skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My notes so far: https://shawwn.notion.site/Business-Taxes-e9f602855f524618b0...

In one of these links, I am quite certain I saw words to the effect of "if you maintain a balance in the business, then the following tax year, it will count as a negative deduction for the shareholders (i.e. you), because the business type is a pass-through entity, and pass-through entities are expected to pass all of their income through to the shareholders."

The fact is, I don't know whether it was an LLC or a sole proprietorship, and I'm now second guessing what I thought I knew. Because yes, it does sound pretty ridiculous that an LLC needs to maintain a $0 balance or else it will penalize the owners of said LLC. That doesn't sound right.

And yet, words to that effect were located in one of these links. (Hunting for it now.)

EDIT: Welp. Can't find it anywhere. At least I admitted from the outset that "ask your accountant, do not trust me" is reasonable advice for anyone thinking of taking business advice from random HN comments.

I'll downshift to "I don't know whether it's a bad thing to maintain a long term balance in an LLC, but I'll be finding out the answer before the end of this tax year."

If there's no disadvantage to keeping a balance in an LLC, then I revert to "Just form an LLC for yourself; it costs $50 to do so. And you can keep as much money in it as you want, as long as you don't mind paying income tax simply for transferring money into your LLC."

It's possible I was thinking of a negative tax basis for an S corporation, if the S corporation has a long term account balance. But a tax basis is certainly not the same thing as a tax deduction, so I throw my hands up in the air and say "I'll be using a portion of my consulting income to clarify these questions with both an accountant and a lawyer; all advice should be considered suspect."
They aren't necessarily generating it -- sometimes they're just storing it. When we produce too much electricity from wind turbines here in Denmark, Norway buys this at a negative price (to offload the Danish grid), stores it (using pumped hydroelectric energy storage), and sells it back into the market when prices are positive again.
I wonder why there were "hilarity" :

> Some members are considering to repeat the experiment again, but we have no way to raise enough fund to repeat it.

That's really a sad situation...
> Long run? I think not. Gold hasn’t really risen over millenia, just stayed in a certain band.

I said they expected it, not that it did. I know plenty of people who buy gold expecting it to appreciate. Whether or not it does appreciate is irrelevant.

> Buffett made a good argument that you could either buy a giant gold cube and fondle it, or a large number of productive assets in the states and collect the revenues. He’d bet on the assets being worth more over the decades, and over the long run he was right.

No he wasn't. If you invested all your money in the medieval equivalent of an index fund, it'd be worth far less today than if you had invested in gold. You can't just cherry pick the last century.
I travel a lot, and so do my friends as I end up meeting a lot of exchange students and expats. Moving with your phone number is not a thing everywhere.
This is dreadful advice that nobody should follow.

(1) Shorting has a completely different risk profile than going long. If you're short, you can lose an infinite amount of money. If you're long, the most you can lose is what you put in. Unless you're familiar with what it means to take a short position in traditional markets, for the love of God don't do it in crypto.

(2) The market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent, and Herbalife has been chugging along since 1980 - in spite of the widely publicized 5-year-long short Bill Ackman took. Even if the shorts are right, timing it is extremely hard, and chances are you'll lose your shirt before then.

(3) Most exchanges that permit short positions are criminal enterprises, all the major non-US ones are under investigation. Binance is under investigation by every major world financial authority including the Cayman Islands. They'll require you post collateral in crypto as well, which adds yet another layer of counter-party risk. Even if you're right, and you time it right, a collapse would likely wipe out Binance (or your collateral) - or it wouldn't and they just wouldn't pay you out, SFYL.

(4) All exchanges have a huge interest in seeing the game continue, and are more than likely colluding to keep the price up.

Most of us bears believe that Bitcoin exchanges are crooked Mob casinos - entirely in isolation of the fundamental Ponzi nature of the underlying asset. What you're suggesting amounts to telling someone who believes the casino is crooked to bet on red instead of black. The only way to win is not to play.

[edit] Yes, you can short CME futures (with massive 200% collateral requirements), yes I've done it, yes I've made money, not you shouldn't. Nobody should.
I think this way of framing it is perhaps misleading.

Yes, it's plainly true that the bank owns (or rents) the hardware, software, databases, etc. and that you're paying for a service through various fees.

But IP is much less clear, and the view that "it's my database so it's my data" is not actually universally legal when the data concerns humans.
You describe a gambling game.
That's a good point! I don't know anything about that. I assumed it was difficult for a US resident to open a long term bank account in Europe without having to reside in Europe. But that assumption is probably wrong.

Thanks for the hint about Revolut and Monese. Now I'm curious what their requirements are...
Updates on the Twitch Security Incident
What motivation do people have to see the world as it is? Billions of people believe they will never die because Heaven is on the other side of this world. As Nietzsche wrote: "Too long, the earth has been a madhouse!" It's nothing new that humanity has a will-to-blindness. In fact, it is an evolutionary advantage. Perhaps the truth itself is hostile to life...
Not sure about Ponzi (which it probably is) - but I am looking at crypto as a "24/7 world-wide semi-legal horse-races". It is absolutely useless for 1st/2nd/3rd worlds. I can see its benefit for illegal activities - fair enough - but it's standing apart from the gambling potential.

But by understanding that it is a gambling machine - I can make a "reasonable" choice, buy some token, sell it at a "small" profit of 10-25% and move on.

The crypto is here, it's fact. It's not going anywhere soon. No one loud is out there with an agenda to deliver the message of its uselessness. Most people don't understand how crypto works - and not even trying - and I personally got over screaming "the emperor has no clothes" and now just quietly do some trades from time to time.

Just a bit of reality to the "lens of someone living in a wealthy" blah-blah-blah.

I did a SWIFT transfer of 30k USD from an eastern European country to a 1st world country. It cost me 20 USD to send and 10 USD to accept the cash within 3 working days. Yes I had to go the bank and it took some time - fair enough - BUT the fees were much lower than I would've paid to the exchanges. I had an ability to reverse the transaction (to an extent), it was an open and legal non-commercial transaction (and I don't have to explain it later to the tax man).

C'mon crypto, try to beat that :)

"Bank the unbanked", "inflation", "poor immigrants" - you know it's all BS.

We lived through crazy inflation periods - basically you either convert your local cash to USD/EU as soon as you can or buy some local products (that you can resell) if the currency is not available. Thus people buy fridges/TVs, etc. There is probably a local village smart-ass who would use crypto for it, sure. But it's just an exception. These people have zero trust in anything, including their governments, so crypto is even lower in this chain of trust.

Immigrants and refugees have 101 ways to transfer their money. There are so many companies/networks that it makes your head spin. And their amounts are so small so very often it all goes under the radar anyways.

Basically all the crypto-mania as is is a big joke AND a great opportunity to make a quick buck :)
Bitcoin isn't really a scheme either. Its creator does not access or use his coins, and may no longer even have access to them. If this was a get rich quick scheme for him, it sure doesn't seem like he's making much use of his success.

Anyways, i'm sure there was a first person to discover gold. And i'm sure that person had the most gold when the discovery was made. That doesn't really have much bearing on whether gold is a ponzi scheme, though.
Thanks, but I meant something even more unpredictable, which is hinted at in your document: "ANE [...] is chip- and/or temperature dependent" and "can not be reproduced in visual6502, which hints on it being some analogue side effect that the simulation does not cover".

It's a shame that I cannot find the other article, because I remember that the author actually had looked at the individual transistors, and figured out the bus conflict or whatever it was, which pretty exactly described what happened, and maybe even why some bits would be more "weak" than others.

EDIT: Oh, hah! Your PDF actually links to it in the same section. The wiki seems currently down, but here's an archive.org link of the page that describes the unstable opcode in great detail. So thanks a lot! https://web.archive.org/web/20210405071521/http://visual6502...
Except who is buying it and for what?

The only wealth people could offer for Bitcoin is wealth in a country with an oppressive regime. Who internationally can even take possession of that to cover their expenses?

The only plausible option would be to actually just setup a mining rig and mine the Bitcoin, since presumably for a while their might be an electricity grid their and the BTC network ascribes value to that activity...except you can't mine on commodity hardware to anymore either.
How is this similar? I only use a phone number for services and never for friends. I change often because I travel a lot.
It's sad to hear this. Is there no way for you to buy foreign currency like dollars instead? Bitcoin might be an attractive asset to speculate in, but I'm not sure if it's the safest way to hold onto your wealth, because of its inefficiency, volatility, the need for endless mining to sustain it, and so on. It might multiply your wealth by 10 or reduce it to zero -- do you really want to take the risk? I understand that what I'm saying might be boring, but foreign currency is tried and truer.
I don't think you can sell traditional investments like stocks in seconds unless it is within designated trading hours. Crypto you can trade 24/7, although fiat wires out to traditional bank accounts still operate within certain hours (at least in the US, maybe this is different elsewhere). I still hold a small amount of my portfolio in USD, even considering inflation, but this is because it's less volatile than crypto, and I think holding actual cash is better than holding a stablecoin.
Why do that h2->kerosene at all? Why not using the compressed h2 or something like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slush_hydrogen to drive a fuel cell(or an array of them) or a micro gas turbine, to power hyper efficient electromotors built with something like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare-earth_barium_copper_oxide
superconductors in a holistic concept which is using the h2 to cool the superconductors? I think I've read something like that not too long ago, maybe even here on hn.

edit: Ah yes, see https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/stories/ascend-cryogenics-su...

addedit: Or less ambitious https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2020-0...
When you mine gold, you get gold, and gold is nice. If we could magically make 100x the gold, that would be great! Current gold investors would be sad but it would be a win for the world.

Bitcoin mining produces heat, and maintains the bitcoin network. It doesn’t actually increase the supply of anything: the total number of bitcoins is arbitrary. The real value is whatever the network produces (happiness in its hodlers, money laundering, some future use case)

Gold’s utility is: some industrial uses, it looks pretty and has special properties, and if you had to bury some treasure for some descendants in 500 years you could reasonable figure some gold coins would probably be worth something comparable in the future, no maintenance required

That’s about it. Never been a big gold fan but those three uses seem pretty indisputable.

The people arguing for bitcoin present it as a store of value but you need a hell of a lot of costly ongoing maintenance for that. Gold would still have those uses even if all mining stopped. Without mining, bitcoin is defunct, conversely.

Edit: oh yeah, I suppose gold lets you keep some value anonymously and take it with you across borders. I think Bitcoin wins on that count but since I’m listing the uses of gold I shouldn’t omit that. There may be others I’m forgetting
Indeed. A comment above also estimated sub money to be ~1/4 of streamer's earnings, but as you mention that can vary quite widely, and in my experience it does quite so for female streamers. Pre-OF sex work is quite a lot like that too, you generally have a few whales making up ~90% of your revenue on cam sites, which is not great. On Twitch too, in my experience looking at "top donators", it's usually just a few handful of people giving big sums to female streamers.
The story about the trowels is really good. And post internet trowels are/have changed quickly. Some tech is new, and per William Gibson now the future is evenly distributed. This article is 2005, if the author could see trowels today I think they'd be amazed.

But trowels have changed iteratively.

Monitors and cameras are square because of manufacturing, although they are now also curved squares. I'm pretty sure currently we want as many pixels as we can afford within viewing distance. I don't thing circles help with that.

A little of what the are doing here is the magic internet mirror paradox. They are solving problems just through the interface.

"Select the HR wedge to move into employee hiring, status, reviews, etc." this is not an interface issue, it's getting the data correct issue. No one needs to save 5 seconds accessing this data. It's collating and storing and sharing it through APIs is where the problem is.

This is not hard to prototype, I think you'd immediately see it's silly having unused pixels on the square interface, which is the same if it's a circle, you won't be jamming something else on your desk in that spot.

I do like the idea of having a small screen for control. It might help with task shifting. Because your brain knows it is only an interface it won't get distracted using it. Maybe. Interesting idea.
There are more German ones: the last one in is_child_exploitation and nazi stuff in is_hateful.
> There's a huge price difference between electric cars and gas fueled cars here in Norway. Gas fueled car buyers have to pay both 25 percent VAT and an additional tax on purchase. Buyers don't have to pay neither of those taxes if they buy an electric car.

You're talking about a tax difference, not a price difference. We have the same taxes here in Denmark and our EV sales aren't anywhere near Norway's level. Probably because the actual prices end up being roughly equal, but the EV usually has lower range and takes longer to fill up compared to the equally-priced gasoline car.
It sounds like your development is focused on containers, and perhaps Copilot is best for that. AWS CDK works very well when your application is based on many different kinds of cloud resources that need to be connected together, utilizing all the serverless and managed features of AWS.
Your newsfeed is based on your friends and the groups you follow. I think you’re talking about youtube and tiktok.
Interesting to think that playing MIDI without any additional software is no longer a feature you can get out of the box these days (at least on macOS, YMMV).
> No he wasn't. If you invested all your money in the medieval equivalent of an index fund, it'd be worth far less today than if you had invested in gold. You can't just cherry pick the last century.

This isn’t true. Gold has about kept the same value, adjusted for inflation.

The economy grew enormously since medieval times. Anyone managing to keep reinvesting since then would be enormously rich.
I'm with you and I don't have any connection with, or financial interest in, Facebook. I use it. A lot of my friends and family do too.

It makes it easy to stay connected with and re-engage with people in your social group.

It managed the spam problem reasonably well (those Ray Ban scams are a relatively infrequent problem).

It makes to easy to start, run, find, and join niche interest groups. I'm in a dance community that would find it much harder to find each other's events without Facebook Events. My wife is in a vintage community that carries out low-friction international vintage clothing exchanges through Facebook Groups.

There are communities using Facebok to run small businesses and serve their communities.

Oh and I change my phone number when I change phone company because it's easier than not.

Now, I also think there are things wrong with Facebook and with how the network effect impacts on its competition. I think it could use oversight and regulation. But your naysayers are unimaginative children. Of course Facebook provides societal benefits. Get real.
Go'ing Insane: Crazy Conventions
Please say you mean he won the 2016 election for those reasons. He clearly lost the 2020 election.
It’s not a blockchain, it’s a merkle tree.

You could probably get away with signing an “implode” message and appending it to the tree, instructing any conforming client to wipe the account upon receipt (or at least cease to retransmit). That would give users the option to request their data be removed.
What's the deal with Google removing features, without warning, from their products that a part of their userbase still uses? They own the largest analytics platform on the planet, why go against the experience most users are used to?
What are the differences between Ponzi schemes and gambling? Both are negative sum games. In both someone is going to profit from people's greed and stupidity and take part of their cash. Both casinos and Ponzi schemes operators create high expectations in some people's minds.
The whole post in the link is in reference to more than just the pushing of a PR.

> It is also clear that the .NET Foundation project governance model is not well understood. Project maintainers sign an agreement that either assigns or contributes their project to the .NET Foundation. That’s the point at which project ownership changes. We’ll post another document on that this week as well.

It's clear reading the comments on HN that the majority of people commenting have no clue what is going on.
This is an interesting question! The answer is to hold conclusions loosely and test; always test.

One way to pick who to pay attention to is ‘believability’ — meaning that you listen to those with at least 3 successes, and a coherent explanation when probed.

Pointing out survivorship bias is a common rejoinder to this view. But when you’re trying to put things to practice (not get at some universal truth like a researcher would) you often cannot wait for perfect samples. So you pick certain practices from believable people and test them against reality, and then hold the lessons loosely, making sure to update based on further experiments (which is necessary because life is messy and full of confounded variables).

Over time, it becomes clearer what is useful and works for you, and what isn’t and is perhaps a quirk of the other organisation’s context. But I’m not saying anything new; this is how we learn from life.

Related: Brian Lui’s loose feedback loops https://brianlui.dog/2020/05/10/beware-of-tight-feedback-loo...

And the problems of learning from experience: https://commoncog.com/blog/the-hard-thing-about-learning-fro...
In todays political climate of fear that would mean everyone has to give their biometrics to state enforcement.
> C'mon crypto, try to beat that :)

Nano has instant transactions and 0 fees. Try to beat that.
Not sure what "scaffolding" you are talking about.

Rust has no headers or forward declarations, and compiles the whole project ("crate") as a single unit.
A generation raised on New Dr Who would eat it up, especially as in the SCP one of QNTM's first antagonists is called "Grey" - a nice physical (and vaguely conceptual) similarity to The Silence.
In a really extreme example of union membership, it relies on a lottery system. The lottery tickets are only given to current members. The current members give this to family members or sell the ticket for tens of thousands of dollars.

The union can post jobs internally and they have to evaluate internal candidates first. Some places I’ve worked even have it set up so that internal union members are sent to school for training before they will open it up to external hiring.

Credentialing. Union can enforce specific credentials that would then keep people otherwise qualified out.

I think these (which are scenarios I’ve seen) are worse than the current system where if you have the skills and can demonstrate them, then you can get a high paying job.
AES being broken doesn't mean someone managed to brute force a key. It means someone found a flaw that enables them to break any key in much less time than you'd expect a brute force attack to take. In other words, if AES is broken people would be able to read that ephemeral data quickly enough for it to be useful.
I miss Axel F mod files.
That’s a very optimistic opinion :)

And just to nitpick about blockchains, ledgers, etc.: they don’t need to be world-readable. You can protect them the same as you would a regular database.
"Change your company or change your company" is an oft-repeated phrase that pairs up with the suggestion in the car repair manual nicely.
I've seen both being used by hedge funds and finance/banks actually. A lot of F# use anecdotally is closed source finance (this has changed now I think) which is why IMO it didn't have as much open source visibility or people showing its use. OcAML is probably in a similar boat. Having hidden use cases however means breaking changes in the language are harder to judge.
A credit card or some other line of credit is the best form of liquidity, more widely accepted than cash (I can easily use it internationally or online).

The reason to hold cash is its low volatility. You can store it in a savings account and even with inflation potentially driving your return negative when risk adjusted it may beat other assets and you don't even have to speculate on forex!
I don't think this is very surprising as someone just below this age band. At my college, I've noticed a significant gap and some associated resentment exists as well, even though the gender ratio is near even and has the student population of a private R1. Some friends of mine cycle through dozens of potential partners easily and never appear to end up in a relationship in spite of wanting one. The issues of marriage are not a contributing factor either, since that is too far in the future to be relevant.

Online, you can easily find communities of men and women who lament not being able to find a partner, demanding that the opposite gender change their behavior. Such behavior is unproductive and toxic, but reflects a an unfortunate reality that there is a deadweight loss among people who are unpartnered.

It's sad overall that such a gap exists. A significant subset of the population is simply unable to meet the needs/get their own needs met of people they are interested in. I wonder what the long term outcome of this will be, but at minimum recognizing such a problem exists and attempting to do what we can for ourselves and others to be a good partner is probably the best we can do.