skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
So far I stayed away from both startups and consulting companies (Accenture, NTT Data and similar) and it went fairly well.

One day I'll reconsider this choice, probably when I'll have a bit more of financial stability (read: bought a house and paid it in full) and can afford some more risk.

Most people seems to overlook the fact that most startups die within a year, and some more startups drag a long death march before dieing.

You might have fun or do crazy interesting things, but if the company goes bust it might not be pretty.

For the moment, I'll stay conservative about this kind of things.
It also will wreck metabolic havoc since it's processed and often uses PUFAs, non bioavaiable versions of nutrients and and other such things.

You think we have an obesity crisis now? Wait until it's near mandatory to only eat things like cheap-edition soylent.
Secret iPod
Time to start killing industries
Sure, iOS gets updated but the app store won’t let you download old versions of things while new versions are incompatible resulting in a useless device.

I now have an old iPhone and an iPad that both run great, but I can’t do anything useful with them.
One of my main questions is how different these stats are for hard drives that are not running all the time. Personal experience over a decade in an underfunded lab was that if you took a drive offline and left it for couple years, you had 10-40% chance of it failing.
IMO, the honest way to think of a wealth tax is as am implied income tax. That is, a tax on the implied income from wealth. Instead of calculating CGT, which doesn't work very well in practice, just tax the wealth.

This avoids all the problem incentive structure, and even worse tax code structure dealing with the fact that some years you make a return and in other years you make a loss.

Liquidity is solvable, if we're actually talking about a super wealthy tax with a floor of $50m and above. At that point, you are dealing with people individually.

In terms of "reducing the portion left which has to justify the risk/return proposition..." I don't think this applies. You have $1bn. You owe $10m in taxes. You owe that tax regardless of what you invest in, conservatively or otherwise.

It even solves some of that problem, if it replaces CGT. A CGT without loopholes (doesn't exist, and won't) disincentivizes risk. If you win big, you pay big. But of you lose, the IRS doesn't pay you. That incentivizes playing it safe.

IRL tax credits exist, and those more than compensate big CGT payers. In some famous example (eg Trump) derivative policies are big money generators. IE, invest for tax credit, not market gains.
Agreed, although I don't want to go so far as to say color is that intrinsic but they are different features with different goals.

Loom is about many blocking green threads that are scheduled without you thinking about it. Coroutines are meant to support UI programming where you deal with a marshaling the app flow to and from a main thread. Coroutines are more verbose but they handle different use cases than Loom.

That said, Kotlin coroutines are just a library anyway. Its a dependency change not a language change to swap out the implementation.
It is as simple as that. But, populations are very slow to recover. This is only one example and is a bit of a special case.

https://www.newsdeeply.com/oceans/articles/2017/10/13/boom-a...

Fishery collapse has happened in other areas as well. Here is an example that didn't follow a disaster.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_of_the_Atlantic_north...

In all the cases I have looked at recovery is decades long.
I have not seen a single wealth tax proposal suggest the funds be used to lower taxes for others, and it's incredibly disingenuous to suggest any wealth tax proponents want to do that. These types of tax proposals are always to fund other services.
Hopefully not in USA, will like it to be in Europe given its stance on software patents and privacy.
Wuhan coronavirus: From silent streets to packed pools
The problem with trying to separate money and politics is that accumulating money equates to accumulating leverage/power, and that's what gets politics done.

Almost the only thing that could get money out of politics is to make holding money the most shameful thing imaginable, and even that would just force the flow of capital/power underground, not actually curtail anything.

As I get older, I realize more and more that the thirst for power will never go away, and these cycles of accumulation and overthrow will be the overall flavor of human existence for the foreseeable future.

Unless we figure out how to shame people out of wanting power, maybe?
I'm not saying his math is not correct, I'm saying it is misleading that he does not even mention growth at all. He presents carefully selected numbers, ignores tons of stuff around (growth, but also the fact that wealth would be marginal tax) and then makes a bold claim that people will believe in.
Or as other commenters pointed out, get some EU intervention
Cool! I really like the (upcoming) idea of watching your own online profiles on HN and such for upvotes and saving those pages. It’s essentially what I already use those upvotes for in my head, but not what they are in reality.
You could have done 0.7% better :)
Interesting how HGST has consistently low failure rates [0]. What makes these drives so reliable? Japanese fixation on quality? Specifics of Hitachi design?

[0] https://www.backblaze.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Ch...
This might just be me being weird, but does anyone else feel like the makes Rust even more interesting.

Best of luck to the Rust foundation.
> ...the content is merely linguistic, not mathematical.

I disagree with the "merely" here. Half of mathematical practice seems to be finding the right way to think about a thing. If the author were claiming this was a new grand theory, I'd be right there with you, but they seem to be claiming that it's just another way to look at things. I don't see any claims of importance. There's always room for new viewpoints that are content-wise equivalent to old viewpoints but different in how you work with, interpret, and think about them.

> ...but end up just rehashing standard mathematics in opaque ways.

I'd say it's rehashing standard mathematics in strange interesting ways, making it a very fitting curiosity for a site where things like a history of methods of communicating with submarines gets a ton of upvotes.

It's a bit surprising to realist that it seems like we completely agree on what it is and what its contribution to existing standard material is, but for some reason I think it's interesting while you "wish it would stop."
I’ve found Sia to be quite good. Their “skynet” system is really cool.
Teaching kids how to dissociate may not be completely good.
The market could fix this issue if a significant enough chunk of consumers comprehended what they were losing when going with Apple and were willing to put their money where their mouth was. That's simply not going to happen and a market based solution is unreasonable - this is a time where subject matter experts need to help make an informed decision for the population at large.
AFAICT it's only support for IE11 on their product web sites like Office 365.
It's also possible to pass laws that protect employees
How interesting. Gold has been seen as a miraculous material for ages because it never tarnishes and is scarce enough to retain some allure.

But a wealth tax could cause gold to begin to "tarnish" like anything else.
Which is why a wealth tax is a better approach than "penalty" taxes on yachts or jets.

Would the high end suppliers of luxury items see a reduction in the very small numbers of people able to buy their top end products? Yes. Is that a bad thing? Probably no in the scheme of the entire economy or even the luxury industry affected.

People downgrading from their $100m yacht to a modest $95m yacht isn't going to destroy the yacht industry.
The simplicity of this post notwithstanding, I think wealth taxes are the wrong tool for reducing inequality (the main reasoning behind its support): 1) it is difficult to implement, and 2) it disincentivizes economic activity.

The right taxation tool for tackling inequality is Land Value Taxation [0].

Some observations of our current situation:

1. The income gap between capital and labor that has been growing since the 1970s (as observed by, e.g. Piketty) is largely due to housing [1]
2. Economic growth and opportunity is increasingly concentrated in the the urban areas (and even within cities, a handful of them are responsible for most of the growth), however, zoning laws makes it very difficult to build new housing there and thus for rural labor to join the economic party. Thus, as we concentrate economic activity we explicitly exclude huge swaths of the population from participating in it.
3. With finite land, concentrated opportunities (i.e. no viable alternatives [2]), and overt house building restrictions, workers who do have the opportunity to work in urban areas are "willing" to pay the absurdly high rents that landowners ask. You can clearly see this in the Bay Area where, prior to COVID-19, the rents would just track the income level of tech employees. The current landowners are the main winners of the success of the urban areas.
4. On top of that (and specific to the USA), if a landowner decides to sell a property, the sale will be taxed as a capital gain which has a lower tax rate than the labor rate. We are literally incentivizing rent-seeking.

A Land Value Tax (LVT) taxes the value of the land (rather than that of the property). This has the following benefits:
1. It incentivizes more efficient usage of the land (a single family house and a high-rise pay the same tax if the have the same footprint and are next to each other).
2. Land is finite, so it can't "disincentivize" land production.
3. When land appreciates, it is rarely if ever because the owner invested in it, rather because the economy around it makes it more valuable. This tax captures that value and returns it to the community (rather than privatizing it and giving it to the landowner).
4. It is a progressive tax.

Instead of arguing whether and how to implement a wealth tax, we should pursue a national LVT.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax
[1] https://www.brookings.edu/bpea-articles/deciphering-the-fall...
[2] Technically, you can choose from a set of successful cities, but they all follow similar patterns.
I have made a couple of bug reports regarding Feedback Assistant losing my report. I don't understand why immortalizing user input isn't a higher priority in general. I no longer trust that iOS devices will not suddenly lose unsaved content. Apple has failed me with its memory management on both iPhone X and iPhone 7 with iOS 13 (and earlier), so I refute that spending more money will solve it, though it may help.
Show HN: Automatic Cryptocurrency price publishing to social networks
> The existence of billionaires clearly undermines the core principles of democracy which is that all people have essentially the same political power.

I'm very pro-democracy; but that isn't a principle that has ever shown to have massive success at scale. There are a lot of fools out there.

Notably, some of the most successful experiments in democracy (British, American & Indian traditions) all have pretty clear principles of not having people with equal political power. Eg, a judge simply has more political power than an ordinary person. Britain and India have appointed members of their upper houses and the US has several safeguards to stop power defaulting to a majority.

Democracy hasn't achieved success due to some rosy concept of equality, it achieves success because the insufferable can't hold power and it provides an excellent method for different interest groups to negotiate and play mock-battle to work out who is stronger. There is plenty of evidence that dictatorship would be a better model if there were some magic method of keeping the dictator focused on good results - and indeed the US political system has tendencies in that direction. The creation of billionaires as replaceable aristocracy is a potential strength.

Plus most of the top US billionaires are self-created. It isn't really comparable to aristocracy either.
I don't understand what this actually means or any implications of this other than the IP being transferred which would prevent Mozilla from shutting it down and the community having to fork under a new name and to also allow monetary donations. Is the long term goal for a foundation like this to eventually hire full time devs?
Cryptojacking worm steals AWS credentials from Docker systems
This deserves to be cited:

HGST drives win the prize for predictability. Boring, yes, but a good kind of boring.
Yes, the US doesn't seem safe.
Definitely. There's a conversation to be had about which billionaires do we want. Most Americans have a favorable opinion of Bill Gates [0], but not Jeff Bezos [1]. And there's good arguments for having large-scale philanthropic efforts be semi-privatized.

A "punitive tax on interest income" is popular with the left because it is, on paper, very progressive and avoids taxing the poor. But in truth, I don't think people actually want fewer billionaires, they just don't want aristocratic billionaires.

It also doesn't help that it's so unclear what the money would be spent on.

[0] https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/explore/public_figu...
[1] https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/explore/public_figu...
If Firefox were spun off, why still have the Mozilla foundation?
I remember seeing it used as an interrogation technique on the murderer Chris Watts. The investigators basically acted all friendly and helpful at first and said this polygraph is just standard procedure. Then afterwards they left the room to "check the results", and on returning accused him of lying. He confessed during the same interview. Hard to say whether the polygraph helped at all, but it shows that it is sometimes used as an interrogation tactic.
if the money was used to purchase assets, then those assets will end up being counted as part of your wealth even tho it's not liquid. So you'd either have to be forced to sell some of those assets to cover the wealth tax, or make up for it by using income (from said assets, or some other source of income).

Or you consume all your wealth asap, and leave no residual wealth remaining for investment. This , however, is not a good outcome, since residual wealth is where investment money comes from.
No problem with that. The problem I have is with selling people bullshit golden promises of wealth when that is mathematically impossible given the cap table. Just don't even offer equity at all at that point so employees aren't deluded.

At this point I know what I'm doing enough to not get burnt by these types of scams, and when I was an engineer I was lucky to basically work for FAANGs the whole time where they are very charitable to employees. But when I was 23 I didn't have the knowledge to evaluate pre-ipo equity and some startups prey on this information imbalance to delude people.
> but people eat wild mammals on a regular basis.

Not in meaningful quantity. It would bet that the median time since a typical Westerner last had wild mammal could be measured in months if not years.
Any good studies estimating the carrying capacity of Earth with current ag tech?
I built one: https://usertrack.net

It has a plain PHP + MySQL backend, so it's really easy to install (on a LAMP server, as a WordPress plugin or one-click install on a DigitalOcean droplet).

When I started building it 8 years ago, the idea was exactly this, it should run on any basic shared hosting that can run PHP, so any site can just have its own analytics dashboard, without relying on 3rd parties.
I'm not sure if I'm just weird, but I've never had any issues switching between work and home. When work is done, I close my work laptop and open my personal laptop, same desk, and I'm not at work. Or I go upstairs. I just... stop. I wear the same clothes around the house as I do at work mostly (except shorts vs. jeans, I don't like long sleeves or pants). There's so much non-work stuff that I typically have to do after work that work will never enter my mind again for the rest of the day after I stop. I have no problem ignoring Slack notifications until tomorrow... just swipe them away, they'll still be unread when I start in the morning. I don't even have work e-mail on my phone. The only exception to this is when I'm on my on-call rotation.

I suppose that having separate hardware for work helps, but it's on my personal desk and is connected to the second input of my personal monitor, and always has been... it even shares the same mouse and KB I use with my personal laptop. I was WFH most of the week pre-lockdown as it is, so it wasn't a huge change for me.

That said, I will be getting an "office" work space soon with an adjustible sit/stand desk that I will put work-related stuff on (including a new keyboard/mouse/monitor), but it's going to be next to the desk I already have for personal stuff.

The difficulty with a mental split between work and not-work escapes me. Either I need to do work, or I'm done and can stop... and I start and stop typically by the clock. If I work more time one day, I'll reclaim that time on a later day with the full support of my leadership.
a zip file contains useful collection of yoga: https://web.archive.org/web/20200818160234/https://file.io/N...
Sorry about that! My site went down, but it's back up now. And yes, that's Justin's blog.
He is an extremist and he is also a visionary.
> The question if billionaires are bad for society is pretty much the same question as asking if the aristocracy was bad for previous societies.

Are you comparing billionaires of today, with dictatorships and monarchies of yesterday? Where people can be killed, jailed, sent to work camps, etc. at will? Are people today working for "the man" essentially indentured servants?

> The existence of billionaires clearly undermines the core principles of democracy which is that all people have essentially the same political power.

I don't think this is a core principal. Every person should have the same voting power, and the laws should apply to everyone equally. But the president and representatives clearly have much more political power than any average citizen.

> Essentially strong wealth imbalance leads to unstable societies.

This is a big claim, and would have to show some sort of evidence to support it.
>>that infringes on someone else's negative right (to take their property without the state interfering)

That is not a negative right, it is not a right at all.

The entire concept of rights, as understood by common law, is based on Natural Rights under a Lockean philosophy of Self Ownership, that you own yourself.

Under no conceptional understanding of natural rights would have have the right to take someone else's property.

So if we are going to start from a completely foreign concept of negative rights then we have no basis for a conversation at all

https://www.learnliberty.org/videos/positive-rights-vs-negat...
The implied income from wealth is zero, because e.g. $10 being spent ten years from now is less valuable than $10 being spent today, in a way that - in expectation - accounts precisely for the apparent "income" yielded by $10 (as 'wealth') over ten years.
>Consider somebody trying to get a job in modern society. The phone is needed to apply. The phone is needed to do the interview. The phone is needed to take a picture of your id and receive the contract when you're hired.

That makes it a very useful tool in modern life. Not the center of modern life.

>They don't have a vehicle

Fuel for the bus or subway, then.

>don't use physical mail (paper letters)

and they don't vote? or participate in the census?

>couldn't care less about journalism.

doesn't match the young people I know.
It's interesting that, despite Seagate being relatively bad compared to HGST, Backblaze keeps installing more and more Seagate drives and not that many HGST drives. I guess the analysis that's missing here is the cost per drive hour?
My thoughts exactly. This is just a case of an ML algorithm describing the face it sees on the Martian surface[0], kind of like a "machine vision Turing test." It's not that it isn't interesting; it's just that it's kind of the expected result when you train a neural net on zillions of images, some of which include faces.

---

[0]: https://www.space.com/11947-photos-mars-illusions-martian-fa...
You may be interested in voice2json for offline batch processing: https://voice2json.org

Here's an example using GNU parallel: http://voice2json.org/recipes.html#parallel-wav-recognition
He's the lead of project Loom, so he knows a thing or two on what he's talking about ;-)
And wasn't it also supposed to be temporary to pay for the war?
I thought it was referring to the "Olson" time zone database, used by virtually any operating system except Windows to keep track of time zone changes:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3080437

Voluntarily maintained by a single person for decades until hit by a big lawsuit and ICANN stepped up to help.
> applied to unrealized gains as well

so it will also apply to unrealized losses too then? Or is it a one way street where paper gains are taxed as tho it is realized, but paper losses can't be offset?
you pay income tax (and presumably any wealth tax) no matter where you move to as a US citizen unlike most countries.
All of that said, "ssh -Y" works pretty well for me. It's pretty usable.

And from a user perspective I personally like the "application connects to render" model much better than VNC or RDP style entire-desktop streaming.
All of the tax money is redistributed by the government. What else can it do with it? If it pays off debt, it is redistributing it, if it invests in infrastructure, it is redistributing it, if it sends cash to the population, they'll spend it and it has been redistributed.
How to use sed to automate mind numbing tasks (with examples)
I never get tired of these reports, and if I ever again buy a drive with a high failure rate for Backblaze, somebody slap me!
Great news :)
It’s not open source.
Beats One was supposed to be a differentiator for Beats before it was acquired (I worked on it). The point was that it would be unique content you couldn't get from a commodity streaming service, and the hosts would bring an existing fanbase.

My impression is post-acquisiton Apple figured their brand would be sufficient to differentiate them, so they kind of stopped caring about the very high-touch work involved in curated radio. I think at this point it makes sense to view Apple Music as "commodity music streaming but it's apple, so it's preloaded, etc."
Mozilla Foundation can't accept Firefox specific donations because the Mozilla Foundation does not develop Firefox. The Mozilla Corporation does and the foundation cannot give money to the corporation (only the other way around). So you'd need to redo a whole lot of things for this to be possible.
> An income tax should do more to dissuade ambitious people than a wealth tax

That is wrong.

I don't think you understand the power of compounding.

That is the whole point of all of this... wealth compounds. Wealth taxes compound negatively.

Read about Benjamin Franklin and his obsession with compounding interest. I learned it in school.
Apparently you're limited to 50 MB for free, which is pretty short if you can't send audio files but only videos.