skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Does it seem tone-deaf to anyone else that this blog post is clearly written from the perspective of and to be interpreted as the opinion of the Mozilla project leadership and not the "Rust Project"?

I mean, if there's any time where you want to be clear about the distinction it would be now, right? What people who really care about Rust need to know now is that it will prosper outside the control of its corporate backer.

Telling us the Mozilla still supports Rust (at a time where it's by definition true that it is reducing its support) is communication that should come from Mozilla, not rust-lang.org.
This hits home. I'm a fairly early employee at a unicorn, with no exit in sight. I've talked to the cofounders about extending my exercise window, and got the response of "We can probably do that when the time comes". Of course if that turns out to not be the case, well then I'm now stuck leaving behind a huge portion of my equity to cover the taxes, assuming I can sell to cover.

Love that this seems to be getting more popular, hope it becomes the norm for companies in the future.
Shoutcast has been a thing for near a quarter of a century. I don't see how this compares favorably at all. I have been streaming Shoutcast stations on phones since the late 2000's back on featurephones.

iOS I'm currently using 'radio.net' for a Shoutcast client, Android I use Radiodroid. Tons of stations across pretty much any genre. Lots of FM stations that simulcast on here as well.

Is there something I'm missing about Apple's service that doesn't even provide a way to play old shows? Are they trying to do live streaming as a creative way to skirt licensing costs (like how FM stations don't pay a penny to play songs). I seem to recall soma.fm and di.fm shoutcast stations trying to lobby and get fair licensing structures, and they still pay $$$ to keep their services up.
How much money do you actually need though?

I’ve worked for 5 startups now and my equity payout has been 0, 0, 0, 0, and now I stand I make low 7 figures from the equity on this last company (publicly traded now).

During those startups the following happened:
- I saw my nieces and nephews so little they forgot my name. They were young, sure, but it still stung when they look at you like a stranger

- Messed up a 8+ year relationship with my significant other and we haven’t talked in years

- Let my student debt pile up to take on more equity than salary (dumbass idea for the record)

- Lost friends along the way because I could never do anything

- Missed many family/friends birthdays as I was working

- Worked 80 hour weeks for a long time

What did I feel after I saw my equity/stock rise to above 7 figures?
Stupidity. I gave up a lot on my journey and money can’t get it back, in fact, the money I stand to earn doesn’t enable me to do much more than what my salary already does. I can travel, eat well, have luxury goods if I want (I’m not that type of person but anyways), and so forth.

My point being that this was a.) self-inflicted and b.) not worth the combined opportunity cost of all of those years.

So for every “friend” who made lots of money at Uber or other places, there’s a story like me or a story where someone’s never made anything from equity because profitable exits are fucking hard
I didn't write the article, and I'm not much of an expert on DS graphics (it's too surreal for me). But you can copy 3D content to 2D images and then display it using the 2D engine, I believe, and then use 3D on the other screen through the direct method. Pretty much everything on the DS is a bizarre special case, and Nintendo's in-house staff is very good at exploiting every last trick in the book.
epic size orgs would not just use one account. It includes preview access and to clot products .

In my experience , I usually sign different agreements with different products for such diverse access . Sometimes it is with different legal entities .

I don’t know if Apple does an MSA which is the kind of document which covers the general engagement , so unless such a MSA exists and allows for this kind of termination , I am pretty sure this cannot be done for violating guidelines of single agreement to cancel other contracts in place.

Apple probably has clauses to unilaterally terminate agreements and is invoking that, but that is not remotely the same as closing down a account for violating guidelines
If you asked US people, it makes sense that you'd get weird looks -- they think that you're asking because you don't know the date (and they expect that you would), whereas you're actually asking just to see how they say it. Also, as other's have pointed out, Independence day is an anomoly in how the US says dates -- we actually call this one "The 4th of July"

A less conspicuous date might work better. "When's Valentine's Day?" or "When's St. Patrick's Day?" (Feb 14th and Mar 17th, respectively).
‘Fortnite’ Developer Says Apple Will Soon Terminate Its Developer Accounts
>> new discoveries can never give us a later date for when something appeared, but they can give us an older date

But neither are useful. The fact that a structure appeared at time X is not an indication that it continued until time Y. Evolution is not linear at smaller scales. Structures evolve/appear only to disappear through the same processes that created them. The fact that this critter had a particular shape of eye is not an indication that it passed that structure to later lifeforms. It is certainly possible, but the concept that something happened "first" is irrelevant in a world where near-identical structures regularly evolve independently.
No, sorry. But if you want to go through all of my comment history and google my name you may be able to guess. But I will not confirm anything.
That's true and a fair point.

I was mostly responding to the part about money not entering the economy again, I was then lazy and introduced another topic into the discussion without comparing both sides.
Am I wrong for thinking that Google Analytics has bad UI?

As a noob at UI it was bizarre and unintuitive for me.

Just finding the region locations of the traffic was odd and didn't make immediate sense.
It's redistributed to people who spend it, fueling consumption. Switzerland has a higher GDP per capita than the US. The country has a wealth tax, but no tax on capital gains though.
> is pretty much the same question as asking if the aristocracy was bad for previous societies.

Well... that's stacking the deck somewhat. We were talking about how to add nuance. Nuance would be "what do we expect the economic result to be" or "this is a matter of right and wrong, not money."

>I find it ironic that the US which was largely founded by people who left their home because of entrenched economics

This gets abstract, but... The individuals most influential in the Revolution itself were mostly high ranking colonial officials from British nouveau aristocracy families of the empire. Granting voting rights only to property owners was the default position. "Universal" suffrage limited to european males was the radical position.

Not a criticism of them. Just... we can't solve these things with history. If you think billionaires are harmful, why? Equality? Economics?
But there is external effects. Wealth translates into political power, how about people ending up disenfranchised by the excessive wealth of a small part of the people? They did not voluntarily give up their right to political participation.
Property tax is really funny in the context of this conversation. You are paying a percentage of the _value of the house_, which you (have most likely) taken a loan to pay for.

A given average person in the US (excluding high earners) will likely be paying a property tax rate based on a value that is _actually higher than their net worth_, which makes property-tax-as-a-wealth-tax for average American homeowners actually greater than the 1.69% average property tax rate.

Imagine if this was applied as a "wealth tax" on a brokerage account, but considered that you could borrow 5x your balance on margin, and then were taxed on your margin holdings.
> Is the EU hurting for tax revenues, or something?

Yes it is, the core problem the EU has is that its budget almost entirely comes out of member state contributions (plus a bit of import duties and fines for rule violators). It does not have a meaningful source of funds that is at the sole discretion of the EU parliament - imagine the US federal government with a budget that is decided by the 50 individual states.

A proper funding source for the EU as an institution would finally allow things such as a joint EU foreign policy/military at the authority of parliament, decent wealth redistribution (i.e. equalizing especially the disparities between Eastern Europe and Core Europe), or major infrastructural works such as assisting all EU railroads to get rid of buffer/chain couplers... and especially to get rid of the political bullshit that the individual member states can pull off at the moment.

The EU parliament desperately needs to be reformed so that it stands on an equal footing with the member states.
"like this" is complicated, because different foundations do different things, but, beyond the Python Software Foundation, there is:

* The OpenJS Foundation (Node)

* Ruby Central is similar but also different

* Parrot (for Perl 6...) had a foundation, not clear on what the project is like now though

* https://www.perlfoundation.org/

And of course, many many foundations that support open source projects that aren't programming languages.
Regardless of how many sell, you are still paying for a $500-800 device which has a very short support life.
I have no desire to continue the Explanations series. The videos are where I'm spending my focus now.
This. Just got bitten by this by using Vercel’s serverless functions edge caching. More details: https://twitter.com/rayshan/status/1295521974479798274?s=21
So your source for any wealth tax whatsoever having catastrophic consequences is Pavlov and BF Skinner?

You think that a 1% wealth tax on wealth over $1 billion would completely destroy any incentive for an ambitious poor person to immigrate to the US?

People are still immigrating to Switzerland, Belgium, and France.
You just suggested that the only way to solve housing shortages is to attack the broader upper middle classes with a wealth tax that will push many more of them out of their homes than are currently pushed out by property tax defaults. Funny for you to word it so passively as “this rhetoric will be raised”.
> I want to be able to do things myself without Apple using the government to attack my business.

Here, how exactly does it attack your business? Is your business built around Apple ecosystem? Have you accepted their terms and conditions? there's no way to enter into any relations with Apple without accepting their terms of the services. Have you got warrants coming from Apple lawyers?

> Just let people compete, that's all I'm asking

You are free to compete, not on their platform at their cost though. For the same reason why you would refuse to give me access to your business (whatever it does) to compete with you. You cannot just freely re-interpret the definition of the market so that it fits your narrative. Market is never a private entity's platform.

> I don't know if this is on purpose or not, but I just listed a few of the ways that Apple can interfere with Open standards, including suing competitors that use adversarial operability to get around network effects in an entrenched market.

It's either open standards or inter-operability with a proprietory standard. If you don't want to get sued, either buy the license or build your own solution that doesn't require interop. There's hundreds of companies who do that regularly, they pay their fees and make money along the way. There are also businesses who do not interact with Apple in any shape or form yet are able to build their mobile solutions. Because Mobile is not "Applications for either Android or iOS", you can believe this but that doesn't make it anyhow true.

> Those are the only two viable mobile platforms that exist right now.

There was a time when they didn't exist at all, the fact that there are two now doesn't change anything. Again, all your points are about convenience to you, not about inability to create a new platform. And by the way, define "viable".

> people accuse us of trying to force Apple to fix our phones for free when in reality we just want to stop Apple from suing everyone who imports a 3rd-party battery.

are you elected to represent all of those who comment positively on that topic? I can play this game too, and "we" who oppose it neither do want any third-party battery to be presented as a genuine replacement for the original ones nor desire to have a device that is easily disassembled by third-parties. Had we wanted these features, we'd go and buy any noname Android phone.

> But don't pretend the web is an escape hatch when its mobile support depends entirely on the two companies

You have to prove that, so far it's an unsubstantiated claim. Another one, because you feel like it. The majority of people use these two platofrms not because there are no alternatives, but because it doesn't worth the effort to switch to anything else. The existing solutions already are convenient enough. Notice the difference. You may disagree with this, but again, it's just your wishes.
This topic keeps coming up. Mozilla is viewed as a bloated entity whose only legitimate activity is maintaining Firefox. No-one cares about the other initiatives they spend money and resources on, and they especially don't want their donations going toward Mozilla's overpaid leadership.

People would like to donate directly to Firefox, but as things stand, this isn't an option. This isn't because Firefox falls under the Mozilla brand, it's because Mozilla choose not to accept Firefox-specific donations.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24141852

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24129794

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24129926
Where I worked, weekly point in time backups were required. Those backups were put onto tape drives, those tape drives were set on a pallet and then driven by truck to an offline second location. IMO _that’s_ how it’s done properly.
Why would you assume that a richer more powerful state would mean those things? Look around the world and you will see that is not necessarily the case. Look at California, and specifically SF right here in the US for a counterexample.
I think because video and photos have the potential to be huge, especially in higher-end cameras, so it wouldn't take very long to exhaust 10gb of data, implying that they might be using a service that allows more for longer-term stuff (e.g. S3).
> Google is unlikely to spend half a billion a year on Mozilla's advocacy efforts.

AFAIK, Google's money goes to the Mozilla Corporation, while the donations go to the Mozilla Foundation. So the advocacy is already separated, isn't it?
Not everyone is salaried, especially at these levels where you're not earning enough to pay any income tax.
Wasn't it close to 100h with the modem turned off?
Yeah but the EU or EU countries will just eat the costs for the populace. In the US, this is a contentious issue (as is every social program for the poor tbh).
Needs ability to import Azure and AWS icons. Also import popular framework logos and icons.
I've worked from home full time for about 7 years.

What works for me is a combo of things, and this has worked across profitable public companies, unicorns, and startups in roles ranging from senior engineer to engineering manager.

1. I set working hours for myself and stick to them. I do not check email, Slack, or pick up my work laptop outside of those hours.

2. I turn off all email notifications on my phone and I only have Slack notifications on during my work hours plus 1 hour afterwards.

3. I communicate the above with my coworkers so they do not expect that I'll reply to them at 9pm or 7am. My team has my phone number; it's also in Slack and our corporate directory. I tell my coworkers they can call me on the phone day or night for emergencies outside of office hours and that they may have to call twice to get through do not disturb.

I also have a dedicated home office now which certainly helps, but I didn't for the first many years of working from home full time -- my office used to be a corner of my bedroom.
The first coming to my mind is the .NETfoundation https://dotnetfoundation.org/

baked by Microsoft but more and more community driven
I do think we should make note of the fine print:

>"By supporting up to three generations of Android OS upgrade, we are extending the lifecycle of our Galaxy products and making a promise that we will provide a simple and secure mobile experience that takes advantage of the latest innovations as soon as they are available.”

"Up to" being the key here. Not guaranteed.
I’ve done it too, you get lots of free stuff in exchange for writing reviews. One would be stupid not to take advantage of that.
How is it more precise to say something the commenter didn't say and, probably, wouldn't say?
Those issues are still the result of the market responding to the government's actions/policies; remove the market (make both single payer) and the government will have much more incentive to fix the problems.
I worked as a software engineer for a large media company, outside of any tech hub.

I switched to working remotely for a San Francisco-based startup because they offered me a 30% raise over what my current employer was willing to pay.

Two years later, when working for the startup became less palatable, I went back to my old company. My manager there struggled with the HR dept as hard as they could and got them to just match my startup salary in order for me to come back.

Which I guess is just to say the parent comment is not universally correct.
Backed by Hollywood propaganda, and really propaganda from most tech news outlets as well.
I don't get it either. Not a native speaker, though. So could someone explain it?
Like others have said, this ignores reinvesting wealth and returns to invested wealth. Here is a table like PG's for each wealth tax %, but calculating wealth after 60 years with 4% annually compounding interest (i.e. 60 years later after annual taxes and 4% annual returns):

0.1% 993%
0.5% 788%
1.0% 589%
2.0% 328%
3.0% 182%
4.0% 100%
5.0% 55%

Sure, with a 0.5% annual wealth tax and no returns, the government would have taken 26% of a founder's initial wealth over 60 years. But if a founder reinvested and got a reasonable rate of return (4%), they'd have 788% of their initial wealth after that annual tax. Just like "small tax rates produce such dramatic effects", compounding interest produces dramatic effects that more than offset such taxes.
Would a wealth tax benefit society? It would seem that if an individual was creating wealth, other individuals would be wise and say: "you keep going!" How would it profit society to interfere with the genius who was creating lots of wealth?

Perhaps a better way to add richness to society would be to examine the use of an inheritance tax. When a genius wealth producer dies wouldn't it be in society's best interest to find a way to funnel that wealth so that other individuals with good potential can use it to create economic activity which could benefit everybody.

Right now so much money can be funneled to descendents, perhaps some of whom never knew the economic genius it created the wealth. These descendents then don't need to apply themselves in life, but instead can lead a life of leisure which often is not beneficial to them or society. Witness what happened to Max Factor's grandson, who I believe is still in prison.

It would seem funneling the wealth from a deceased economic genius into capital for individuals with great potential to realize their ideas would enrich all of us. Right now there are probably many individuals who could create amazing things if they had access to the right education and capital.
The advantage of Go is that you can compile it to a single (static) binary, and then it doesn't really matter what the rest of the backend is running. Unlike Python, Node, PHP, etc. you don't need to set up an environment.
We should think about the amount of equity a founder gives to investors to get their company started. UBI changes the dynamic a fair amount.

Twenty-somethings with dreams often have one thing between themselves and bringing their products to market. That is, how to feed themselves and stay in a decent living situation until they get some basic revenue?

Well, right now founders can solve this by raising seed capital. Instead of having guaranteed housing and healthcare from the government, founders today can trade pieces of their company to investors in installments, until they have revenue and a better negotiating position.

UBI could actually end this investing model. Seed investing might not happen as much in a UBI country because there would simply be no need for it.
Behind the scene work for this already started last year (or even earlier?).

The recent events are if anything only an aclerator for this.
45% of wealth OVER 50 million. How do you not see the difference? The idea is that you wont discourage anyone from doing anything because they're already a multi millionaire. Who is going to be bitter about being a multi millionaire?
It's not necessary, just as it is not necessary that a much more "individualistic" approach would lead to better country (take US as an example).
I'd like to see a one time wealth tax followed by a restructuring of the capital gains tax to promote capital investment with the middle class while more heavily taxing the capital gains of the wealthy. The current system allows a runaway effect at the higher levels due to such a low tax rate on substantial sums of money. Even earning 5% in an index fund is huge for someone with $100M, yet due to the capital available they also have access to investment opportunities (private equity) that have a good chance to return much more.
>without the costs of distribution and physical media creation, it would actually be possible.

Did anyone seriously think just because you don't need to make blu-rays any more a 50 million dollar TV show or movie can just be sold for next to nothing? It's probably not even 1% of the production costs.

Even weirder because I've never seen anyone think that Red Dead Redemption would coast 5 bucks if they only sold it on steam
The real problem with wealth taxes is that they really can't raise very much revenue. In the US, even an extremely aggressive wealth tax, like, say, Elizabeth Warren's proposal of 2% over $50M and 3% over $1B, would only increase federal revenue by around $250B/year, or around 6%. It wouldn't even come to covering the federal deficit, let alone big social programs like free healthcare or college. And this is assuming zero capital flight and new tax avoidance, which is impossible.
Learning JavaScript? Topic – Event Bubbling and Delegation
_most_ people pay a wealth tax, its just they normally pay it to their pension provider.

Management fees are all over the place. In the UK pensions are capped at .75% (it used to be be as high as 2%)

in the US, 401k mangement fees are ~1% (https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/06191...)

obviously I'm in the UK, and therefore my views are unlikely to be shared by those in the US. However I pay a good 35-45[1]% of my total income in taxes. I don't mind so long as we have a system that supports my fellow man.

So it smacks to me of pearl clutching. I don't see why a multimillionaire who has the option to hide their wealth should be exempt from paying a reasonable amount of tax. Man up and pay your fair share, its not like its ever going to be as higher percentage as what someone on $70-170k is.

[1] do the math of total loss of income on that....
Upvoting because I like fish