skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>But this kind of misses the bigger picture of what Marx was getting at rather by getting lost in the weeds about price definitions and really is a critique of Ricardo more than Marx.

This is very true, and cannot be overstated. Often, the criticisms of one theory are actually much better direceted at a predecessor theory. Students in a history of economics course, or a regular economics course, may learn of the "labour theory of value", but they may learn either Smith's, Ricardo's, or Marx's, and assume that the theories are the same, or that the same criticisms apply to all of them.

There are good and serious criticisms of the "labour theory of value" from those unsympathetic (and even those sympathetic) to its apparent normative conclusions. It's a shame that many people seem to confuse one thinker for another, especially when each boasted of their improvements (Marx, for example, writes "I was the first to point out and examine this [...]" when writing on the "LTV" and discussed the law of the tendency for the rate of profit to fall again in his original understanding, despite being extremely well read on - and critical of - his predecessors).
A savings account shouldn't be your emergency fund to dip into. It should be a lockbox you don't touch, in which case buying the index regularly is a no brainer. If you need to dip into your savings, you need to be expanding your emergency fund before you can think about saving and investing.
More free time
> People just hate being told what to eat - it's as simple as that.

In Netherlands in loads of restaurant the vegetarian option will taste terrible. In recent years that's slowly changing. I often wondered why someone chose the vegetarian option, it looked and tasted terrible. It wasn't just the initial impression, everything vegetarian was bad to terrible. Plus stupidity on my part, instead of buying something nice that's vegetarian I'd try terrible meat-replacements.

To me someone eating vegetarian was someone giving up enjoying food.

IMO it's nicer to focus on the positives rather than on what someone cannot or should not do. E.g. various colleagues are now vegan. Some just because the vegan diet is better for them (more energy, sleeping, etc). That's stuff they experienced, I'm not vegan/vegetarian.

Another thing I realized is that sometimes the meat part in a dish is actually terrible. A lot of the chicken in Netherlands is sold with a huge amount of added water. It actually does not taste any good, sometimes it is not even noticeable that it is in a dish. A vegan friend was visiting, I already was doubting why I was adding chicken to a dish. Replacing the chicken resulted in a nicer dish (cauliflower with mango chutney plus loads of other spices). Since that experience that dish will at least be vegetarian.

Further, why not let people experience it? Instead of saying that they'll change, maybe say it might happen. IMO it's not that important someone completely changes their diet or never eats something. If they go from regularly eating meat to sometimes eating meat that's already a huge change.
Real fairness under that definition can't exist as long as there are inheritances. People who are born in wealthier families are not playing under the same rules (just imagine if a person playing Monopoly started with ten times the initial amount of money).

I prefer a definition of fairness that is actually achievable[1]: everyone has at least the bare minimum, regardless of fitness and deserving. You can quibble about what the definition of bare minimum, but to me it should include housing, food, education and health. Any society where anyone can't get those things by asking for them is not fair, as people who don't have access to those don't have the minimum to compete with those who do.

We can't have an equal playing field. But we can perhaps make the bare minimum livable.

[1]This is almost impossible, as opposed to entirely impossible
> Entering a credit card number again seems comparatively inconsequential in either case

For an individual, probably. For an enterprise, skipping new vendor procurement is a material advantage. I don't think it's a decisive one. But it's an advantage nonetheless.
If a company can hire someone worth $50/hr for only $5/hr and therefore make huge profits/margins, couldn't another company easily come along and undercut them? I don't think a scenario like that could exist very long.
So capital is entitled to a return but labor isn't? Why the distinction?
My point was that if you annotate code that's without the proper Rust guarantees because of cpp calls with a macro, you still can use the literal keyword "unsafe" and have it easily searchable for places where you use it because you have a good Rust internal reason. I.e. not to hide "unsafe" but to make it more clear where it is and because of what.

But they want "No C++ annotations". I believe they should have annotations in the Rust code to make it clear that the Rust/C/Cpp borders are crossed.
> Proper authorities, photo of car, and a set of local news organisations, plus a few tweets and your state reps, might get some attention.
> Play interests off each other.

Papers please!
>if you have a heap allocated thing that is passed between Rust and C++, who frees it?

Isn't this an issue regardless? Forget crossing the rust/c++ boundary, lets say you pass something to another class in c++, you need to have a contract of who frees what when, right? Maybe I'm not understanding the issue.
It's your cable box. For many digital channels you are essentially getting streamed VOD and their backend equipment is slow. Modern ATSC tuners are reasonably fast with a clear signal. You can legitimately surf like on analog.
> A lot of economic arguments forget these ideas. The labor market is not a free market: companies have more power in negotiation, they have more information and, most important of all, they can deal with a job opening not being covered most of the time. Workers can't usually live too much without finding a job.

I'm generally in favor of stronger job protections and so on, but I'm not aware of any definition of "free market" which supposes that all players have equal leverage. As I understand it, an economy with powerful corporations and relatively weak workers could still satisfy the definition for 'free market'; in other words, power dynamics are orthogonal to market freedom.
Even modern C++ has eschewed macros for virtually every use case, the only reason I've had to use them (legitimately) has been conditional compilation and some compiler/platform specific issues.

Like if you're doing #define PI 3.14159 you're asking to get chirped in code review.
> maybe it means they can buy a laptop for the kids

Or maybe it means they can't buy a laptop if they don't have a job at all.
Classic market failure problem.
related? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet#History
The nice thing about Android TV and firetv is that you can sideload apps like NewPipe (better YouTube client without ads) and Kodi. Android TV has been better than FireTV until now, as it has not had an annoying homescreen littered with ads, like the FireTV.

I'd switch to an AppleTV, if I could sideload things like NewPipe, but for now I'm sticking with my Nvidia Shield, which runs Android TV.
It's okay to acknowledge that both of us are exhausted and upset. That whatever issue is going on is real and we commit to doing solving it. Often that much is enough to make anger give way to peace, or at least acceptance and resolve.
This advice sounds great in theory but I (and some others I know) have found it to be one of the worse pieces of advice. I know some people whose marriage was almost destroyed by this advice. What it does not recognize is the impact of being tired has on emotional regulation and rational thought. Sometimes its best just to go to sleep and talk about it in the morning. Most of the time for us it turns into a "Huh, now that I can think, that was nothing, sorry about that. I will work to better recognize when I'm not in a good place".
>The Fight for $15 movement came from expensive cities, and it might be the right policy for those places. But it would severely distort and crush lower-cost cities and states. The right policy for San Francisco isn't necessarily right for Birmingham.

Your point is a valid one. At the same time, if you look at how these numbers actually play out in reality, $15/hour (assuming 40 hours/week -- certainly not a given and 50 weeks per year) works out to $30,000/annum. Figure in the 12%[0] Federal income tax plus the 6.25% FICA (Social Security/Medicare) withholding and that $30,000/annum nets (not including state and local income taxes, which vary) to ~$25,000/annum.

Assuming (a big assumption) no income tax at the state/local levels, that leaves ~25,000/annum at $15/hour, 40 hours/week.

This works out to ~$2100/month for a single earner. Given that rent, food cost, transportation requirements, etc. vary widely across various localities, it's difficult to determine how well folks can get by on that amount of money.

The median rent in the US[1] is ~$1000/month. That represents ~50% of net income (again, assuming zero state/local income tax. Which doesn't bode well for those making $15/hour, given that many don't get 40 hours/week.

Even in the places with the least expensive rent[2], that's still ~25% of income. That's often considered an appropriate level of housing cost relative to income.

What's more, given that the median income in the US is more than twice as high[3] as 40 hours/week at $15/hour, a $15 minimum wage wouldn't put any upward pressure on median income (how relevant such an eventuality might be is arguable, but is interesting to note).

So yes, a national $15/hour minimum wage isn't a panacea. Those living in the poorest/cheapest places could likely live pretty well on $15/hour (again, assuming 40 hours/week, 50 weeks/year -- which doesn't apply to many).

Contrariwise, those who live in places with costs around the median for the US would likely struggle with $15/hour, and those living in the most expensive places would likely not be able to live on just one full-time job.

So yes, $15/hour nationally is a bad idea. In fact, it should be significantly higher in places that are more expensive.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_State...

[1]https://www.deptofnumbers.com/rent/us/

[2]https://dailyhive.com/mapped/10-cheapest-cities-rent-usa

[3]https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2019/09/us-median-hou...

[Edit: Fix spacing typos]
> 100% employment will drive wage growth as demand exceeds supply.

I hesitate to call this a fantasy thought experiment (like all the atoms in the right place for a brick wall to allow a baseball to pass through). Not to mention the illusion of employment statistics (how it's measured), in many countries.

This stable equilibrium is impractical. The world is not a singular country. Employment within a single country is not representative of labor supply/demand, in this context.
That happens to me sometimes, but when it does, I find the leather seats in my BMW very comforting.
Even during the height of beach-chasing in the LA area, it was well known being outdoors was far safer than being stuck indoors.

It wasn't about safety. Arresting a lone surfer or lone beach jogger isn't about safety. It's about compliance. You must comply.
The actual best estimate of death rate in the US is 0.65%, not 3%.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scena...
I'm using markdown files in a git worktree stored on iCloud. This provides fast syncing between my Apple devices and the ability to push everything to a git remote for peace of mind. On iOS I use iA Writer and on the mac I use vim (& wiki.vim) and command line tools like ripgrep. The only annoyance at the moment is that iA Writer doesn't support wiki links.
I don't disagree with phased lockdown -> re-opening plans similar to what we did here in VA. The lockdown started in late March, round one of opening was rural areas and small gatherings, then extending to suburban areas, etc. And if numbers start to go back up, we might shut down again.

The problem I do have is a substantial number of people appear to be ignoring any/all orders to stay home, distance, etc. Everything from the speakeasy gyms mentioned in the article to churches holding indoor services to in-person classes at local schools. All three of which, by most accounts, are likely to result in new COVID clusters.
Mexico has Jarritos, Sabritos, Barcel, and lots of other local brands that are much more prevalent than their American counterparts. If Coca-Cola, Frito-Lay, and McDonalds all vanished suddenly, it would not significantly change the diet of most Mexicanos. You might be able to formulate a coherent hippie rant about "corporate food" but it isn't a specifically American phenomenon.
you haven't said anything new here. Price must rise to account for destruction of a share, but market cap stays the same... (price / share goes up, price / fraction of company stays the same)
There's a web comic version of this story being developed: http://alpha.operationajax.com/
It seems this targets difficulty depends on the the threshold to get registered outside the labour force and that options incentives vs regitering as unemployed. For example, motivated stay at home parents would need strong incentives to become employed.
The argument goes both sides. No company is entitled to receive profits on the products it creates or the money it invests, just because it exists. There is no reason to believe or accept that companies and investors should have more protections from losses than workers.
> I think that’s the reason that doc discusses using cxx, right?

cxx can only really do as much as the C++ compiler can. It's certainly better than nothing. In my experience, a non-trivial amount of C++ code will have additional requirements on how and when you're allowed to call various functions; requirements that aren't enforced by the compiler.

>> It might be the right call for this specific case, though.

> I agree with you, but at the same time, I think in this context, single codebase, abstractions built by the teams making the guarantees at the FFI boundaries... it feels like they would meet the requirements here? It definitely is less strict than Rust, but the way I interpret it is that they are saying they will guarantee the C++ is safe behind the abstractions (maybe they can mark the C++ In some way to state this), and that’s not all that different than what we say in general in Rust when we claim an unsafe call is in fact safe when we wrap it in unsafe.

That's why I said it might be the right call in this specific situation. Normally, I don't think this is the right approach, but it's probably the sensible thing to do here, especially since it's likely the same team of people on both sides of the FFI boundary.
> In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.

Yes and on top of the obvious absurdity of this statement, there is a second level. As long as we punish things with fines they are effectively legal if you're rich enough.
...and because workers show up to make it run, and because everybody pays taxes for the roads and electricity, and on and on.

We could have a dog-eat-dog society like Mad Max or something. Or we could set simple rules and live a decent life. Its kind of what Democracy is about.
Is it not? To me, an 18 year old getting mown down on a beach is a much larger tragedy than an 85 year old dying.
Netflix Conductor: Open-source workflow orchestration engine
Decoding Code Review – How to implement code review in your team
And where exactly is the problem with that?
Facebook employees internally question policy after India content controversy
Is this a perceptual change similar to the Tetris effect or one I have personally experienced, The Witness effect? Or something else?
There’s obviously income thresholds for Medicaid, food stamps and other services. ACA clearly defines standard of medical care. Not sure what your asking because the government has already figured this out base on data.
If it is true that you cannot experimentally determine the impact, that's a pretty good reason to never try UBI.
People may be interested to read a history of Iran-UK relations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93United_Kingdom_re...

tl;dr Britain has a long history of causing harm to other countries.
> Example: Commit message with both ! and BREAKING CHANGE footer:

> refactor!: drop support for Node 6

From Wikipedia's Code Refactoring:

> In computer programming and software design, code refactoring is the process of restructuring existing computer code—changing the factoring—without changing its external behavior.

So if a code change is just a refactor, then its external behavior is unchanged, therefore it is not a breaking change. These two commit labels are incompatible.
I'll be checking into the comments throughout the day. Please let me know if you have any suggestions, especially if you had some experience with open source fundraising.

While I've contributed to multiple open source projects, this is quite a different undertaking to raise funds. Thank you for any ideas or advice you have.
"If someone does something once, they will do it twice"

This is in some ways depressing, but its always been true for me. Individual actions that are outside the realm of someones common patterns are extremely rare. So if they act in a certain way, expect that going forwards. Be cynical.
> A company exists because one or more people risked wealth in order to create a net positive system

What about companies that exist solely as rent seekers? TurboTax is a net negative on society - congress has tried repeatedly to simply mail people a bill or refund, instead of the silly song and dance we go through now, but Intuit has lobbied aggressively to prevent this.
I like these three:

Eating the menu isn't the same as eating the meal. (I believe from fritz pearls).

Thinking is hard that's why most people go straight to judgement. (C Jung)

There's nothing more disgusting that a person with tons of resources (money, time, imagination) but who has no taste. (Paraphrase of Goethe)
You want contact tracers to compile a database of the exact times every person with COVID was in a grocery store? This reeks of bad faith argument.
Thanks for the recommendation. That's great information.
Who's the author? There's three different books with that title on Amazon.
The free market is very good at solving information asymmetries of the kind you are talking about. If it isn't being solved, it's probably because of regulation (regulatory capture). Or maybe it isn't a real problem.

I'm going to guess in this case it's more the latter than the former.
??? Shooter could easily be prosecuted for reckless endangerment without intent, and rightly so.
_ « if you can not afford to buy it, you certainly can not afford to build it »_

To eager business leads saying that a software or service is too expensive and we should build it internally instead...
I stopped reading since it's obviously just a rant but this seems like it's about preschool remote kindergarten - clickbaty title
How much does it differ from mainline AOSP? Do targets not exist for those devices at all?
Maybe, but there doesn't seem to be much danger in them being enacted on a global scale. Even the OP article is treating added-sugar products like age-restricted alcohol, not an outright prohibition. We've seen what happens to laws that try to prohibit consumption in adults (soda ban).
Filecoin: Proof of Storage Systems
... and the CPU has no direct support of in memory stack needed when calling a subroutine. Rumor had it, the guy responsible for this decision (to not include it), was later mutated to the IBM's internal equivalent of Siberia
Module federation: https://webpack.js.org/concepts/module-federation/
Yes you're right, sorry if anyone read my comment to imply that BBC actively used that word to describe a black person themselves.

But it's pretty much accepted in the UK and especially UK media that if reporting on it, you say "the n word", especially if you're a white reporter.

A lot of people were extremely offended, even in the context you've added, and the BBC have now acknowledged it was wrong.

The reason for today's boycott is partly their delay (and initial defence), and partly a wide, subjective view of institutional racism among large parts of the BBC.

This is obviously a very complex topic, but for now can't we at least agree that we don't need to hear the n-word purposefully spoken by BBC News?
taxes will definitely rise, inflation I don't think so.

Everyone has been saying that everything will be so much more expensive if we just dumped money onto the market. Well that already happened, did anything got more expensive? Stocks, but what else?

If things became more expensive, then people can compete to reduce that price in the market. For some reason detractors of UBI have a micro focus on the demand side of equation.
We did this moon puzzle [0] towards the start of quarantine and it was _super_ hard. Part of it was the same-ness of all the featureless grey. It was slow going.

[0]: https://fourpointpuzzles.com/products/the-moon
I honestly couldn't get past the first four paragraphs. The author has... issues. Personally I wouldn't write an article like this to let the whole world in on my neuroticism.

It reminds me of the Mark Twain quote "It's better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt."

It's better to keep your mouth shut and appear neurotic than open it and remove all doubt.
VMware snapshots are not backups.
> I'm not aware of any definition of "free market" which supposes that all players have equal leverage.

bog standard microeconomics 101 uses as an assumption that no player can thru individual choices affect prices in the market, i.e. all players do have equal leverage, zero.

"free market" has more than one usage, but economics's conclusions are valid only if the assumptions are met.
I mean 5 hours is pretty much a days work realistically so if you look at it that way it seems pretty reasonable to me. Project 1 is basically a "you'll take a day to do this" project 3 is basically a week's work, etc.

If it comes with some instructions and hints it would line up with my estimates pretty closely, that said I've done a bit of this sort of work before so I might have less unknown unknowns in my estimate.
People talk about it a lot but I don’t think there is any agreement on what fairness is.

Note that having a leader at all means someone has more power, and that’s inherently unequal, but most people think the benefits are worth it.
That view seems limited. Many relationships, especially longer ones, allow for both attraction and arguments.
> Do you live in the US? The situation is exactly the opposite here.

I do. I live in the Bay Area. Your local situation may be different.

I stand by what I said. I’m surprised to hear some think there will be a permanent COVID emergency. I’m not really doing the whole partisan thing, so I don’t know the state of that debate.

We are in a pandemic; of course there will be pressure on our leaders. My conjecture is that career concerns may be leading some to ignore principles of good governance to minimize the risk that things will turn out poorly for them. I think it is not uncommon for political leaders who call all the shots to back themselves into such a situation. We need a way out.
Reading the articles it's very easy to get an impression that LessWrong is a "best of the best" community.
This is one example that shows how economy is skewed against workers. If salaries rise because there is a shortage of workers, this should be accepted as normal. Instead, it is seem as a cataclysm for the economy that should be avoided because, of course, this shrinks the profit margin for companies. The monetary policy is designed to maintain the power of companies over labor.