skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My may concern with this system: Sledgehammer meets tack.

The comments on HN aren't perfect, but they're far from bad when compared to other sites of this nature. There has been a downwards trend most probably due to the increasing popularity of HN. A response is warranted. However, this system has the potential to silence a lot of high quality comments on any threads that aren't on the front-page for an extended period of time. Thus, you get a feedback loop. Good posts require quality discussion to stay on top, but must stay on top to get quality discussion going with this added approval lag.

I think you should ease these changes in as conservatively and gradually as possible. For example, apply it only to the top page at first, and reduce the number of endorsements required for display to 1. You might also consider merely greying out comments that have not yet been endorsed, as currently happens to down-voted comments. Another option would be to apply the endorsement system only after threads have reached a certain age so as to jump-start discussions. Additionally, I would recommend that authors of a parent post should be able to see all child posts regardless of their karma. Below, Babuskov raised the point that the endorsement system will obstruct useful back-and-forth discussions between sub-kilokarma users in buried threads that often takes the place of a private messaging system on HN. This would fix that more effectively than merely reducing the endorsement requirement.

You should not entertain any illusions that you can flip the switch and watch this system work perfectly, and that you will therefore be able to avoid confusing people with many changes over a lengthy period of time. Tweaking will almost certainly be required.
Because you don't live in a vacuum. Our society makes it possible so that you can earn a living. You're just paying back for having that opportunity to those that are less fortunate.
You hit on a important thing for me. I know the "quality if the comments" thing gets talked about a lot but I think it is much ado about nothing. I think it, like you say, a minor problem.
"someone would only take that job if it was worth it/fulfilling to them"

e.g. Immigrants. I'm not sure if we should start calling them deltas or epsilons...
I am curious what percentage of users (active with upvotes/downvotes and passive interaction by reading mostly and dormant users) are past that threshold of karma? any insights to this pg?

I am all for better dialog on HN though as it has been on a downward trend but not terrible yet. I think this is a change for the better. Not certain that the vote hiding had a huge effect though.
Cool idea.

Would love to see frame weights added, along with complete bike weights.

Not seeing Raleigh, Focus, and a bunch of other brands listed. Will more be added?
I haven't implemented this yet but it would not be too hard.
This AI startup raised 40M from Zuckerberg, Musk and Ashton Kutcher
You can't be serious. Microsoft could have filed complaint against employee with law enforcement agency who then would have received warrant to search any properties that law enforcement agency deemed as required.

Key here is that Microsoft is not searching itself. Content of the email account does not belong to Microsoft, it belongs to the user. To search it Microsoft needs explicit permission of user or law enforcement agency.
Those that are less fortunate aren't also the ones that make it possible for me to earn a living. Police, teachers, firemen, road workers and some others do all that, work hard at it, and I appreciate their contribution. They're not the ones we're talking about here.
I've read the whole, original PNAS article. I have to say, I don't see a major distortion/dilution of it in the submission's linked article.
That is quite different from the current scenario, and could be called a "warrant".

verb
1.
justify or necessitate (a certain course of action).
Here's a sort of solution, a bookmarklet:

https://gist.github.com/maxerickson/8456792

It turns the timestamps into collapse buttons. It's sort of adapted from here:

http://alexander.kirk.at/js/hackernews-collapsible-threads.j...

I have another gist there with a bookmarklet that turns the timestamp into a button that hides comments of that age or older.
It's only an issue if it takes a long time for comments to get endorsed, which we don't know yet. But if that is a problem it's easy to make the restriction per thread. I just wrote the simplest thing first.
Interesting point. I wonder if arcades, bowling alleys, and roller rinks all followed the same trajectory. My local bowling alley actually had an extensive arcade in the late 80s to mid 90s. You'd go for the bowling and stay for the Cruis'n USA.

It's always hard to tell if these things are actually less popular than in decades past, or if it's just that I'm no longer in elementary and middle school.
And where will the source for the Guaranteed Income come from? It will surely be taxes - income, sales, other. All taxes in some way or the other depend on the state of the economy. What if the economy goes into a recession or has severe fluctuations from year to year? Will "Guaranteed Income" be continued if there isn't sufficient wealth and production to pay for it?

Ultimately, it is another form of "spending other people's money" which runs out at some point or the other.

Any guaranteed entitlement scheme that does not account for the source of the funding will run into the same problems, sooner or later. (Just see the fate of a number of guaranteed pension funds in some parts of the country).
Markets are powerful.
Oh, so I'm not meant to get 2048? Damn.
I'm also from Europe, and I agree with icedog.
>Finally, the overall style of bowling as a sport is decidedly 1970s midwest America. The US is undergoing probably an unprecedented urban trend right now. As profoundly shallow as it might be, bowling is just not sexy at all.

I think that's the whole story right there.
There are many good suggestions in the comments here (which I've been upvoting, on the assumption that that's going to focus attention on them); but I have one that I haven't seen made yet: collect data on pending comments to see which, if any, of the potential issues being raised in this thread actually are issues. For example:

(1) Measure the distribution of comment endorsement for >1000 HN users: how many they endorse, how often they endorse, and how that varies with things like hour of the day, time logged on, etc.

(2) Measure the distribution of "time to endorse" for comments (how long it takes from posting to endorsement), and how that varies with things like hour of the day, etc.

(3) Measure how many comments get lost in limbo because they are never endorsed.

My initial sense is that this is going to significantly raise the cost of participating in HN, which will make me less likely to participate. (By "cost" I mean both the added cost of having to endorse comments, and the added cost of having to wait for my own comments to be endorsed before I can post another one.) But I may be overestimating what the effect will be.
As much as I'd like to see the quality of discussion on HN improve I think this is a terrible change that will do the opposite as well as driving people elsewhere.
Here's a simple solution to this whole moderation hammer: add a downvote for poor comments (ala Reddit). The spam and garble comments will automatically be moderated by the community as a whole.

Turning HN into Wikipedia Moderation Politics is not a smart idea.
Here's a code: GFt3JRxr
I definitely won't, unless they're adding something unique.

Threads are cluttered enough as it is, and the idea isn't to encourage good faith efforts, but to improve comment quality.
Everything that goes against liberty is doomed to fail.

Miserably.
I was wrong about the DRM, that mechanism was Sim City

Populous asks you to identify a picture, which came on a separate sheet from the manual.

It is disabled in the GOG version (although it still asks you the question but without checking the answer).
Then you are playing the exact game the parent is worried about. It is an extremely fair point, whether you agree with it or not. It is also something arguably outside of the standard view, and will therefore be de facto censored. I don't think comparing this to product reviews on Amazon makes sense; these are two completely different things.
Perhaps surprisingly, the AI of which you speak actually came first, and was an inspiration for this. https://blog.sphere.chronosempire.org.uk/2014/03/20/8402 has more details.
Anonymity? The bar for having an engaged, non-private conversation shouldn't be creating a new email account.
It will work better than you think it will. People will endorse comments they disagree with just to get the opportunity to rebut them. Users don't debate things on HN to right the wrongs of the universe; they debate because debating is (or can be, when the comments aren't horrible) gratifying.
I can't decide, whether to consider this a nanny or police state...
Can you cite any precedent where a court has agreed to hear such an argument? This is not a rhetorical question - I'm genuinely curious whether civil procedure allows it. As a non-lawyer (and MSFT employee) who is interested in the law, the closest thing I can think of is a motion for declaratory judgment, but even there I think you need an actual case or controversy before the judge will hear arguments.
The 'we fixed it' link points to four new lines including these:

.replace(/>/g, '&lt;')
.replace(/</g, '&gt;')

I can't really tell without more background and context, but I'm surprised this doesn't turn > into &gt; and < into &lt;. Is this a mistake? The same code's still in the HEAD.
Same way we pay for anything else, cutting spending and increasing taxes.
I'm not sure you could to do straight math like that as it does depend on the implementation. I presume there would be corporate tax laws introduced that would re-coupe most dollars associated with employees. So a govt could craft whatever policies they want in order to make it work out.
you are not, but society is an organism with more than you in it, and if he's thrown into the bin because he's can't make it in it the guy may think it's fair to take it from you...

in the same vein, your job only exist because there's people with enough buying power to keep the business you're at existing, so again you depend on people, and you could be punished or rewarded depending on how society as a entire organism does...
That's what the delete link does.
To put 2,500 Swiss francs in context see: http://www.gadling.com/2012/04/16/welcome-to-zurich-home-of-...
I'm not convinced that Basic income would necessarily deal with edge cases all that much better. A simple basic income implies that you provide everybody with the same minimum income and they cut back on public services etc to the minimum since in theory people can now buy what they want.

But there are problems in that not everyone can live off the same amount of money. This is especially true with disabled or very ill people who are the most likely to be unable to obtain employment. They also require more money to maintain the same living standard, often much more in the case of people who require full time care etc.
China, Japan, Korea: Do they all look the same, or are they very distinct?
> How does this all interact with debt?

Other than "you can use it to pay debt", not at all.

> Can I get a lump sum payment in return for my future wage?

If you mean "will someone loan me money in return for me pledging an amount equal to my future basic income for some period", maybe, but it would be a really bad idea to let it be redirected.

> Can it be taken away to pay creditors, child support, back taxes, etc. ?

Probably not -- there is already, AIUI, a "first $X" (which may vary under specific local rules depending on context) of income which is protected against garnishments, etc., and BI probably ought to fall within that (at least until the economy advances enough to support a more than pedestrian lifestyle on BI alone, at which point it might only be part of the BI that is within that protection.)
Fair point but sometimes people don't want their real identity known. Either as a matter of policy or because they are using a throwaway to discuss something sensitive.
I've beaten 4D. It does take substantially more concentration than the original though, which I can play and win mostly on autopilot by now...
how about investing in something real and useful like preserving biodiversity for example? Too much to ask from inanimate-matter-lovers-computer-crazed autists like Musk and Facebook boy, right?
I can think of three sane approaches. First, BI does not necessarily need to be above the poverty line. We can also go to a progressive BI, which may better be describe as a negative income tax, where the poor get more than the rich. And we can increase taxes.
Comments don't have to be brilliant. All they have to be is not stupid or mean.
You can merge your opponent's tiles. We tested it with a 6x6 and it just makes the game take too long.
I understand the potential; it's why I said "massively overblown" rather than "wrong".
I'm sorry but I still have a right to privacy no matter whom the service belongs to. Companies cannot overturn my rights simply because they own the service. They are a carrier whether they like it or not and have to adhere to certain standards at the very least on social responsibility grounds.

I find the old companies can do what they want just use someone else fallacy very tired.

I can't simply change my email address that is something easier said than done. This isn't myspace were talking about or some dating service. This is my online identity and more and more my real life one at that.
Idiotic equivalence. There are very few processes that can be reversed just as easily.

Radiation, waste heat, carbon dioxide - the list goes on and on.
I don't know much about BI or the numbers either, but I'm guessing that BI would replace some existing spending.

Social security, unemployment, food stamps, etc seem to account for 1/3rd of the total federal budget in 2013 [1].

[1] http://nationalpriorities.org/analysis/2012/presidents-budge...
Basic income is the first step to an empirically ethical society, which accounts for inherent human limitations and behaviors. Evolution is an extremely feckless game, and thus far we've been trapped by its whims, endlessly struggling in a free-for-all battle for survival.

In order to transcend and escape our evolutionary origins, we will first and foremost need to understand ourselves. How we came to be, what behaviors we're prone to, and what impact these have on our societies.

Second, we will need technology which allows us to liberate ourselves from extreme labor, giving us free time to engage our societies in a calm, rational matter without our survival on the line.

If these two conditions are met, then I believe humanity will transcend into a new golden age. As of this writing, I think we're made incredible progress on the second point, but are very far behind on the first.

Furthermore, the US is an extremely complex nation, with a history that makes unity almost impossible except against foreign entities. The US needs to make an incredible amount of progress on the first point in order to even consider radical ideas like basic income. In fact, it is currently dialing back its SNAP (food stamps), which is part of its social assistance program. This is in the context of an already weak social safety net, by far the weakest of any western nation.

Sadly, the US has a very long way to go. The commonwealth and Nordic countries, by comparison, are much further along.
I agree. I don't understand what problem pg is trying to solve here.
A good idea but race conditions could still cause both comments to be posted. Maybe if we decide the user can't do that reliably, we cod just let that case slide.
"The actual facts in the global warming debate is that we've recorded these temperatures at these locations across the globe, and they appear to be rising over the last century."

To be clear - the only fact involved is the measurement of at a particular time at a particular station. The temperature of the world as a whole, and trend in temperature over a century, is a matter of interpretation and analysis, not pure fact. All sorts of statistics needs to be applied to clean the data, adjust for changes in station location, adjust for the growth of urban heat islands, etc. To see an example of the debate over these adjustments - http://climateaudit.org/2010/12/26/nasa-giss-adjusting-the-a... - changes in adjustments can have a large impact on the resulting graph.
At the 7 billion mark we would need 5 planets worth of resources if everyone were to consume at the level Americans do

You're assuming that we are already making maximal use of all available resources. We aren't; we're not even close. The reason the "poorer nations" are poor is politics, not lack of resources.
There's two different issues here: (1) whether or not to use compiler plug-ins, and (2) whether or not to use compiler plug-ins for metaprogramming.

Using plug-ins for automated analysis improves the quality of your codebase. The annotations serve as a machine-checked documentation which make the code easier to debug.

As you point out though, the benefits of plug-ins for metaprogramming (such as implementing a DSL) is not always as clear-cut: you have to pay the price of maintenance, much of which is not always obvious up-front.

You face many of the same issues when designing a DSL in Scala --- the DSL may generate code that depends on a custom run-time or library.
Because the devil is in the details. Let's say a guy gets rich. Do you put him in jail? If yes, for what crime? If not, you'll probably want to confiscate his wealth. What if it's not cash, but assets: cars, houses, gold bars. You (or the government) confiscate all of them, now you have to sell them; the simple act of selling them devalues them (depending on how many there are of them). So now the government either owns a bunch of useless (to them) assets, or a pile of cash that will be quickly spent.

Also, a much simpler explanation is: moving wealth from rich people to government just makes government rich. This doesn't change the underlying problem, it just shifts power into different hands.

Then there's the prevention approach. How do you even prevent people from owning stuff/having money? You'd have to completely discourage savings, and force people to spend everything they make.
This won't work on high volume threads. This one had 3-4 comments per minute. You will need a horde of moderators to handle that load, otherwise a most comments will never be read AND endorsed. Coupled with the rate articles drop of the front page almost guarantees most comments on high-volume threads will ignored.

If you lower the moderator karma threshold to try to handle the load, then most readers will be moderators and what's the point? Moderation exists to benefit non-mods. Personally I would rather not have that power.

I argue upvote solves "say something substantial" and downvote solves "be civil". This form of moderation is easy and works.
Go back and read Microsoft's privacy policy [1]. Microsoft has inserted following in it:

We may access information about you, including the content of your communications to protect the rights or property of Microsoft.

In short, you agreed that they can search any of your shit without warrant or permission if they deem that you are a risk to Microsoft in anyway.

[1] http://privacy.microsoft.com/en-us/fullnotice.mspx
Actually the basic income creates new business models. If you can't take care of yourself you can sign up with a company that takes your basic income and provides 3 hots, a cot and an allowance. Can't image it will be the nicest accomidations but it will be there if you need it...
HN already have this.
More tax. More specifically, an amount of extra tax that for a typical person would roughly balance out the extra (say) $10k/year in basic income, so that the net effect on government finances would be small.
I've been working with recruiters for the last two weeks and most of them are younger women, but there are several men also. I'm not sure which I prefer to talk to. The women (anecdotally) talk more about the jobs when they call. The men, on the hand, keep things short.
The US social security budget is 1.3trillion, so diverting all of it to BI would get people 30% of the way towards the goal of reaching the poverty line.

It may be that getting everyone above the poverty line is infeasible. It may be that the poverty line may be sidestepped, say, by relocating to a poorer (less costly) region of the country.

Food for thought. I haven't really formed an opinion on it, really. The numbers don't look that off, at first inspection.

Reference: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_(United_State...
I agree 100%. One of my favorite ways to learn a new language is by doing problems from https://projecteuler.net . The mathematical basis of Project Euler seems to map into core language concepts better than many other "getting started" exercises.
This benchmark measures the time to generate random characters - per Mithaldu's remark - not the time to shuffle bytes around. If it actually took around 7 seconds to shuffle about 20 megabytes[1] of data around, no one would use PHP for anything. Of course, the algorithm actually performs 20 million string concatenations, because of the way random strings are generated.

To give you an idea of how slow that is, maximum memory throughput with memcpy on many modern systems is measured in the tens of gigabytes per second. The comparison to .NET at the end is amusing, because the same benchmark including the random generation of characters can be done many times faster in C#. And I'm not even good at writing C#, having spent most of my time in Haskell. But I did it anyway.

PHP version (in C#) = 1.8660s

Using prebuilt array = 0.0654s

Using StringBuilder, random = 1.5628s

Using StringBuilder, array = 0.0749s

EDIT: If I construct the StringBuilder with a size parameter, it shaves another 0.02 seconds off (or 25% of execution time).

Gist for source: https://gist.github.com/AaronFriel/9699764

The original should be rewritten to not be a test of PRNG throughput. In the amount of time that it took PHP to generate those random strings, my unoptimized, first-try C# concatenates about a hundred times faster.

[1]I am aware that this is merely the size of the resultant string - 20 characters times 1,000,000 iterations. But it's within a factor of two of the total bytes copied, and I don't know PHP's internal string representation. I don't know if each append alters an entire string, rewrites a rope structure, etc. In all likelihood, many fewer than 20 million bytes were harmed by PHP in the making of this benchmark.
Noob comments on HN
Fun but laggy; looks like this is hosted on AWS in the US?
IP = 54.193.69.60

Amazon Technologies Inc. AMAZON-2011L (NET-54-192-0-0-1) 54.192.0.0 - 54.207.255.255
Amazon.com, Inc. AMAZO-ZSFO4 (NET-54-193-0-0-1) 54.193.0.0 - 54.193.255.255
2048.py