skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is excellent! (not in "pervert" sense). "pervee" is "first" in Russian.
Ah yes, the Samsung that sells 5 different phones under the same model designation. Will be interesting to see if all the submodels and variations get updated or if carrier branded models will languish.

Nokia (HMD Global) has probably been the most reliable Android vendor in the Android One program for actually running long support cycles. Oneplus has been 'ok'. I have a Moto X4 that got 3 generations of official OS support and continues to get monthly security updates as well as a fully working LineageOS port to Android 10.

Nothing compares to first-gen iPhone SE though that is getting yet another year of updates. 6 major OS releases will have been supported...
When you already have another 145 billion? More than you could possibly spend in your lifetime?
using the effective rate is misleading because by absolute amounts they paid more.
For that specific complaint, the videos can be disabled in Settings -> Playback -> Canvas.
Yeah, the nintendo DS is one of those consoles which is mostly a joy to play emulated on a modern android phone.

Many games are very enjoyable with modern touch controls -- Inamuza Eleven for instance.
I really wish there was a way to stop all fishing at a commercial level for 10 years. Not that you can’t eat a fish just that if you want that luxury you have to go catch it yourself. I know this will never happen.
You can see similar saucer vehicles in the Bay area Hiller Aviation Museum.

(Hiller had a similar career to Sikorsky.)

https://www.hiller.org/

https://www.hiller.org/event/flying-platform/
If the purpose of the wealth tax is to lower equality then the correct solution is to tax machines.
Prince Andrew is in a spot of bother
I'm not sure you can say the startup impact is measurable either. You certainly can't measure it by monetary value.

Mindlessly building what is handed to you is a culture problem and not a company size problem. Some startups have less freedom than some corporations but both usually grant more freedom to more senior people.

You can still 'wear many hats' at some mega corps too, if the company only has 'engineer' as a title then you are expected to basically do 'everything' . The team you are on will decide what the balance is though.

I think all of what you said could apply to both sizes of the companies.
Yes. Author highlights the critical metric:

> ... 87 populations were found to be in the “very bad” category, with biomass levels at less than 20 per cent of what is needed to maximize sustainable fishery catches
Extremely useful, I just recently signed up for BizCounsel and it's been handy but this is a nice add-on for project work or to compare to fixed fee prices from other attorneys.
Well when we have lots of labor, and seemingly not enough jobs for people, even when they could be doing productive things that build their own wealth and others' wealth (like building homes), then that $7.25 wage being the "best" option is a failure of the system, because too few people I society have been empowered with the option of starting their own businesses, or having the access to the tools that would let them create wealth. Too much inequality, not enough people with money to spend, and not enough capital movement to allow people to create new jobs.

Capitalism is a fantastic means for directing economic forces as long as everybody has enough capital to do the voting, as it were. If only a few people hold all the capital, then only a few people make decisions and will often engage in capital strikes rather than risk the chance that their position may be threatened.
Yes. You missed the agenda when every village was connected had a phone and the Govt laid down infrastructure for it or when they erected TV towers across length and breadth of country in 80s.
While I don't share the sentiment of the OP, I would guess lines like this may be the key for them:

>Mozilla and the Rust Core Team are happy to announce plans to create a Rust foundation. Our goal is to have the first iteration of the foundation up and running by the end of the year.

I read this as "Mozilla is currently still largely in control. This is the moment where they will cede to the new, more independent, foundation." But the fact that it follows "Mozilla and the Rust Core Team" with "our" may taint the rest of the use of "our" throughout the post for others.
There are 1-5 levels. Level 7 is a marketing trick.
The actual study is here:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027277141...

Fishery biomass trends of exploited fish populations in marine ecoregions, climatic zones and ocean basins

It's a journal called Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science.
Japanese camera companies are really bad at cloud software - Sony Playmemories probably the worst offender. Also the in-camera "mini-apps" tend to be terrible.

They make good hardware but horrible software. They should really buy a computational photography company that also knows how to make good web and native apps, like https://skylum.com/
> standard lib Python and Go suffer less than other languages

Depends on what those "other languages" are. For example. golang has nothing on the Java standard library (e.g. what does golang have to even remotely compare with `java.util.concurrent`?)
Yes. The actual talent is doing very well with the streaming boom, even if it's not sustainable.
that's what I meant by leaving, renouncing US citizenship.
I am quoting David Rockefeller, an important member of the ruling class in America, to give context as to why the west might be becoming more like China.
Filecoin is a great example of raising a lot of money slowing a project down. They did a $200m ICO in 2017 and they still haven't shipped a 1.0, while smaller, much less well funded projects (Sia, Arweave, ...) have made a lot more progress.
Same here. I work at a startup with competitive pay and great work-life balance. I think people are becoming aware that startups should be treated like any other job (unless you're an early employee with significant equity).
I never understood..what’s the fascination in turning one county into another? We have Switzerland, France, Belgium, Germany. Why force America to become one of these? Those countries already exist. Turning one country into another doesn’t make sense and isn’t what makes America unique.

Imagine I moved to Germany and kept stating “Germany should be more like America because X Y and Z.” Can you imagine how offensive that would be?
I saw that, what's the point of even having a press release for such a vague promise.
Personally I LOVE the lack of recommendations in my face. I find that one of the most annoying features of YouTube. They just run me in circles when it comes to playlists and I have a hard time training it to let me listen to more than one song of something different.

But I don't let Apple Music run with streams, really. I stick to my own selections. So YMMV
The first thing to notice about a wealth tax is how little it fundamentally differs from an income tax on investment income. If you have a billion dollars and you get a 2% return and pay 15% capital gains tax, you paid 0.3% of your wealth in tax. So then what's the difference?

For one, it pushes people towards riskier investments. At a 1% annual return, a 0.3% wealth tax is equivalent to a 30% income tax. At a 5% annual return, it's equivalent to a 6% income tax. This has various consequences, but a big one of note is that it makes it much less desirable to own government debt, which has a low rate of return, which means the government could end up having to pay significantly higher interest on the debt. It could also incentivize excessive risk taking.

Another concern is that it requires investments to be liquidated in order to pay the tax. Generally we defer taxes on investment income until the investment is sold in order to avoid this, because it can be quite problematic, e.g. you own 51% of your company but over time you're forced to become a minority shareholder just in order to pay the tax, or you owned 100% of it and are required to take on external investment over time just to stay in business. This also costs the government money because the government pays lower interest on borrowing than average investment returns, so paying 0.7% to borrow money in the interim while the investor is earning 5% returns on the money you'd have collected as tax means that when the tax is ultimately paid, the government ends up with more additional revenue than they paid in interest in the meantime.

It also increases foreign ownership of domestic resources, because domestic owners are forced to liquidate in order to pay the tax and domestic buyers are in the same boat so the liquidated securities go primarily to foreign buyers.

Another problem is that a lot of forms of wealth are hard to value. If you had a wealth tax and someone owned a piece of art, or some intellectual property, or shares in a privately held company, what are they worth? It's inherently subjective and estimates can very wildly. But then you're creating an opportunity for accountants to do their thing and avoid the tax. Waiting until the property is sold and then taxing the gain solves this neatly because then you have the sale price to go on.
I’m sure this is dated but here is a write up in Google’s backup system from High Scalability - http://highscalability.com/blog/2014/2/3/how-google-backs-up...
Good idea. Luckily this was just a threat so far.
2% of annual net-revenues from MozCorp go to the Foundation; and Google's deal is with the Foundation, but I'm iffy on how much makes it straight into MozCorp.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation#Financing
You didn't! Just trying to steer things in a more fruitful direction.

In the startup world they usually call this employee waves. Hoffmann, Christensen & Collins all broke up different people as part of different waves (using different models) and that some people "belong" in certain waves. Others, such as say, Davidow and Von Hippel went into detail on how to insulate new technology from late wavers at established firms in order to successfully incubate it (Christensen talks about this as well). See Kidder's book on the Eagle project and Fergusons book on the IBM PC for some examples. Also search "sony missed ipod" for some really interesting counter-examples.

Also how BBN beat Raytheon for ARPAs IMPs is a fascinating example.

Anyway, I'm a first waver who wants to improve on being a much later waver.
Yes, but we're talking about a wealth tax. Which specifically does require that a wealthy person actually liquidate some of that wealth every year.

Not sure why people are discussing this as if it's not exactly that. PG is right in what he's saying, but wrong on the impact.

Assuming his figures are correct, then I would expect to own 45% of something much bigger than what I owned 100% of 60 years before.
feanaro: fine, if you think so.

I find it interesting that actual mathematicians working in Category Theory, such as Tom Leinster (who wrote a lovely little introductory text on Category Theory [not covering monads though] and made it freely available on arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.09375) are able to engage in polite discussion about the contentious viewpoints on the use of CT without resorting to personal attacks (see 2-3 minutes from his talk from a few years back: https://youtu.be/UoutGluNVlI?t=410) ... which stands in sharp contrast to some of the evangelists, whose attitude in response to criticism often reeks of arrogance and puts people off taking CT seriously, which I think is a great shame.
Containers are a good tool for scaling resources?
I have been at this for a while, reaching mid-40's, and the truth is while there are startups with life balance stories and corporations with unlimited overtime, the stereotypes really apply for the large majority of companies.
Agreed. I doubt a very wealthy man's short blog post against taxing very wealthy people would make it to the front page of HN if it wasn't for the identity of the very wealthy man.
> If the email program would pop up a warning...

A moment's thought should illustrate that "pop up a dialog box to ask permission" isn't really a fix for a hole like this. It has conspicuously failed in the past.

I think your quote, which has the benefit of being funny, does miss one key thing, and it's that the number of users and our interactions with our systems keep growing.

Prob(user error) might well be increasing a bit, but N * Prob(user error) is definitely increasing.
It's ironic how now everyone is bringing out the slippery slope arguments, after years and years of tax cuts for the rich reduced social services and increasing wealth inequality, all based on the promise that cutting taxes for the rich would benefit the average person. Well that was a lie, after several decades of increasing efficiency and economic growth the middle class can look back at essentially at no increase in wealth and the only reason that household disposible income has somwhat increased is because now both adults in the family are working (+plus often high school and college kids are working large proportions as well).

If there was ever a slippery slope it was the slippery slope of cutting more and more taxes for the rich.
The tragedy of the commons is a great launching point for understanding this problem. Managing fish populations is one of the best examples.

For further reading, I suggest folks check out Elinor Ostrom, an economist who spent time developing regulatory solutions for managing fish populations. She was even able to implement a few!
>I think its a way to get people to admit to things

This is the standard way human discourse happens when talking about something for which there is no evidence of efficacy. You back up and try to rationalize some other reason for it's use, even when it makes no sense. Like in this case, using it to get people to admit things, can lead to false confessions or false convictions, especially when some of the people you threaten to use it on know it doesn't work! Do you think the agent who knows it doesn't work, and just uses it as a threat, is going to drop the case when you take the polygraph and fail? Nope!

It remind me very much of when people discuss some supplement that doesn't have evidence: "Oh well those studies didn't use enough/too much/wrong schedule" or acupuncture : "oh well even if it doesn't work the placebo effect is valuable"

you just can't get through to people
Authentication Patterns for Next.js
This is a classic mistake made all the time in economics, assuming all people are rational actors operating on a "money go up" algorithm.

It ignores emotions, it ignores our vast swath of cognitive biases and shortcomings, and it ignores a hugely complex capitalist system.

Off the top of my head, reasons a millionaire might not move out despite the existence of a wealth tax

1. They're too lazy to figure out how to move, including moving all their assets etc and sorting a new citizenship, finding a new job

2. They're too scared, for reasons above

3. They're a perfectly rational actor and the cost of a move doesn't outweigh the tax

4. They love their city

5. They have a huge family spread throughout the area

6. They're a fervent patriot

7. They don't want to leave their local church

8. They're the coach for the local little league team

9. Usa law is more reflective of their own value system (say, they like guns)

10. The rockies are too beautiful to leave behind
My take on it, personally, is that the primary benefit of a monarch is precisely that they are inherently illegitimate, in a way. This means that every day they have to justify to the people and keep answering the question "Why do we keep these people around?"

A president only has to convince (fool?) the people twice, and can always hide behind a "mandate" from the people to justify bad behavior. A monarch has to fight to earn that legitimacy every day. Plus they have the incentive of not screwing their kids' inheritance up. That's the value I see in it anyways, I don't know if there's a more sophisticated articulation of this idea out there.
> The most important nuance being that you control most of this wealth for most of this time and will be paying your taxes out of interest.

Then a wealth tax boils down to a punitive tax on interest income. Which means billionaires will be incented to save or invest a lot less, and consume a lot more of their wealth since they're going to lose it either way. (See, e.g. Larry Ellison's yachts as an especially obvious example of billionaires' consumption.) That's an "economic policy tool", alright. It's not as clear that it's a sensible one.
I think it would be a loss, because up until today I had thought broad-mindedness was sufficient protection against fascism. In Pound we have someone who railed against provincialism and secondary sources in early work, yet wound up broadcasting pro-fascist propaganda for Mussolini.

ABC of Reading (ch 3. p 42):

> "One has to divide the readers who want to be experts from those who do not, and divide, as it were, those who want to see the world from those who merely want to know WHAT PART OF IT THEY LIVE IN."

> "When it comes to the question of poetry, a great many people don't even want to know that their own country does not occupy ALL the available surface of the planet. The idea seems in some way to insult them."

I at least will study him, to figure out how he wound up there. It appears it may have been via antisemitism, through the christian/muslim anti-interest tradition. It may have been because he thought fascists rewarded artists better than democracies. It may have been other paths. I don't know yet.

(I still think self-deprecating humour may be an antidote: fascists are Serious People doing Serious Things, and I haven't been aware of any thick anthologies of famous fascist comedies. But after today I'm no longer so sure they don't exist.)
Note that this article is one in a series: https://www.copetti.org/projects/consoles/
This is an incredibly stupid and mendacious line of reasoning. This is just the action of an incredibly rich guy afraid to give up a small sliver of his enormous wealth, and grasping at straws to do so.

A simple way to see how silly this argument is - replace "0.5% wealth tax" with "2% VC fund management fee", and see how that changes the conclusion!
> question if billionaires are bad for society

Inflation changes this detail daily. A billion is just a number of units of an arbitrary currency.

The real issue goes beyond the number and is more about generative assets vs liability / depreciating ones.

IMO the real problem is money in politics. Fix that and many of these issues with billionaires will sort themselves out as the system corrects itself.

EDIT: By "money in politics" I mean big money that overwhelms small distributed money. (ie money that does not look democratic) . Obviously it's always going to _take_ money to run campaigns
I was listening when Beats 1 came on air, the song they played just prior to the start was Music For Airports by Brian Eno. That influenced me to include it in our Burning Man art this past year. [1]

I've subscribed to Apple Music since the start, but apart from a massive catalog, I can't help but feel that it is a neglected product.

Apple put Jimmy Iovine in charge of that business, presumably because the company needed industry legitimacy and the connections he had.

However, I do not think Iovine or his lieutenants were music "fans", which are people who for personal reasons intentionally seek out new artists, listen to them and share their picks with friends.

I think this lack of familiarity with the customer and how to connect with them through mobile software products led to the state it is in now.

What is strange to me is that Apple Music as an application has not improved. The views do not pre-cache, so they are the slowest loading of any app on my iPhone. Apple Music often fails to perform searches properly.

Despite the volume of data Apple had from my music preferences _before_ Apple Music existed, the recommendation engine is still no good, and the music curation lacks any semblance of personality.

When I ask Siri to play a song, it sometimes feels like Apple Music tries to play a version of the song that has a lower licensing fee than the one I'm actually after. This is total conjecture, but I would not be surprised.

That Spotify has done as well as it has is more a credit to the failure of Apple Music to materialize into something at all representing the vast beauty and detail of music.

I occasionally have tuned into Beats 1, especially if there was an artist interview I wanted to hear. But I really did not like the vibe of Zane Lowe. I felt like he was always fawning over the artists and he interrupts them while they're talking.

Hopefully, these minor radio changes are indicative of a larger changes coming to the Apple Music product as a whole.

[1] https://skylarkcollective.com/blog/
Depends. Both outcomes are possible.