power should be weakened.
It is much worse than this; the elite works to actively divide the populace and distract us. Note how divisive politics has become; divide and conquer.