skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You're always incentivized to make marginally more money with the negative income tax because it gives you a monotonically increasing effective income vs job income curve, whereas some welfare systems end up with disincentives at various points of income where you'd make overall less by exiting the income level where you're receiving the aid (the same curve gets a negative slope or a downward jump).
I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I'm upset that centralized control led to big tech being able to so easily squash ideological competition (Parler and NY Post, and I am no ally of these, as well as stuff on the left and many individuals), and I want to see some sort of government whip-cracking. On the other hand, if they repeal 230 and everyone is afraid of lawsuits, then you'll see comments disappear everywhere, content disappear everywhere, freedom to publish diminish, and not platforms but content itself be centralized to that which is 'approved.'
I admit I just recently learned about Curtis (I am not a native English speaker) but the ideas of his documentaries seem fascinating, so I am planing to watch some of them. Now, my question is, What books would you consider in the same style? By that I mean content not form.
"the company's new privacy policy, which would have allowed it to sell patient data."
Why does any source code exist then? What is the point of GitHub with codebases that are 7+ years old? Would mass adoption of the outdated server force updates or god forbid a fork of the code base?

Please excuse me for being direct, I do not accept your defeatist attitude on this one. You won’t have stickers, such a shame, but you would have the ability to create your own signal service
It's just a cleaner design, having implemented a tickless kernel for an RTOS. All of these "what is the actual timer frequency" questions that get more and more complicated as you're doing more (and other contexts are doing more) just sort of disappear.
The Life of a Web Component – Declarative State
Has India banned other religions?

Cue pearl clutching about slippery slopes.
What you're talking about isn't a problem until and unless whole-brain emulation becomes a thing. You cannot assert copyright over a human brain because you cannot copy a human brain; and insamuch that brain is capable of copying other works, that's already covered by standard copyright law. It would be a good plot for a 2000s-retro-futuristic cyberpunk book (P2Ppunk?) but I suspect the Supreme Court would rule that the 14th Amendment overrides copyright interest in human brains were that to become a problem.

(If you wanted a 2010s-retro-futuristic cyberpunk sequel book you'd have some far-right militia group arguing for bringing back slavery to protect author's rights or something. Call it Twitterpunk.)
They are the number 1 app in app stores right now. People are morons. They're not going out of business anytime soon.
Isn't the practical difference the past vs. the future? A negative income tax is based on already reported income, whereas UBI is clawed back once income is reported.
Twitch Live Video Transmuxing/Transcoding (2017)
If true, I’m quite shocked just based on the bald-faced, zeroth order flagrant incorrectness of things you wrote in other comments about it.

I worked as a fund manager at an asset management firm for a few years, often sitting daily with our general counsel on many issues. Nothing you have said about this, including the totally off the wall comparison with Phil Falcone, causes me to believe your take is trustworthy here. I’m not a lawyer, but just because you allegedly are one doesn’t mean I’m going to take your opinion on this at face value.
Hypothetically they'd get rid of a lot of welfare programs and just institute a negative tax, which has a smooth curve upwards. More money always means you make more, just maybe not linearly.

UBI can do this too - it's not clear to me what the practical differences between UBI and "negative income tax" are.
I hope people understand that this is exactly why sanctuary city policies and government identification for undocumented individuals is so important. If an individual does not feel safe seeking recourse from the government, they are not capable of exercising the rights they do have in the US.
Looks like a normal PowerPoint to me
> distributing your own web browser

network effects
I suspect that Google will eventually get Matrix clients right. It's really no different than an email client or web browser. Element is *not* a content community it's a communication client app. As a customer, I do not want Google regulating my communication software clients for content. That is my job as a user.
I have a OnePlus 6 and I have security update Nov 1, 2020.
Actually when it comes to personal experiences, and human to human offline interaction I've just noticed I don't need to agree with everyone.

I have liberal friends, conservative friends. I've dated liberals and I've dated conservatives. Well I still vote, I'm not nearly as political as I used to be. I don't use social media ( including online dating) , if only because I found people to be insanely mean. I don't want to be called slurs when discussing politics, and that's what happens online. Now if I'm at a bar, I might actually even buy a voter from the other team a beer. I can see his or her humanity. Online the other team is literally a group of evil villains who want to destroy all that is good in the world. And I'm at the point where I think social media needs to be heavily regulated to stop society from imploding. It's just too powerful, too harmful of a tool as is.
I'll support the Clean-up Technical (Legal) Debt political coalition.
Unless you are Brock Turner-esque, in which case "20 minutes of fun" shouldn't ruin your whole life.
I hate to ask, but can you dumb this down? I still don’t really get it. Are you saying that if you have no job that 100% of your income is tax funded, but if you have even a shitty job that you still get more benefit than the job alone but this is sliding scale down to some unknown point which you no longer receive any benefit at all?
Five Things Low-Code Is Missing
YNAB but for actual poor people. The problem with YNAB is that it does not allow you to budget in future earnings that you “know” you will have (like salary paid on a date). The justification for this is that you should be budgeting so that you don’t rely on this. But if you are living paycheck to paycheck, you have to. The main use of budgeting in that case is to avoid overdrawing your account, since not everyone has a credit card.
It's pretty clear that minimum wage increases are inflationary. They may not be NET inflationary in some circumstances.

Consider this thought experiment: raise the minimum wage to $2 million/hour. What happens to prices?
Yeah, it's called "the great compromise". During the days when the founders were debating majority rule vs minority rights, they couldn't decide what to do. So they created two houses that both have to coordinate to pass law, but provided a few escape hatches.

Random, but this is also why adding Puerto Rico as a state is extremely threatening to the political paradigm today. It would add 2 extra senators, who would most likely be democratic.
Authors like this frame the UBI/minimum wage debate as if we just haven't figured out the right policy mix to fix poverty or precarity -- as if it's a problem of ideas. I propose that it's in fact a question of power -- 1) who benefits from people being poor and how much 2) power do they have?

1) Owners of capital, who don't want to see their labour costs escalate and use firing/the poverty gun as a disciplinary tool.

2) Overwhelming power, channeled through vectors such as billions spent in lobbying or campaign contributions or threats to take their capital to friendlier jurisdictions.
The end game of higher education is to become churches, recruit followers, and teach a religion. It even includes original sin.
I guess if you’re buying lottery tickets at $.01-$.02 per contract it’s be a 50-100% change in costs.
Andrew Yang:

> I am a huge fan of a negative income tax, but I prefer a UBI for multiple reasons. It lowers the administrative burden because you don’t need to figure out how much I made last year. It removes any strange shenanigans in terms of trying to report a low income. It alleviates a payments timing issue — you’re not likely to get your negative income tax when you might need it. And politically, I think it’s more appealing to be able to say to everyone: You have intrinsic value. This is how much you get for being an American, [a] human being.
This is equivalent to whether the UBI is paid on the first day of the period or the last day of the period and is only a meaningful distinction in the first period of implementation.
That’s a whole 6 hours of profit. They’re at almost $1 bill in annual revenue for 2020.
Or who have positive effectiveness when looking solely at their production, but negative effectiveness of the team or company's production?
The concern is that we're soon going to reach a point where "our current economic order" - the assumption that every healthy adult should have a full-time job - is unsustainable. I wouldn't say I oppose a $15 minimum wage, and I don't think the author would either, but we do desperately need to start thinking about our transition to a post-work society and I worry minimum wage debates are sucking up a lot of the energy towards that. We risk getting stuck in a terrible equilibrium, where many people can't get jobs but all our social safety nets are built on the assumption that they can. (There's a serious argument to be made that we're already there.)
Sudo: Ineffective No_root_mailer and Baron Samedit
I would surmise they mean that by giving people cash you don’t have them dependent upon any programs that dole out benefits depending on various eligibility factors. For example right now if you need food support in the US you can apply for food stamps (SNAP) but the problem is that food stamps can only be used for food and so you create a dependency on that particular program with the person needing food support. But if you give them cash you then allow the person to decide for themselves what mix of things they spend that on according to their specific needs and can probably do away with most of the specific programs that only deal with a specific benefit that may not be in the right proportion to other benefits depending on need.
It's very disappointing. I don't expect people to know these things. But on HN, I'd expect them to ask or listen or read about it. Instead people just post about how it's a big finance conspiracy and how they're going to sue everyone...
Fleeing violence and poverty? By voluntarily becoming slaves (people who are owned by other people and have no agency in their lives) by illegally entering a systemically racist and white supremacist country where racist white supremacists cops hunt black people like dogs on the street with impunity?!

And they are slaves inside the US but in no other country that they are in except the US?

This logic does not square for me.
This subthread is confusing clearinghouses, clearing brokers, and execution brokers.

Citadel is an execution broker. Their job is to match buyers and sellers.

Apex (in these conversations) is a clearing broker. Robinhood is its own clearing broker. Clearing brokers are responsible for ensuring that money and stock actually changes hands (this takes 2 days, but all of these firms work together to create the illusion, using credit, that it's instant; those credit arrangements are why brokerages post collateral).

Clearing brokers are members of clearinghouses. The relevant one here is (I think) NSCC, which is owned by DTCC. Policy set at DTCC determines how much collateral needs to be posted to cover any particular set of trades.

DTCC drastically ratcheted up the amount of collateral required to cover trades in meme stocks, which had the effect of 10x'ing the amount of cash Robinhood was required to post to insure that it would not go out of business before its current set of in-flight trades cleared. It made the same requirement of Apex, which passed restrictions down to its customers. These companies are contractually required to make good on collateral requirements, so there isn't much choice involved.
I actually agree about RoaringKitty/DeepFuckingValue. From what I've seen none of his posts or comments were at all encouraging or even insinuating that others should follow his lead. His YouTube channel even has a disclaimer video. In an ideal world he'd include that disclaimer at the beginning and end of every video but the fact that he has one at all at least demonstrates he's thought about the potential market implications and taken steps to make sure his followers don't take his commentary the wrong way. I'm actually a bit curious if DFV will be hired as a PM by a hedge fund when the dust settles. I don't think GME is the first time his thesis has paid off.

But the people saying things like "buy GME and call your broker to instruct them not to lend your shares" or encouraging people to go "all in" and the comments specifically encouraging others to buy GME to screw $hedgeFund have left a pretty clear paper trail of their intent to induce others to purchase and manipulate the market.
I have a 2013 Chrome Pixel, with 240 dpi, and I’ve also found that the Xft.dpi setting takes care of nearly everything, although there are some interface elements in some applications that still display tiny type. The author seems to be suggesting that 163 DPI is high resolution; is it commonly understood to be so? Because that would look a bit fuzzy to me.
Show HN: Nodewood, a JavaScript SaaS web app starter kit
With UBI, people will be more selective in their job search. With negative tax rate not so much since you would need to work in order to benefit. I am not a fan of them because they will simply push out cost of living and the poor will be back in same relative economic disadvantage. The only realistic solution I see is free education even into adult age.
My understanding is just because something meets the layman definition of, say, “market manipulation” doesn’t mean it meets the legal definition of that. This also applies to things like recklessness - the legal definition and the layman definition are different.

Furthermore, AFAIK it’s not that something like “market manipulation” is illegal - it’s usually more complex than that, and might only be illegal under circumstances XYZ.

It’s tempting to read laws as if they’re written in plain English, but it’s really more like a specialized dialect where words and phrases have different (and often complex) meanings.
Please buy a Honda generator and don't waste time with a Harbor Freight (Hazard Fraught) one. You need this to work in a time of peril - not a use case for HF tools.
Yes, while this has issues of its own (as long as the web services they are using are centralized and corporate controlled) I have observed the less technical users I have been helping with computer issues are totally happy as long as they sit in front of a computer with a web browser, where they can log in to their online accounts and get going.

Some might want a full mail client and possibly a printer configured and that's about it.
> You misunderstood the fallacy. it's not "don't listen to experts".

It certainly doesn't mean "listen to the experts". There is no such intellectual guidance there. The perspective of "logical fallacy" only cares about whether something must be true, and it has no opinion on how to judge whether something is probably true, or how to develop trust.

Formal methods became fashionable only late in mathematical history, yet mathematicians somehow achieved productivity up to that point.
I think it’s also important to mention that Robinhood also has the most brain dead simple UI out of all the trading platforms I’ve seen.

The brokers you’ve listed have more complicated user interfaces than the casual trader would care to learn about. Fidelity and Vanguard also probably care way more about their reputations than to gamify their platform like RH does.
It's not a restriction on taking risk. It's a restriction on spreading misinformation to pump and dump a stock. You could say that the perpetrators were meming, or they didn't know the illegality, or they got caught up in the moment but that defense

1) gives too much benefit of doubt to these people. WSB types know very well that what they're doing is unethical and illegal. It's exactly what they accuse hedgefund boogeymen of doing to stir up their victims.

2) This situation isn't as novel as it seems. There are already deliberations and legal mechanisms in place to determine the culpability of someone who only took a small part in a crime, is a first-time offender or whatever other excuse there is.

3) To carry this point home, I think HackerNews already censors (thankfully) links that try to pump random penny stocks. This type of internet scheme is not new, and most of us have already decided it is something we won't tolerate. This behavior is outrageous and it's not made any better because it's happening in broad daylight or on a large scale. We shouldn't be in such awe of the 'revolution' that we are blinded to its impact.
I believe that this is included in the report generated by `powercfg /energy`.
Show HN: I'm Open-Sourcing Graph Attention Network (GAT) PyTorch
Most of the Starlink constellation is at 500km and higher, so a much longer lifetime.

... it only takes 1 collision to cause a chain reaction when we have 40k satellites, much less 1m.
It's actually worse than that. There's often not any kind of sliding scale.

Make $x and you get rental assistance, medical care for your kids, food aid, whatever.

Make $x+1, and you get jack and shit.

There's no reason for it to be that way, in a world with ubiquitous calculators and computers, but that's how it often is.
Isn't one of the most popular Wayland clients a window manager? I'm confused.
Now I see the value of Bitcoin and Ethereum. Can we build an exchange on Ethereum? Maybe handling high number of transactions will still be a problem. Can we accept the delay for the benefit of decentralization?
quickdraw and carbon were explicitly presented as legacy APIs when OSX was introduced and were supported for backwards compatibility reasons.

Quartz on the other hand, the actual supported API, has over time outclassed Xlib in almost every conceivable way.
> This program is in no way meant as criticism of the Wayland project. It simply demonstrates that creating a secure desktop requires more than just a few server-side restrictions.

This is the right takeaway. Unfortunately, given the previous paragraph and the name, I suspect a lot of people are going to think "Wayland is insecure, so why bother?". The reality is closer to "many parts of Linux are insecure, and Wayland closes one of the holes".
I managed two weeks in university IT as a developer before I just had to leave and never come back. If it is anything like UBC IT, it is not worth losing math over.
I love the concept of uniwidth typefaces, but the problem stands that almost every single uniwidth font looks fundamentally _differently_ when you bold them or not.

The aspect of bolding in normal fonts makes them easier to see, and increases the spacing to accommodate, but nearly every uniwidth bold font fundamentally changes the font to shift them to a new font that is marginally based on the non-bold.

I'm not saying I entirely dislike them, or that there aren't good uniwidth fonts out there, but it's just that in almost all cases the difference in the same font set is fundamentally different.
Wasn't a big part of the debacle some pretty questionable decisions by FAA as well ?
Oh yes now I remembered it all. I went to army right after that. But I was a Hippie at the time and concious objector of sort. The inquisition panel found out my objection was not "real" so I ended up as Army Radio Man. But I learned to morse very badly, probably because of mild dyslexia. So rest of the year I was making test equipment for a Russian Missile Control because of language skills ( https://flic.kr/p/JycyMy ). And just occasionally consulting the "Kyber"-team. I did not get any medals or ranks for my contribution, because untrustworthy Hippie with bad hairdo. Also I was rejected from army reserve duties, which was very good.
That's the underlying issue, I think -- "nobody else wants to do my unusual thing". Most people are happy with the corporate internet, or at least indifferent. If you want to change that, you have to add some major value. (And, people have added such value; there are users of Tor, after all.)

My point is, switching from HTTP/1.1 to QUIC doesn't really make a difference here. The battle against centralized control of parts of the Internet has been lost and no protocol spec is going to change that outcome. Instead, there needs to be major innovation from the camp that wants to fundamentally change the world.
Isn't the saying that if your taxidriver or shoeshiner starts talking about the stock market, it is time to get out?

Do we need to add barista's to the list?
Sounds like Robinhood was setup to fail from the beginning, if so. If you make it as easy as possible to do trades but then start getting "rate-limited" essentially, it was never gonna scale in the first place.

Gonna be interesting to see what gets to replace Robinhood for easy and reliable trades in the future.
93% of blacks in America were killed by other blacks
Honestly saying a UBI is superior to anything else is so open to interpretation that it’s just asking for it to die by being gummed up in endless debate (which is where it’s been languishing so far).

Make a case that with all things considered (including government labour and other bureaucracy costs) that a UBI is fundamentally better value overall than the current system and you’d have it in two years.

I think that’s a case that could be made convincingly. UBI is simple. It’s impact is therefore easily measurable.

It’s self-regulating if you believe that the taxpayer will be incredibly sensitive to systemic abuse because they know they’re fundamentally paying a fixed amount directly. If abuse were becoming a problem, the public would express their distaste at the polls.

It also frees up a lot of people to pursue ideas they might otherwise be prevented from exploring, which could have outsized macroeconomic benefits.
I use a handful of Windows machines regularly and don't experience most of these problems.

Your disk space issue may be related to automated backups, system restore service, and LAN caching of Windows updates. You can disable these. Disk cleanup wizard can help here too.

Edge hijack has never happened to me, although a handful of links inside windows apps/services/docs do force edge to launch (which itself causes a confirmation to make it default, which I decline)

Windows is famous for backward compatibility, especially compared to Linux or MacOS, so I'm not sure what issues you're running into there. There are some strange system dependencies that I've seen cause issues; cortana search powering the start menu search feature and disabling the swap file causing numerous invisible failures come to mind.

Faulting anti-malware is frustrating because on windows you basically have to run it, and the default one is pretty okay. Most commercial options like symantec, norton, mcafee, etc are absolutely terrible.
Let's see now.

Is BTC->USD conversion taxable according to your suggestion? USD->BTC? I suppose one or both, that's fine.

Now, is a transaction on Binance? (That would be one crypto for another)?

Is a transaction on Bitmex? (That would be futures.... not actually cryptocurrencies?) How about the Bitcoin futures on CME? A crypto ETF?

It's likely possible to build a suggestion that will curb "crypto" trading, but the cat is completely out of the bag, so you have to figure out what you want to stop.

But what's the real rationale for banning it?
A negative income tax is mathematically equivalent to a UBI as long as we have progressive taxation.