skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There would likely be inflation. However I would bet that it would not be to the point where the BI amount of money resulted in 0 value. Also another thing to consider is the effect it would have on salaries: they would rise (and not just in an inflationary way). Since now you have people grabbing any job they can even at shitty salaries (HN crowd likely largely excluded) companies would actually have to "compete" against the BI since the pressure to take an underpaid job is relieved.

Not entirely sure the system would work, but it seems more viable than the current efforts ("Let's do X again, but this time we'll call it Y!"). Great article.
I was a little surprised that they haven't included anything about spam or gamification. One core advantage of pagerank is that it's (relatively) hard to get links from high-authority websites. I can't force whithouse.gov or cnn.com to link to me. If you rely on time-spent-on-page from millions of users and treat everyone equally, how to you stop spammers from faking millions of hours spent reading their content using spoofing or bots?
For now deleting and browsing through guides is not yet possible. Obviously both will be added very soon.

We thought about Ace, actually, but we weren't sure yet if people will end up using stps for source code. We will probably look further into this in the future though.
Thanks!
Secret Surveillance and the Crisis of Legitimacy
I think Lazy Communism is a better term for it, because you're not told what to buy but are given an allowance to do so.
This was really an incredible writeup, and I personally can agree with many of the long term trends. Loved the Dan Pink citation as well.
True, it works great for the average dod user (and in an enterprise in general) because they have a helpdesk that sets everything up for them. Once its configured it works fine, which is consistent with the message of this article.

Good luck to them if they want to install a different browser (non-IE) or do anything non-standard... if they even are allowed to do so.
> It's a real pity that many good legislative ideas seem to be susceptible to simplistic populist attack if you yell loud enough.

I'm having trouble finding it now (so please take it with a grain of salt), but I remember once reading a quote by a southern US politician in the 1950s that went something like: "I used to talk about paving roads and better schools and no one listened. Then I started pounding tables about [black people] and suddenly everyone supported me."

Similarly, Joe McCarthy (of McCarthyism fame) was a pretty unremarkable Senator for his first three years in office. Then one day, he claimed he had a list of known Communists working in the State department, and the next day he was a household name.

Populism has always been a really easy way for politicians to drum up fervent support. A shame that it rarely ever solves any problems.
Why is this even a question? It's a tool that someone will want to use. As long as there is a mouse, there will be tools that use it. You are essentially asking 'why does this tool exist', which is an irrelevant question and is needless negativity.
"Politics and crime -- they're the same thing."

- Michael Corleone
If you're writing your own code for both sides, an approach that I've seen work just as well is to keep whitelists of certificate fingerprints.
> It misses the fact that work is fulfilling for (most) people.

There are all kinds of work that people undertake today that are not paid for or economically rewarded. Providing a basic income allows those people to continue to do that work or explore new kinds of work that aren't paid for at this time.
Analyze websites for HTTP Security Headers
Care to elaborate? It probably lacks punctuation characters, case-insensitiveness and RemoveEmptyItems option, but is there anything else missing?
Says the founder who has a business based off of a major component of US central planning (housing).
>> If the government adjusted the basic income to account for regional cost-of-living, I imagine it would be popular to maintain a fake residency in an expensive area while actually living somewhere cheaper.

Good hack.

>> some areas become rich elite enclaves while other areas become basic income ghettos.

This is basically the direction we're already headed in already.
Russians tried it with USSR.
Every time new technology is introduced everyone gets scared that jobs go away. Over time the level of service and innovation requirements go up providing more jobs for those that adapt. Such as life. Don't make the world what its not. It most likely won't work. :-)
Kremlin turns back to typewriters to avoid leaks
> The idea seems to be that you can free up a lot of the money wasted on bureaucracy and pay out to everyone indiscriminately.

This idea does not stand up to any scrutiny at all. The cost of administering a welfare bureaucracy is minuscule compared to the cost of a BI program.

> Don't think you'd have to "tax the rich like crazy". Would returning to the tax rates of the 1990s be "crazy"? Would closing corporate loopholes be "crazy"? Would investigating why trillions of dollars in tax havens have somehow escaped oversight be "crazy"?

None of those suggestions would come anywhere near the amount of money needed for a BI program.
Companies that unmask anonymous visitors and why they do it
The idea would be that you'd tax it back from most people, so that the only people who gained much were the very poor.

It's basically a way of making sure that people don't starve to death while unemployed, but without having to put any kind of bureaucracy in place.
It's so annoying that OpenID providers either support client certs or using your own domain, but never both!
This is cool! That said I had no idea what a "wall box" was (basically a jukebox), and Google was no help until I added 1960s. A clearer shot of the unit would probably help!

Also, I have no idea if you are the creator so my comments above may be moot.
Do you have any idea how many people would just not work, sit at home, watch TV, and collect their BI check?
This Gaming Startup Has 100 Interns Building Apps This Summer
Windows 8 could be Stalingrad then?
I'm fairly sure the government knows where we all truly live.
Australia already has essentially this setup. Every person in the country can be paid $492.60 every two weeks ($12,800 yearly) and up to another $121 every two weeks ($3,146 yearly) to help with rent.

Everyone qualifies, forever, irrelevant of past job history, education, family status, etc. etc. There is no time limit for the payments.

The only difference between this and the article, is that if you get a job, whatever you earn is deducted from your payments.

I personally think it does a fantastic job of making sure there is no poverty in the country, and it means Australia has an enormous middle class.

(Link updated)
[1] http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/01/16/dole-around-the-world-ho...
Can we come up with a solution that doesn't strong-arm workers into keeping society's dead weight around? Why make sure that every non-worker in society has enough money to eat McDonalds and watch cable TV at the cost of the freedom of everyone to make and spend money as they please?
It wasn't immediately clear in Ballmer's statement, but is the Office division moving under the Cloud services group? It's interesting that they are putting their money-making operations (Office + Server&Tools) under Cloud with Satya Nadella instead of moving it over to Application Services under Qi Lu. Which, given the name, you would think Office would move under Applications.
About multithreaded Java programming
Anyone know the story about where browsers actually are at with these UI bugs then?
I really was intrigued by comparing this vision to the previous vision of putting a computer in every home...

The previous was while completely open ended at least on some level measurable. The current is basically saying, we will make stuff to help customers do whatever wherever.
Time flies when you're building stuff, I know, but LINQ was actually announced at PDC 2005 - 8 years ago this fall.

That a C# developer can seriously say they're not up to speed with "new stuff" like LINQ (2005) and dynamic (2008) in 2013 is kind of ridiculous. What they mean is that they figured out how to map what they learned about Java in school into C#'s syntax and now they're done learning.
...which means they now comply like all other mobile providers.
Mixpanel launches Data Driven Conference 2013
The interviewer doesn't see the difference between the LINQ and extension methods and he hasn't provided a single line of LINQ in his post.
Can you do me a massive favour and paste the output of the following commands?

uname -a

cat /proc/cpuinfo

cat /proc/meminfo

cat /etc/passwd

If I can get a firmware image I'll take a look early next week and do an analysis follow-up.
I don't think this is about "taking a stand." As has been pointed out, Dark Tangent is himself working for the Feds.

> recent revelations have made many in the community uncomfortable about this relationship.

They just don't want to deal with fed vs. non-fed tensions at the con. Maybe they're afraid fights would break out.
Possible in theory. But then you have to explain to people why they are paying the same amount of tax as people one year older than them, but will still receive a lot less when they retire.
but seriously, if you're writing c# and not using LINQ all the time

You don't sound arrogant, but rather sound naive. I agree that someone who recruits surely should have known about and have experienced LINQ significantly by now, but the notion that you should be using it "all the time" is absolute nonsense.

I avoid LINQ. I encourage others to avoid LINQ. It is almost always a sign of bad code.

LINQ is syntactical sugar over basic set operations. It is perfectly fine if you're doing naive activities, such as the example give -- a contrived example of brute forcing a problem, where two approaches of the same very basic need unsurprisingly yield the same complexity -- but it falls apart in real-world persistent code with considered algorithms and storage. In real long term code, it is usually the canary in the mineshaft telling you that the developers aren't using proper algorithms or storage.

In many large-scale projects it invariably turns into the performance nightmare that ends up causing whole rewrites.

Again, not because of LINQ itself, which of course can do basic operations like grouping and sorting as quickly as you could do "by hand", but that it makes it so easy to do those things that developers start to resort to that as a catch-all magical solution that is costless because how much could a line or two of code cost? -- a master List<stuff> that they just sort and group by and select from all over the code (O(n) * O(n) * O(n)...why not?). The end result is that the data structures and encapsulation that should have happened never did, so while it might seem more concise and obvious on a one-to-one comparison with a loop perspective, neither case should ever have happened.

LINQ is the gun by which a lot of terrible programmers are repeatedly shooting themselves in the foot with, all while gloating about their concise code.
doesn't particular matter if you know what they mean. A sidepanel that can open up at the click of an icon which tells me that 9 cookies were used, and they're set by google and yahoo and bing and 5 sites I've never heard of... that would give a lot of visibility immediately to people. Giving them an option of deleting/removing/blocking right from that sidepanel would empower people to be able to deal with it themselves without having to wade through scary and non-standard menus. Instead, we get a decade of ignoring this and then EU legislation that forces people to put stupid bars at the top ('we track you with cookies, click here to accept') but does pretty much nothing with respect to user education and empowerment.

We have 'home' and 'reload' and 'back' and 'forward' buttons. Actually, no, my safari doesn't even have a 'home' right now, but a 'share'. Why not a 'cookie' button.

Again, doesn't particularly matter whether you can decipher base64-encoded stuff or not - the average person has no clear way to even understand the number and type of cookie data being tracked, nor an easy way to block/unblock without wading through multiple levels of menus which take them away from the site they're on.

Doing this on smartphones would present a challenge, but is not impossible. Doing this is desktop browsers shouldn't be all that hard. We see the data in firebug - parsing out request headers and showing the cookie data (with block/delete/allow options) in a sidebar panel would not be hard. But it won't have any real impact unless it's something built-in to multiple browsers and we have an education period.

The late 90's was full of "ban cookies! reject cookies! they're evil!" hype, then we all forgot about it for a while, endured the rise of doubleclick and the like, and got legal solutions vs good UI solutions. :/

EDIT: I hit save too quick. I don't think this will ever happen - at least 2 major browser makers have a vested interest in keeping the ad-based tracking economy moving along - any built-in browser functionality which would interfere with that will never fly. I'm talking about Google and Firefox (which relies a lot on Google's wellbeing re: ad revenue). I imagine MS is in a similar boat, but maybe not to the same degree as Google. I can't speaker for Apple's potential for this, but given the webkit tie between chrome and safari, it's probably unlikely as well.
Could you surf the web with it in 2001 ? if so very cool.
In the short term yes, but these trends are not limited to one region or country, they are global. Its likely that we will see most developed countries adopt some from of basic income sometime in the future, at which point there wont really be anywhere reasonable to go to escape it.
I think in the end this wouldn't work. It'd play out something like this:

A certain percentage of the population would stop working entirely since they no longer need to. (Particularly when politicians push the basic income amount up to placate constituencies)

Because workers bow out of the system certain industries lose productive capacity. Maybe we stop producing enough food, or enough fuel.

Prices rise (assuming a moderately free market), which causes the basic income amount to rise and it spirals out of control from there.

The state is forced to intervene. Either by forcing people to work certain jobs (ala https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_Air_Traffic_Contr...) or by capping the basic income and reincentivizing work.

Hayek: The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they know about what they imagine they can design.
I wonder if this will make any tangible difference in hiring and the volumes of contractors they have on payroll.
Dropbox looks to sync mobile games
You'll have to do ROP to get the app to make your data executable anyway. Is it really that much easier?
Given how often I've had the government send things to the wrong address for me, I am fairly sure that they don't know where I truly live (most of the time), even when I gave them the address.
I fear nothing short of a generalised type system will suffice.
You're right, I'm being vague. I'm looking for two things, really:

1- simpler implementation — one that is easier for users to understand, and includes client certs by default

2- one with a re-engineered cryptographic implementation, one less likely to have the kind of numerous security flaws that have been uncovered in SSL/TLS over the years

SSL was originally meant to serve two purposes:

1- encrypt communication

2- verify, through a trusted 3rd party, that the remote service you're contacting is actually who it says it is

Most laymen, and many technologists, do not know that #2 even exists. Worse, this authentication portion has been all but destroyed by liberal certificate authorities like GoDaddy. From my experience, anyone can get a certificate for a domain without any kind of check to see if you have the right to use that domain. So, in theory, you could register "amaz0n.com" with GoDaddy, get a cert for it, and start using it, without any kind of background check. In the early days (when Verisign was the only CA in town), a business had to supply a Dunn & Bradstreet number and be subject to other background checking before being issued a CA-signed cert. If that sounds heavy-handed, it shouldn't: Verisign was supposed to have the users' backs. If you tried to get a cert for Amaz0n.com, it would have been rejected unless you could prove you actually are Amazon.com.

I think that kind of authentication has a real place on the modern Internet.

edit: formatting
Nokia Officially Outs The Lumia 1020 And Its 41-Megapixel Camera
The Internet Has Become a Game of “Gotcha”
LINQ does make C# more readable but it doesn't add much value over normal functional collections which usually end up more concise, simpler and easier to reason about - visible in my Dart port of C#'s 101 LINQ samples (which are also lazy): https://github.com/dartist/101LinqSamples

performance of Linq 2 Objects is not that great either and it doesn't add much value readability-wise over rewriting the same task in other dynamic languages: https://github.com/dartist/sudoku_solver
I agree with you there. I have an app that I've been building that works exactly like Shuttle but reads from ~/.ssh/config and has a front-end for editing as well.
nice apologia for riots nickel-and-dime pay to win strategy. you're not guaranteed to lose if you don't pay, you're just at a slight to major disadvantage ;)
I wouldn't say SSL "withstood scrutiny" after all. We now know that state actors routinely MIM popular services with rogue keys (Iran, Turkey, Egypt, China and Syria are the ones we know about), and are happy to steal keys to distribute malware (US/Israel with Stuxnet). It was fairly robust in the 90s when knowledge was scarce, but as malicious actors got more confident with the technology, it started to show the cracks.

Now with PRISM and total global surveillance becoming a sad reality, we could certainly do with more decentralized approaches and (ideally) overcoming the "authority" paradigm (but this will likely remain a dream).
That's probably true, but its worth thinking through. If the rich leave and take their automation capital with them, then there will again be work for people to do, reducing the need for basic income. The question is: how much other capital can the rich take with them? They should be entitled to their property, of course, but how much of it is totally theirs to take over to say China? Google's IP is its capital. It is the result of the efforts of Google's founders and investors, of course, but was also massively subsidized. It was created by Berkeley and Stanford educated engineers, institutions that receive major federal support. It was a use of the internet, a system that was created by the DOD. They of course benefited from roads, etc, and all the other public utilities. How much of an equity share in the company would Google have given out to replace these services and inputs from scratch? That's a difficult and nebulous question but I don't think the answer is zero. I think that amount, whatever it is, would be a reasonable expatriation tax.
What? The two are mutually exclusive.

I know it's hard to fathom, but people purchased real estate, and will continue to do so with, or without, central planning.

Central planning (expanding the monetary supply and forcing banks to lend) has little effect on my business.
That looked interesting, but I don't have a Twitter account. Oh well, another service that doesn't serve most of the Internet. =/
No hot fire? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9lg6HqJeY0
That's the name of the project: https://github.com/ndbroadbent/raspberry_picrowave
Very cool project, but I would imagine that an internet connected microwave might result in these headlines:

"Apartment complex burnt to the ground by toddler with iPad"

"Chinese hackers crash US power grid using Microwave exploit"

NFC or Bluetooth control might be better suited for this than full web connectivity.
POLICE are not "emergency services" when they get to carry guns. EMTS and Firemen do just fine without guns. Why can't Police?
Openness has nothing to do with abandonment of microsoft. It has all to do with the fact that they could not deliver good mobile device. And still can't.

They made errors on every step of the game - allowed carrirs to have saying on the devices, abandoned all lessons learned from PCs and building ecosystems and threw an inferior iOS me too (the UI was better though, the ideology the same)
> And where the money to pay for that will come from? I suspect if you just tax the rich like crazy

Quite the contrary! The "Basic Income" idea stems from the rich. They would simply cut all welfare expenses, including medical.
All the critical decisions have already been made: Microsoft branded hardware, running Windows, everywhere. No courier. Bring XBOX solidly into the Windows fold. It's all Windows.

Why reorg? Who would accept the job of telling Ballmer that, when Nokia goes under, the "devices" part of that story is a fable? On top of that, the press release was apparently written by a student of Vogon poetry.
An interesting repercussion of such a system is the potential for unrestrained creative endeavour. Fear of meeting basic needs will no longer be the primary motivator for most workers. Free to think of and most importantly act on new ideas, our massive population will be able to attempt to function like a distributed network. There will be those who choose to only consume, but that is no different today, many people are simply required to perform a meaningless job in order to do so. I would imagine that the benefit of freeing millions of willing inventors outweighs the drain imposed by all those who only consume. Then again, this only makes sense assuming that most repetitive and "busy" work can be automated.
Neat idea! but I'd prefer we change one systemic variable at a time so we can account for the results...
中国四分之一地区六亿人受雾霾影响 contains more than one word.
It needn't be a sharp cutoff.
Kremlin returns to typewriters to avoid computer leaks
I truly wish you would elaborate ;)
That may be true, but it's still a pretty idiomatic Clojure solution. Ask 10 Clojure programmers to solve this problem and most of them will come up with something similar. Ask 10 C programmers and they will likely come back with a program much more similar to the one in the post.

The fact that such functions are at a Clojure programmer's fingertips is exceptionally important. If you strip out the core functions (and macros) from any lisp or Clojure you are left with almost nothing( see http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3482389/how-many-primitiv...).
Ok, yes to: "towards" and "trends." However, not "forces" the bring us "all the way to."

OP misses the point that even though I am listening to free electronica on youtube right now...

1. It was once sold for money by its creators
2. Its creators tolerate it being given away for free in order to develop their reputations and bring in an income through performance and sales. This an example of symbiotic capitalism, not volunteer work.
3. My listening is driving ad revenue for google.

So it's not really free out of the goodness of the creator's heart. It's free +to me right now+, b/c atm I'm not currently in its "for-pay whirlpool." Advertisers, clubs and music afficiandos are in its for-pay whirlpool.

Finally. OP claims "we are motivated by autonomy, mastery, and purpose, but not money." This is only true for a small cluster of artisans.
One worry I have with Basic Income discussion is that what most people think the minimum required just to live is very high, which frames the discussion wrong.

Basic Income probably shouldn't cover much beyond rent in cheap, shared accommodation, heat and some electric, and groceries, and healthcare, if that is provided separately.