skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't know, how the situation in the US is, but in my country, if a landlord would add a statement in the rental agreement, that he can search your home, such a statement would be void from the beginning! Because you can't break or bend the law just by adding a statement in a contract in my country.
Enemies of the Internet 2014
If the fixed income came from newly-printed money then yes, it would cause inflation. If it came from taxes then no, it would not cause inflation in and of itself.

In both cases, it would increase the purchasing power of the poor and reduce the purchasing power of the rich, because $5000 means more to somebody making $10000 than it does to somebody making $1000000.
Well, then McDonalds can offer more money to work there. Obviously, McDonalds wants to stay in business, so it has to offer up some incentive to get people to work for them. If they offer enough money, there will certainly be people who would work to flip burgers.

The jobs' salaries match what they are actually worth, and can't be offered as minimum-wage jobs that people take because they don't have any money and can't get a job elsewhere.
Twenty years ago a lot of people couldn't see themselves using a cellphone or an Internet.
There are many huge cultural and socioeconomic implication of Basic Income.

Inflation is dependent on money supply, you don't need to print new money to apply basic income. You would worry as much of its inflation impact as you would for bailing out banks, if its the same printing. Its not a BI specific concern.
Pricing, on the other hand, would probably change drastically, as there would probably be a solid market of goods for people that want to get by with BI alone, so essentials will probably be priced to fit perfectly with BI.

On the second point: Basic Income is guaranteed, regardless of other jobs. So you would work at McDonalds if you wanted more money. Otherwise it creates the perverse incentive not to work which you described.

BI could be nefarious or the savior socioeconomic rule, and it deserves experimentation.

Personally, I find its socio-economic impacts the most interesting and important in shaping a society. With BI, the jobs nobody wants to do will experience a reverse Supply/Demand.

Cleaning toilets today is cheap because you have enough people that need it to survive: when they dont need it anymore, the supply for those jobs will plummet, and suddenly they will start earning way more money. I find this to be such a strong positive force that this alone justifies doing BI to me.

Also, it will very quickly destroy crime. Petty theft and small crimes have no reason to exist anymore, since you dont need to steal to eat or to try to get out of a desperate situation. Specially if being in Jail means you dont get your BI (because its used for prison budgets) it creates a magnificent economical incentive not to do crime and to get out of jail as fast as you can. Organized crime like drug dealers would likely plummet as well: as most organizations they are heavily pyramidal and require a vast number of poor people to work for peanuts and take all the risk. Take them away, and they have no supply chain, so even large organizations will get wrecked quickly. Suddenly, White-collar crime goes way higher in the scale of important.

In terms of society education, you will prevent and help millions of people to be able to pursue education without having to sacrifice it to make ends meet.

Another strongly positive force is to eliminate government "fat". Firing government employees that are useless or provide little value is a very politically expensive move no-one makes, because nobody wants to throw people on the street. Now, this is not the street anymore, they have a strong safety net so we can stop worrying about politics and focus on making things productive.

I clearly see a lot of potential on BI, and I also appreciate it could have devastating downsides. But thats what experimentation is all about finding out.
>>We know that Islam and its adherents are generous contributors to the surplus of misery in the world.

NOPE! You've been made to think that by the media. Time to bring out this vid again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQnxnYEVp4U
It should be tied to some indexes that reflect the cost of living. If it's impossible to actually live a very minimal life on the basic income, there's not much point, as you'll still have to work and be under stress about making ends meet.
They should have called the FBI, the FBI would have requested a warrant, the Judge would have approved the warrant, and the FBI would have accessed the information in the user's account.

That would have been the correct way to do it.
How does it not apply?
The people upset by this discussion? I've almost entirely run out of sympathy for them.
Do we know what fraction of active users has over 1000 karma? As someone with forty-two karma currently who only comments rarely, it's a bit scary to know my comments will face moderation to be posted, although it will surely increase the substance/message ratio, which has seemed to be decreasing some.

It's not so much that I care about the karma, as I'd post more if I did, but more that if someone asks a question that not many other users care about, but I happen to have unique insight, I'd hope that my message can get through to them. :)
> Forrester Research, a technology research firm, said the losses could be as high as $180 billion, or 25 percent of industry revenue, based on the size of the cloud computing, web hosting and outsourcing markets and the worst case for damages.

This was the bit in the Times article that was significant to me.
Wow, this seems like a rather large change -- with a lot of dynamics and moving parts -- for what seems like a relatively minor problem on HN. Not that there aren't bad comments, but bad comments get a lukewarm response, and insightful comments seem to do pretty well. Comments that get more airtime than they might deserve will still get approved by someone (and upvoted/downvoted accordingly)

The bigger problem to me seems to be that great comments that come in a few hours after the posting of a hot submission will almost never reach the top of the comment stack, because older comments that are decent enough will inevitably keep getting upvotes by every new reader of the thread. I'm not sure what the best tweak for that is, but the proposed feature at hand would seem to exacerbate the situation.

Note: OK, I've realized I made the archetypical dickish HN comment ("OK the OP is interesting but on a tangent, why don't we all discuss this other thing I care about?")...but I do think the proposed feature will have a direct impact on the circulation of fresh, insightful comments. I'm a 1000+ Karma user, but after I've read a thread a couple of times, I probably won't re-check it...I can't be the only HN'er who has this lack of attention span...and so this queue, even if perfectly implemented, would seem even more to suppress new comments (unintentionally)
Otron: Chrome extension for end-to-end Facebook chat encryption
I doubt lump-sums-in-advance would be permitted. I'm sure that predatory payday loan places would jump at the chance to fill the gap, though. I hope that if BI is ever implemented, that kind of stuff will be regulated.
Not any healthier than vegetarianism. http://www.chooseveg.com/health
If Netflix really wanted to turn this around on AT&T, they would just have different prices based on how much each provider extorted from them. Comcast customers would pay more for Netflix than Cablevision customers. Netflix would pay the tax, then pass the cost onto the customer, but not onto each customer equally. It would then publish this data for all to see.
Hack us for $25 000
Alaska has its Permanent Fund Dividend, which is a kind of basic income coming from state oil sales. How hard is it to get Alaskan citizenship?
Oh, yeah oops, I was trying to read too fast. You're totally right of course.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7445761
There is at least some biological reasoning behind why sanitation workers are overwhelmingly male, it's a field where physical upper-body strength actually matters.
Obviously this is not a new idea... Twenty years ago I sat around with college mates, in Canada, listing the merits of the "Guaranteed Income" and quite frankly I still support the idea today.

If you took all the salaries, property and operations cost associated with distributing old age security, welfare, disability, unemployment wages etc etc, it would probably pay for much of the cost associated with the Guaranteed Income (even if you had a small group dedicated to counter fraud abuse).

I could list out the many benefits and the nay-sayer objections with counter arguments, but after twenty years I've come to realize money distribution is not the problem. The problem is money = power and society is hell bent on gaining power.

The real solution is to move to a resource managed economy that eliminates money all together. But quite frankly we as a society are not there yet and I doubt we will be in my lifetime.
> If anything like basic income happens expect immigration to be halted and birthright citizenship grants to be ended.

Why? Doesn't make a lot of sense. To the extent that immigration might strain a BI system, there are much smaller changes that would allow managing the impacts, while still maintaining the basic high-level structure of the existing citizen and immigration system.
The argument that Netflix non-subscribers would have to pay for the bandwidth of subscribers doesn't make sense:

Most ISPs already charge differently for Mbps (speed), GB/mo (quantity), or both. So therefore the cost of the bandwidth is already being applied somewhat fairly amongst different ISP users.

If the ISP wants to be more fair, create new tiers of Mbps or GB/mo.

Netflix users who like HD could chose a higher Mbps connection, and Netflix users who like to watch more could choose more GB/mo.

Because the whole point about Net Neutrality is, once I get an ISP with a certain speed and cap, I expect all internet services to behave similarly within that speed and cap.
Yeah, we're considering ways to make it editable via web interface of some kind, but for now - hey, all the data is online and it's accessible and editable enough.
Someone should write a movie where aliens come to earth and do some kind of mind-weapon where nobody on earth can tell a lie for 5 years.

It would be the end of society. I don't even know what we'd do; probably just live like wild animals in the forest only worrying about primal needs.
> Child support

Presumably, Child Support would no longer exist for anyone.

Children are people, with no income, they would essentially get a child-version of basic income, paid to their parents, to raise them, regardless of all other circumstances.

(Similar to US taxes today, where the government effectively pays you some a small amount of money simply for having a child)

If a couple conceives a child, and one parent abandons the other, the single parent keeps the whole state-provided income for that child, and uses it to raise the child.

It eliminates the whole "penalty" system for distant parents, and if those people eventually get jobs, they pay into the basic income system just as anyone else does (so they aren't dis-incentivized to work).
Definitely true, it's just that people don't know that or want to believe it.
Check out https://www.facebase.org/

Facial prediction is still in its infancy but is an exciting area of research.
What does this have to do with ayn rand or libertarians?
I think this is different, though. They did not have any moral objections to cellphones or Internet. They simply lacked imagination.
I drive about 10 minutes a day, yet I pay for roads that I hardly use. It's a part of being part of a society. Some things we pay for because it makes things better for all of us. Education is another of those things.
I am not familiar with the US law system, but in our country it would be normal, that for example my landlord has to go to court before he can search my house, even when he is the owner. And the warrant is not against the landlord, but against me.

So I disagree with your statement, at least in my country it would be not wasting anything ... but DOING THE RIGHT THING!

And I would really wonder, if in the US the landlord could just search your house, because he thinks that you might have stolen something of him -- with the argument, that he does not want to "waste anybodies time"!
It's there for me too, in the order of: Facebook, Twitter, Google+, then others. Odd how G+ isn't first.
I think the real fallacy beneath the surface is that if we do something like this people will just totally stop working.

A few will, but most will use their newfound flexibility to shift what they work on: explore other career options, create art and culture, etc. Overall there will likely be a lot more entrepreneurship, invention, science, art, literature, and music.

It's tied into the far right's religious-based doctrine of original sin view of humanity: we are miserable evil disgusting monsters who must be beaten and cudgeled into exhibiting any form of virtue. If it weren't for life-or-death struggle we would all sit around, drink beer, play video games, and probably screw goats. It's the same mentality behind strict physical discipline of children... if you spare the rod, the kid will grow up to be lazy or a monster.

Besides, the people who would completely stop working are the lazy people nobody would want to hire in the first place. You're not losing much by taking those folks out of the work force.
This seems quite drastic to me. Personally I don't have a lot of Karma (and I don't really care to) but every known and again I post a comment and usually I hope it provides a good contribution.

Like this the system is putting a lot of weight on the users with more Karma... and I am guessing there are "many" more users with less than 1000 compared to those with more? Some people may never have a chance to state their opinion like this.

Rather, the opposite approach might work? Users with more than X karma can completely remove some comments, and say if your comment has been removed, you are not allowed to comment again for a specific period of time. If you post x rejected comments in a row then potentially you get banned.

EDIT - maybe a little off topic: another "comment" about comments - I notice you can up vote and down vote comments. I see this functionality sometimes is used to indicate agreement (or lack of) towards a comment. This as far as I cant tell is not the intended functionality, I am unsure however how this can be fixed easily.
Horray! This is an idea I had a few months ago, threw around in my head, and realized it's something I'd never have time to build.

I'm thrilled that you have!

For those of you who aren't super-familiar with the agonizing process of choosing the proper bike, I'll try to clue you in.

Say you wanted to buy a Full-suspension 29'er from a well-known manufacturer for about $2,900. You'd narrowed your choices down to the Giant Anthem X 29er, Trek Fuel EX 8 29er and Specialized Stumpjumper FSR Comp 29er.

At this point, if you wanted to know which option gave you the best value in terms of components, you'd have to obsessively comb over the manufacturer's sites, and (if you're like me) possibly build your own spreadsheet that listed every "important" component from the bikes you were considering.

Now, you can just go to http://bikebook.io/, select the models you're considering, and look at features side-by-side.

Then, quite honestly, you should just ride them all and pick the one you like the most based on how it feels, but that's beside the point.

---

A couple suggestions:

* When comparing models, I think that a table-view with individual features lined up would be more useful than the current comparison view. That way I could quickly scan between models.

* I noticed some areas that could benefit from increased granularity. For example, right now if I look at the "Trek Fuel EX 29" I see that it has a single field for "Rear Suspension" that reads: "Fox Evolution Series Float w/DRCV, CTD (climb-trail-descend) damper, rebound, tuned by Trek in California, 7.25x1.875"" - That's nice, but I think it would be more helpful (especially when comparing to other bikes) if that data were split up into something like:

Rear Suspension - Travel: 184mm

Rear Suspension - Manufacturer: Fox

Rear Suspension - Model: Evolution Series Float

Rear Suspension - Features: DRCV, CTD (climb-trail-descend) damper, rebound, tuned by Trek in California.

That way, I could quickly scan across the comparison page and realize that if I chose the Trek over the Specialized, I'd be leaving a full 11 mm of travel on the table?! OMG, how could I even consider such a thing?! I feel like such a fool.

But seriously, this is wonderful. Spec-obsessed bike nuts everywhere owe you a debt of gratitude.
Honestly, this whole thing has been such a glorious example of the absolute stupidity and tone-deafness of M.S.

It is mind-boggling that they could have shared the kinds of details they did with the press about their behavior.

"We busted a criminal. Along the way, we shat in the corner. We got the criminal really good."

How in the world could they have missed that second sentence? It's just incredible. My mouth is agape.
I've read this thread; and I think my biggest hope here is the realization in the bureaucrats that are afraid of losing their job ... that they'll be getting money anyway because the basic income will provide their money now.
Way2GO NYC helps you find the 3 closest toilets anywhere in Manhattan
So, why not use F-Script or work to make it what you need?
Haha this is an awesome last resort. I genuinely hope Net Neutrality wins, but if it doesn't this is a way to re-level the playing field.
The desired end-game here is that no one needs to work at McDonalds at all. Basic income goes hand in hand with the massive productivity gains that technology has and will bring. We somehow have to match up nobody needing to work anymore (to produce) with nobody having to (to live).
Is the World Wide Web for luvvies and VCs – or for all of us?
I think the problem I had with it had to do with the way the sentences were constructed. For example:

"... this could have been a disaster, very much like the rubygems.org security breach in early 2013"

This implies that the issue you had wasn't as serious as the RubyGems issue.

Similarly, the following sentence likewise implies that the breach was not as severe:

"Unlike that incident, there’s no evidence that, other than ourselves, the engineers who reported the bugs, and a few members of the GitHub security team who knew about the issue, anyone knew about this hole."

This implies a confidence in the presumption that you weren't breached that you then backpedal on in the following sentence by saying "of course we're not positive because we didn't have logs".

Both of the sentences I cite lead a reasonable reader to a different impression than the one you say you were attempting to convey. I'm glad to see you clarify things here, but I hope you can see why people would misconstrue things based on the words in the post.
Definitely something we're working on. We got the data in raw strings, if you have ideas for how to parse stuff, contact me, seth at bikeindex.org
I guess karma will mean something after all. Any ideas as to when this this change will begin to roll-out?

Edit: Re-read the post, launches tonight.
strongly expressing an opinion contrary to HN ideology

Is it merely contrary to HN ideology or something that's considered outside the realm of legitimate controversy in this community?

Some positions aren't going to be well-received no matter how well they are phrased, which is generally considered a good thing. We shouldn't have to continuously debate the idea that the universe is more than 10,000 years old, or that women should be first-class citizens in our society, for example.
>someone needs a job

I don't know that we necessarily need to have jobs.

We could fund it by taxation of revenue and wages, rather than just wages.

A company who fires all it's employees, and uses only robots, would see a huge surge in profit from reduced overhead. That profit could be taxed at something like 60%.

The owner(s) of the business still see windfall from the cost savings of laying everyone off, and the basic income now rises for everyone and can now cover the lost wages of the newly unemployed, using the companies new profits as a funding source
I'm excited to see how this works, and how the process changes after some testing. If reddit is any example, stricter moderation almost always results in a better user experience and a tighter, more respectful community. Look at r/askhistorians as a prime example.
There is no way to reduce corruption in society without regulations and bureaucracy.
>So you pick two people, one moderate and one extreme, and pretend they're representative?

Ah, but I'm picking two leading advocates for their respective positions.
None of your response indicates that the proxy is the issue here.
Basic income already exist for some people, it's extended unemployment checks + food-stamps.
Every attempt at analyzing this for the US economy I have seen concludes that immigration is at best a wash for the people who were already US citizens. It does, however, have the effect of worsening income disparity. Capital benefits while low income wages are driven down. Of course one also has to consider environmental costs.
You have to live here for a full calendar year before you can apply for the dividend. Even then, the dividend is only $800-$1200 per year, hardly enough to offset the higher cost of living in AK.
Wow, this sounds great. My only question is if you're sure you want to put the "endorse" button so close to the "flag" button? I don't want to accidentally flag something incorrectly.
downvoted? awesome. care to share why?
> Someone who has a pending comment will have to wait till it goes live to post another.

As currently stated, if a comment's never endorsed out of pending, the commenter will never be able to post again?
Um, one small difference, you have to be a resident of Alaska for at least a year, intend to remain a permanent resident and not be absent more than 180 days without a valid reason. [1]

[1]: http://pfd.alaska.gov/Eligibility/EligibilityRequirements
Completely agreed. Also, I think starting with Windows 8.1, if you're logged in to Windows with a Microsoft account, your documents get saved automatically to Microsoft's cloud. I would watch out for that, especially if you have sensitive documents.
I've upvoted you because this seems like what they should have done. I didn't think about the criminal aspect.
The problem with the evolution/genetics argument is that people can use it as an excuse for deplorable behavior.

Genetics isn't destiny. We're more sophisticated than that.
I picked that number pretty arbitrarily, but it's just a variable and HN has a repl.