skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't feel like I'm getting screwed. As a small business owner, I think I get fantastic value for the taxes I pay every year. It could be better, sure, but having lived on 4 continents, it's here that I've chosen to live and start my latest business.
In my case suscription models with somewhat absolute pricing were attractive because it provides a way to even out the money cost over time.

But the price was not the only thing in consideration when it came to costs.
The concerns my client had with suscription model was if the provider would still exist and provide same service in a year, or in five years for that matter. The amount of time they had to invest for the PoS (which was with inventory management) needed to be secured. They were okay with phasing in the inventory over a long period (it was a specialty store with a huge inventory) given the system didn't rely on being functional if only it knew the inventory - as long as the time investment couldn't be lost. Should the PoS provider go bankrupt or otherwise stop the service they wanted to be sure their effort time-wise wasn't worthless and could be ported somewhere else. Contracts with a minimum binding periods was okay as long as it didn't mean the time they used the system couldn't benefit them elsewhere.

Someone pointed out that the robustness wasn't a deal-breaker because you could revert to handwriting receipts. It's true that you can just do that but the point about PoS isn't just that it's slightly more effective than a calculator that can print out receipts for customers. A PoS grants valuable data. Even older cash-registers have data capabilities such as who the salesperson was and time of purchase.
If you can provide great analytic tools for the data it has gathered, that'll be a major improvement of many available PoS systems.

But store owners also care about stability very much. If the system doesn't work when there's internet shortage they won't be happy. No electricity is probably only acceptable factor when it comes to having a PoS on a computer.
If the system is slow and customers are waiting because there's unstable internet they will also be dissatisfied. Debit card processing all goes over the internet and when it's slow customers have bad experiences but at least they know it's because the internet is messing up and some ISP probably is to blame. If the cash-register is screwing it up they will blame the store.

I've worked in a store for a couple of years as a sales person so if you have more questions I'd be happy to help. I'm available through email: pierre@snowboardforbundet.com.
How does not being silent help you? Talking to them provides no benefit to you and gives the police opportunity to make you slip up. There's no upside to talking to the police and a lot of potential drawbacks.
The question is, does it require more than 30%?
Yeah, but aren't we talking about the "last mile" problem, not about dark fiber? I thought that most of the dark fiber was in long inter-city/state runs, not running down my neighborhood street.

I thought he was referring to dormant fiber that the telco owns that used to be available to third-parties at wholesale rates.
People can't vote away multi-million dollar CEO bonuses, though.
Yes, that's how it works: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_tax
Apple's unreleased products are already inferior.
My friend just came home from 2 months in China on an English teaching program through Yale. Part of the people he was teaching English were established Chinese businessmen, one of whose company makes a chip for Apple. Apparently the iPad 4 is already in production, and production on the iPhone 6 is about to start. Has anyone else heard this?
About the binary file format : http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2008/02/19.html

I'll let you set your own opinions.
Not sure what people are going to do with 20mbps+ broadband when they will certainly set caps that will be used up within the first few days of your billing cycle?

Sonic apparently has no cap but that's virtually unheard of today. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/07/05/...

Which would you rather have, unlimited speed with a 150gb cap or 6mpbs with no cap?
The Death of the Generalist Software Developer
Not sure why someone down-voted that... But it doesn't sound too pricey as long as it does what it needs to do and it does it well. 20-30 dollars is probably what most store owners pay just for being able to accept credit cards. In my country the credit card terminal alone costs the same as a mid-end desktop computer and you still pay for the service to be able to accept credit cards and in some cases fees for the processing.
I bet it wouldn't phase them a bit. They would create a watchdog professional organization (see US Chamber of Commerce) that makes sure local elections and appointments are influenced just as effectively as federal ones.

This already happens in judge elections in many states. Certain "business-friendly" candidates are showered in campaign money, with the expectations that when certain cases are appealed those judges will end up making "the right choice".
Most Expensive Google AdWords Keywords
The problem is that gifts to charity aren't coercive. I know, it's strange to say that it's a problem if it isn't coercive, and I'd agree that many of the inefficiencies of government stem from the coercive nature of taxes (no need to convince people to give you money if you can just take it by force). But I'm really a moderate in all of this - I personally don't think a modern state can survive on donations, or a "pay only if you think the government will do a good job with the money" tax code. We're gonna have to collect some taxes, rich people (in my opinion) should pay more than poor people, and there's no way people, rich or poor, are just going to pony up out of a deep affection and fondness for the federal government.

If tax rates are going to be paid and progressive (they actually aren't), then they'll have to be coercive. I think what Mr. Buffet is arguing here is that the rich need to be coerced into paying more in taxes than they currently do. I'm inclined to agree with him, even if I have to hold my nose as I do.
Good point.

However, I feel that I obtained a similar education in teamwork by working odd jobs throughout my law and computer science studies.
Definitely. He might not be able to buy the whole thing, but as long as he substantially drives up the cost of a Congressman, that's a step forward. A couple hundred grand (and 10 million in lobbying money) gets you billions of benefits, which is way too cheap.
Exactly, as much as some individuals would like to focus solely on the ills of government, there are socially beneficial programs supported by the government which need continual funding:

http://know.about.com/Government_Programs
When choosing internet service 4 months ago for my new place, i made a decision that my next job hunt will be around areas were walking distance from the office are covered by sonic.

Startups think about mentioning this as a benefit. seriously.
I'm pretty sure that's because America does a better job of this than most other countries. Out of curiosity, what kind of rate are you paying?
Random Chat Me
Johan Ku Autumn/Winter 2011-12
It's interesting that all of these links talk about federal income taxes, but you talk about them as if they're talking about all taxes that people pay. Once you take into account payroll, sales, and sundry other taxes that people pay (many of which are pretty regressive), the system becomes much less progressive (it's still slightly progressive as a whole, but much less so than conservatives like to cast it).
Note that "Contagion Health" AKA "I Move You" (YC S10), merged with "Health Month" to form "Habit Labs". No mention of the other "I Move You" founder Andrey Petrov. I wonder whether he's involved or not.
I have just finished the site. We are working on more things to differentiate us from chat roulette and sites alike. Any Feedback would be awesome!
Because that is true, it becomes worthwhile for lobbyists to invest money in encouraging the government to centralise control.

If lobbyist money can affect government policy - and it can - then it is always a worthwhile investment for those who have money to invest.

Basically, decentralizing government is, surprisingly enough, not a magic bullet.
I agree. Imagine not looking at your cell phone and thinking about how some shitty company with a government-granted oligopoly is screwing you over and treating you badly.
A nap after lunch seems to be common in Chinese companies. In both big consultancies, and small entrepreneurial companies, i have seem people put their head down and take a brief nap at their desk. I have read that some companies have a formal policy encouraging this, but it seems widespread anyway.
Especially shut up in traffic stops. Police rely very heavily on confessions in such situations, and don't appreciate lying. Even if you think you're telling the truth, they won't (that is why they pulled you over..). Saying anything except answering their queries with carefully constructed responses will either incriminate you or make them mad.

"Do you now how fast you were going?"

"What do you have me as officer?"

"15 over, but since you were wearing your seatbelt I'll
let you off with a warning"

The number of times I have directly participated in this exchange or been present for it is rather impressive (flyover country, long stretches of straight roads limited to 60mph...). Be polite, but do not admit to a thing.
I could get naked dsl from ATT only after i found this phone number in an old blog comment!

spread it 1-800-288-2020
I'm sure that it pays off for a percentage of organizations, but for many, that game represents a lot of time, money and effort that create no value.

And with campaign contributions? Come on. For the federal elections of 2008, we used $5.3 Billion dollars. What did we get for it? The exact same number of elected officials we would have if we spent $0.

What value was created? Better representatives? Quality entertainment?

What else could that money have been used for? As I said earlier: Ugh.
Maybe. It depends on what we as a society want our government to spend money on. Considering our current demands in this country (no cuts to entitlements), I think it requires at least that much.
Thanks. I can see how this would lead to "derailments", particularly if the story line was modeled as arcs (given it's a "connectionist model"), but the "delusions" seem less obvious... unless things, including identities, were also modeled as arcs between different ways of referencing the same thing (e.g. my address, where I live, my home). Sort of using the same model for instances (events in a story) and schema (actors in a story) - which makes sense, and may well be how it works in the brain. Reuse, don't reinvent, is what nature does when it can.

I have doubts about Science based on making up computer models and seeing what happens (although it is a lot of fun to do). OTOH, they clearly casting this as merely a hypotheses - which is pretty reasonable.
> The downside is, I miss the taste of coffee.

You can always put it in your mouth, and then spit it out.
The U.S. Government could be a worthwhile investment (as a charity), but it's not doing so right now. We could raise taxes to invest in infrastructure, which would increase future GDP. A charity cannot do this owing to eminent domain issues.

That's the real rub about this deficit/debt limit drama: it wouldn't be so bad if the government spent in areas to increase future GDP. However, the government is basically an old-age insurance program with a large army. I don't see these expenditures contributing greatly to future GDP.
I'm surprised at the outraged expressed in this thread.

Everybody expects participants in this experiment to be divided into givers and takers, right? Why would anybody donate and then claim if they could just buy their own cup? The very nature of the thing is that both party's are anonymous, so the givers have no right or expectation to the "worthiness" of the taker or the purpose it is put to (on-selling included). However, it is clear that the hope and intention is to spread good will and kindness.

Originally, Jonathan provided a means to distribute these gifts to random strangers. The demographic was somewhat limited by technical and geographic constraints but Sam figured out a way to broaden (a small portion of) the benefits to a wider audience. To my mind that is entirely in keeping with the spirit of the original experiment (i.e. spreading goodwill and kindness).

Also, it's worth noting that Sam did not explicitly moralize about this - other than to say that he didn't "find the idea of yuppies buying yuppies coffees very interesting".

Can anyone explain why it has provoked such an aggressive response?

EDIT: I've no connection with Jonathan or Sam or Starbucks (really).
12. Dictated but not read.
John Carmack Interview: GPU Race, Intel Graphics, Ray Tracing and Voxels
Hanes
Hanes assemble innovative American clothing. Every day millions of people get its products. Hanes t-shirts are awfully admired for its fresh t-shirts for men, women, and kids. It’s the greatest online source for every day clothing including fashion tees, cotton t–shirts, beefy tee shirts, and casual clothing. Athleticlothing.com provides special clothing from Hanes because it’s also acknowledged as one of the most much-loved brands in the US and is establish in additional than 80 percent of households. Hanes t-shirts is best known for the most at ease products in clothes (apparel) like the Beefy-Tee, Tagless and Comfort soft product lines.
Obligatory Designer Clock - Saikat Biswas
"The whole financial system and everybody that depends on it was a beneficiary of the bailouts. If everything collapsed, everybody would have suffered."

A narrative convenient for powerful banks that was created by powerful banks and allied politicians. People have suffered and continue to suffer because of the crimes these institutions have committed. Propping up their corpses only helps the criminals who created the situation. Clearing out bad businesses so that new ones can take their place is a central pillar of capitalism. If you really believe a bunch of billionaires who claim the world's going to end if they lose their billions, well, you're gullible at best. Far from forestalling suffering, the continued operation of these entities and their influence on legislation perpetuates it. Their collapse is the best thing we could hope for, even if it causes short term turbulence.
surely you should have an answer to that question before you start claiming that 30% is screwing you?
Because even if Buffet donated every penny he had (approx 50 billion), it would barely make a dent in the US debt (approx 14.5 trillion).
Our deficit is $14.6 trillion. TARP, which cost ~$80 billion (with still more to be paid back), is a rounding error in that deficit. Changing tax rates would have a much bigger impact on the deficit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program#P...
I've been (very) slowly porting an AS3 site to JS/jQ, mostly as a learning experience, but I'd be quite interested in this as well.
I love cocoacontrols! As does everyone I've referred to it. I'm a regular visitor, so thanks! :)
Nice article - I downloaded a trial copy of Scrivener to try tomorrow.

A couple of years ago, Apress wanted Word files and I discovered Pages: really pretty good, good Word compatibility, and fun enough to use.

That said, I really prefer Latex for writing because I spend a very small amount of time thinking about formatting compared to writing.
I have been off caffeine for 6 or so months now. I stopped cold-turkey before and went a whole year before joining my new job and free soda was too big to pass up.

I have found that being with caffeine has actually helped me tremendously, I don't feel jittery anymore, I am more alert, I am able to stay awake longer (that one was weird to me as well), I was less likely to feel mentally tired at the end of the day, and my sleep has never been better (although I still have a delayed sleep phase ... luckily my work lets me work on my own terms =))

I also kicked the soda habit, about 3 months after I kicked the caffeine habit, and it has also changed me. I drink a LOT of water now, and overall don't mind the taste. I stay away from most everything that contains high fructose corn syrup, and have found that I have less energy dips throughout my day, and since I can keep my blood sugar pretty constant throughout the day I don't have any major dips where I feel like I am crashing.

I used to be at the point where I would roll out of bed, drink a liter of Mountain Dew, then half a pot of coffee when I got to work, and at least another can or two of coke or something along those lines before lunch to try to kick-start my day. At some point I figured that I was dependent on caffeine much like a drug addict and that I did not like the fact that a chemical I was knowingly putting into my body was directing how I lived my life and what I bought for food.
"But for those making more than $1 million — there were 236,883 such households in 2009 — I would raise rates immediately on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including, of course, dividends and capital gains. And for those who make $10 million or more — there were 8,274 in 2009 — I would suggest an additional increase in rate. "

If you really want to see something get passed, you're better off putting the cutoffs at $5mil and $25mil(maybe even slightly higher). The $1mil cutoff sounds nice in a soundbite and it polls well, but it's not hard to find sympathetic faces(small businesses and large family farms) who would get caught up in that. His cutoffs would end up hurting the the "upper middle class" and the "lower rich" more than the "super rich".

And if you want "shared sacrifice", you should be talking about a consumption tax.

What this country needs most is a firm federal spending cap at 20% of GDP. There would be less opposition to raising taxes and balancing the budget if the measuring stick for spending wasn't tax revenues but the GDP.
Prehaps they all benefited, but it seems as if the bailouts benefited the most irresponsible people far more than the rest of society.

The banks should have been allowed to fail. The only reason capitalism works is by providing a huge incentive to do things right. Bailouts like these will convince companies they can get away with the same thing in the future.
I think the point behind that was not about her per se, but that she (as a "techie") was on the red carpet in the first place. In a city like LA I imagine you'd see movie stars or rock stars, and zero techies, whether they're VP of a $60BN company or not.
And drug use is thought to trigger schizophrenia in certain people: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizophrenia#Substance_abuse
I hate to break this to you, but for any larger merchant, you're going to be SOL, for one basic reason: PCI compliance. Unless you spend a ridiculous amount of time and money researching and implementing things like key management, credit card tokenization, and the like, no level 1 or level 2 merchant will look at you.

For level 3 and level 4 merchants, you may have a shot-- especially if you can seamlessly upgrade the application to add more functionality, allow for customization, etc. Basically a Shopify for the real world.
Unfortunately, due to the duopolies described in the article, most of the rest of us are stuck dreaming of such a fibery heaven. Verizon has said explicitly that they won't be coming to my area. Ever.
They vote against "clawback" taxes on those bonuses, it's the same thing as saying the bonuses are okay.
I love the lies with statistics.

"We already lean quite heavily on the top 1% - the top 1% actually pays more in taxes than the bottom 90%."

The chart of course only shows federal income tax.

What about federal payroll? What about excise taxes? And at the state and local levels, what about sales taxes?

Here's a much better link:

http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-17350-9_things_the_ric...

From this article you'll note:

This year the first $9,350 of income is exempt from taxes for singles and $18,700 for married couples, just slightly more than in 2008. That means millions of the poor do not make enough to owe income taxes.

But they still pay plenty of other taxes, including federal payroll taxes. Between gas taxes, sales taxes, utility taxes and other taxes, no one lives tax-free in America.

When it comes to state and local taxes, the poor bear a heavier burden than the rich in every state except Vermont, the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy calculated from official data. In Alabama, for example, the burden on the poor is more than twice that of the top 1 percent. The one-fifth of Alabama families making less than $13,000 pay almost 11 percent of their income in state and local taxes, compared with less than 4 percent for those who make $229,000 or more.

and

It’s true that the top 1 percent of wage earners paid 38 percent of the federal income taxes in 2008 (the most recent year for which data is available). But people forget that the income tax is less than half of federal taxes and only one-fifth of taxes at all levels of government.

Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance taxes (known as payroll taxes) are paid mostly by the bottom 90 percent of wage earners. That’s because, once you reach $106,800 of income, you pay no more for Social Security, though the much smaller Medicare tax applies to all wages. Warren Buffett pays the exact same amount of Social Security taxes as someone who earns $106,800.

Don't let some fool you into believing that the poor don't pay their share of taxes. They do.
Thanks! No, haven't had the time to do an SVG demo, but that shouldn't stop anyone from doing so ;) Thanks for the link, didn't know about jquery.svg, maybe I'll play around with that if I find the time or no one builds one already.
There is a another process that takes place

"I am not poor, I am just pre-wealthy".

The biggest scam is that the wealthy have managed to convince even the poorest that they are just a "little hard work" away from being a successful owner of family business or the next Donald Trump. It is the American Dream.

So ... they should vote accordingly and just get their future selves those nice tax cuts for when they become wealthy.

There is also the good'ol "trickle down" trick. Vote for us and we'll trickle it down, we promise...
It's not just that - even when we're talking Warren Buffett here, the scale of the US govt is totally different. Buffett's entire fortune ($50B according to Wikipedia) would only cover a few weeks' worth of borrowing and then we're right back where we started only Warren Buffett has no more fortune. It's silly to say we should expect him to do that.

What he's saying by advocating tax raises is "I will pay more if I know that everyone else will also pay more." He's not interested in paying $XM to reduce the debt by $XM, but he would happily pay a personal cost of $XM if it meant reducing the debt by $XB.

(This is called "collective action," and it's also Groupon's business model.)
Happy to get the party started. Just keep in mind that I am totally talking out of... well, no actual experience in your field. ;)
Don't forget to check out all his other impressive works!
http://madebyevan.com/
Fry's point in particular is not that IQ is bad or useless; it clearly indicates some kind of talent. It's that treasuring IQ to the point that you join a society for people with high IQ, to Fry, also indicates a vapid intellectual narcissism wholly lacking in other kinds of "intelligence". At the very least, he feels that that's what it would have meant for him.

Avoid confusing warnings against a certain kind of vanity with anti-intellectualism, which regrettably is popular enough already.
That's not a math error, that's a display error. I'm no fan of Office, but that would not be a reason to fear Excel's ability to calculate correctly.
Best of both(ish) worlds: use python in LibreOffice.
Visual clutter: It’s worse than you think