skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You increase the taxes by an average of $10K
which means nothing at the low end (people below the poverty line) and more than that at the high end

but ideally the middle class breaks even on the idea, they pay $10K to the basic income fund and get about $10K at the start of the year as a prebate on the next year's basic income tax
2048 with Stats
Transfer all federal administrative authority to the tech industry
It Is Time For Basic Economic Literacy
Ashampoo Photo Commander 11.1.3
This is the wrong approach, and it's going to help deteriorate an already small community.

1. HN doesn't have an issue with comment quality.

2. HN should be concerned about growing the community, and increasing comments. A lot of discussions already suffer due to a lack of activity. This is going to do the opposite, it's going to decrease comments.

3. We live in an instant world. Pending comments is a step backwards for user experience.

4. Occasionally I see a topic with 10 comments, the majority of which were written back and forth within the first hour of the topic. You're going to kill these discussions.

5. Manually moderating topics doesn't work for communities like HN. It works on a blog, where your article from last year gets another two or three comments every month, half of which are spam.

6. You're creating unnecessary work for members in the community. People come here to enjoy the community, not to moderate.

7. It's a poor method of moderation. You can have 99 users decide not to endorse a comment, then one person decides to click the endorse button. 99% against, and yet it's approved.

8. I'll have to question every comment I write, and avoid spending time on any detailed responses, because they might never leave the pending stage.
Correction: it would require all users with over 1000 karma to read the comments of every post to HN. It seems like you are making the assumption that every user reads every post
> Sometimes I ask a question in the comments, and it gets answered days later. I go through "comments" in my profile periodically to see if someone replied to those. In this process I also see if someone asked my something and reply there as well.

I use http://hnnotify.com/ , and it works incredibly well for this case.
Think "working-age adult" (perhaps even "household") not "individual". Also, assume that taxes will reclaim that basic income from folks making significantly more than the poverty line.

According to Wikipedia, only the bottom quartile of the US population earns less than $22500 per household; if you assume that BI isn't simply added on tax-free to higher-earning households' net income, that makes it more like 1/4 of the 80% of the population over age 14 would be eligible for full BI benefits. So, call it 20% of your original population estimate.

That makes it roughly $600 billion, with the potential chance of largely replacing welfare ($532 billion* in 2013) and federal disability ($166 billion), not to mention some portion of Social Security and other programs.

Sounds like a reasonable idea to at least explore IMHO.

* per charts at usgovernmentspending.com
> This is logically impossible. Journalists selectively choose what to write about - this is an act of curation. This is further editorialised by the news organisation. What do you think an editor does and why does every news organisation employ tiers of them?

By that logic it is logically impossible to ensure fairness in a judicial system. Should we then just give up and tell judges to do what they want instead of striving for the ideal of due process under the law?
If endorsing comments too hastily risks the loss of that privilege, but endorsing comments correctly has only a social benefit...

I'll try to do my part, but I worry about the tragedy of the commons here. The current incentives may actively discourage endorsements.
"Don't say something mean" is a lower bar than "say something substantial", which is what your post said the standard of endorsement should be. There's going to be a mental tax involved, asking "would PG be OK with me endorsing this? is my threshold for 'substantial' higher or lower than his?" to each comment, weighing the risk of losing the privilege for guessing wrong. I've apparently already mis-judged what you think warrants endorsement. The meta-moderation aspect of someone subjectively reviewing my endorsements is a disincentive to participating in that moderation.

The number of people that can upvote is very high, yet most comments probably sit at 1 point despite not being mean or stupid. Now restrict that pool to 1000+ karma users, add a mental tax to the task, how many of those same comments are going to get two people to click "endorse" if they couldn't get one person to click "up"? I wouldn't put money on the rapid-fire sub-second moderation materializing, especially outside the top 10 stories or at odd hours.
To counterpoint that:

What if I wanted to work somewhere that excluded people who I did not wish to involve myself with? Why should I be prevented from doing so, or the company prevented from doing the same because you want to work there?

I'm not going to make a comment on the legal ramifications only to say that if they qualify as being able to discriminate on the basis of a religious institute then, as they say, "that's the way the cookie crumbles".

My personal answer to your question by the way is that if a company was only looking for an African-American, homosexual, US-born, male without disabilities then that's what they want and what they want isn't me. Not the end of the world, I'm going to move on with my day and not stress over stuff like this. They live their life and I live mine, I don't see any reason to impose on any part of their life if it isn't directly infringing on mine.

"I mean, say what you want about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos." - Walter Sobchak
There's nothing wrong with profit news. That is how all news generally works - journalists generally don't work for free. However they should rely on adverts like the other online news sources.
Not a response to that story but I accidentally discovered /noobstories while searching for a link to the feature suggestion thread for a comment in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7445761. I then discovered https://news.ycombinator.com/lists while skimming the feature suggestion thread.

Funny how I missed those two for years despite finding four out the six things on /lists individually. Is /lists linked to from a static page on HN?
HN really loathes humour, doesn't it?
> it is kind of arrogant to think you can design or think about superintelligences without reference to the best existing intelligent systems we have.

I don't think it's any more arrogant than, say, Djikstra pointing out that submarines move in a completely different manner than a human swimmer. How arrogant were the Wright brothers in looking at birds and deciding to try to achieve some of the same goals by a completely different mechanism?

If computers thought the same way humans did, if they came with builtin moral sentiments, the product of a very unusual evolutionary history and social structure, if they had access to no novel capabilities, then humans and forms of cooperation developed over the last few eyeblinks (centuries) might be relevant. But then, no one would care about the issue in the first place...
But if charity were reliable enough to rely on for livelihood wouldn't it make sense to remove any form of welfare or basic income?
How are these generated?
Free from wage slavery, citizens receiving basic income could spend time producing their own commodities. They could learn trades not to use in a career, but to reduce their dependency on others.

I also think the premise that prices would rise and create a GBI death-spiral is far from guaranteed. With a GBI behind them, citizens could potentially be more likely to start their own businesses, increasing competition and productivity and keeping prices well within reasonable range.
what if I want to be an artist? or write the greatest epic ever?

Everybody can contribute or not, in their terms, I guess that's the magic.
Show HN: UpOut Insiders Club – Birchbox/Netflix for Events
Let's see how much of a problem there is first. I wanted to start with the simplest possible thing. If it breaks in some cases I'll add stuff to fix those.
Maybe users with over 1000 could get a point each day they review a new submission on the new page and lose a point for each day that they don't do a review.
100% on a public fund? So I should be paying for the elections of Republicans and Democrats even though they are private parties that may for no reason exclude me?
Maybe the verb 'to endorse' is a little bit too strong then. How about a button that literally says 'not stupid or mean' or 'appropriate', so that one doesn't have to indentify with that action as much.
This is hilarious because he was the lead developer at Tumblr.

I saw Tumblrs 'original' code base and it's a giant cluster fuck that is full of horrible design decisions.

They are still in tons of technical debt because of it. So it's funny to see him give an insight on PHP. Kind of ironic.

Either way, Facebook’s HHVM is not for 99% of PHP developers. Most PHP developers need better cache coverage and proper SQL architecture and approach.

Execution speed is not a problem for most of them.
With serious protocol designers now largely side-stepping the IETF due to BULLRUN infiltration, BLAKE2 and other non-standard primitives have a better shot than before of seeing mass adoption. I hope to see BLAKE2 widely used in the future.

I also hope to see more non-standard crypto and protocols, where "the market" leads the way, and standards groups try to keep up in order to appear legitimate.
I am probably too young to think of one with the same restriction. It doesn't work because there is no real gain.

The point seems to be to improve the quality of comments.

Look. The intention is good. But I don't like this feature. Since most comments will be endorsed eventually, we won't gain much from this restriction.

Some people don't understand sarcasm (I am with this group!). Sarcasm is not necessarily a bad thing and can be quite fun to read. This is not a forum where people post scholarly comments. As long as the comment is genuine I personally consider it a good comment.

Now some people have a more compelling reason to "karma-whore".
Mass Compromise of the Obsolete
Can you find a different term for it? To 'endorse' something means that you support it, and that you put your name behind that support. The action you're describing is more like 'publish' or 'pass' or 'authorise'. Probably 'release' is a good term, given the concept of 'pending'.
There will probably be a nonzero negative impact. Patrick and a couple of other users recently tag-team-assisted someone with a website problem in the middle of the night, and this new feature probably would have about killed that.

I still think it's a net win though.

A few of us with very broken sleep patterns can put a little more effort into checking comment threads.
Wow, noobstories are awful https://news.ycombinator.com/noobstories
I'd imagine they would get a not so friendly knock on their office door from THEIR boss for not following company policy.
There already is downvoting, it just isn't enabled until you hit a certain karma (I think 500, could be completely wrong as it's late and I'm tired)
Thanks yeah.. as I mentioned I'm not trying to change jobs just wanting the skills more on the hobby side of the equation.

Thanks
Exactly, and it isn't like this is the ONLY form of income. This is meant to subsidize those who are living below the poverty line. If you are living below the poverty line and go out and buy yourself a car you can't afford, guess what, you'll have to sell the car, and you'll have learned your lesson that next year, you can't go waste your BI.
An alternative would be to increase the money from $10k to $15k at some age.

>Is cheap private insurance illegal now? Is that why my premiums are so outrageous?

Yes and yes.
Seems like something that would increase the quality of comments, but also prevent any meaningful discussion.
What is that username, something from reddit? I really have no interest in FreeBSD.
If a comment isn't seen by many users with over 1000 karma then it isn't seen by many users period, and thus doesn't have much influence anyway.
I'm guessing we would only need to divert a fraction of the money currently being used on weaponry and military to cover the difference.
Seems too vague to really be useful is this real or imagined? No CVE? No details at to vector?
I believe this is not hard to imagine at all. It's unlikely that all >1000 karma users will take the time to review every comment. So it'll be enough if the few users who happen to browse a thread have the same views on that particular topic.
I can't wait for the first "I endorsed this just so I can tell you how stupid you are" comment.
The first big issue I see with this is in submission. When you submit something often you need to leave the first comment to give it context. So stories on the "new" page are likely to get a lot fewer upvotes.

The second big issue I see is when responding to comments on a post about you/your company. I'm at 950-ish, and I suspect that is on the high side for a founder at a 2 year old startup. When posts about us hit 3 months ago I didn't have 500 points. I "hustled" to get to this level so that I would not look like a noob, but if these rules had been in effect 3 months ago I wouldn't have seen comments and questions about our product, and I wouldn't have been able to reply.

I'm a "noob" as I have under 1000 points, but I have been a top 100 contributor in many other communities, it doesn't sound to me like this is a good idea. I think it will limit discussion and feed back by Authors, Founders, and others who find they are suddenly getting traffic from a site called ycombinator that they have never heard of.

Basically I think this is a move away from community and towards elitism. If that is the goal, then I think you should do it, but it feels like it is counter to the stated goals of this change.

@PG if you want an automated system for determining the quality of a comment I make one. We could probably work something out to leverage our technology at HN to prevent all the negativity, and to do some sort of blend of the quality score of the comment and the user karma to calculate if the comment "passes".

Edit:

I posted a history of Digg and how changing the way powerusers and noobs were treated lead to its downfall.

http://www.xyhd.tv/2014/03/industry-news/hackernews-change-t...
MD5 has already been out-and-out replaced. For applications that require collision resistance, MD5 is already dangerous. Even in a setting where MD5 is unlikely to cause real problems, like in an HMAC authenticator, its use would still be flagged in an audit.

No competent new design in 2014 would use SHA1 either.

In the world we live in now, there are two "mainstream" options for hash functions: SHA2 (ie, SHA2/256, SHA2/512, &c) and SHA3. SHA3 is actually not at all mainstream (very few applications use it), but (a) that will change over time and (b) nobody will really bat an eyelid if you choose to use it.

What Zooko is advocating for is a third mainstream option: BLAKE2. BLAKE2 is derived from a well-regarded SHA3 finalist; the preponderance of evidence suggests that BLAKE2 is safe, and arguably a more conservative choice than SHA3 (a/k/a Keccak, pronounced "Ketchup"), because SHA3's novel sponge function design hasn't been banged on the way SHA2's design, which BLAKE sort of shares, has.

The reality is that for most software designers, this isn't an important issue; most software isn't constrained by the speed of its hashing algorithms (the common bottleneck in crypto code is the bignum work public key algorithms have to do --- if you're worried about bottlenecked on hashing, you probably have a much bigger problem with I/O).
off topic but by far the most interesting comment thread I've read on HN in a long time.
I didn't RTFA, but if you instead assume it just goes to adults (~221M) then that's $2.2T. I think BI gets rid of SS/Medicare/Medicaid/etc, which gets you back roughly $2T.
Being lego, this actually solves a lot of my immediate worries:

Sets can be weighed back in. Missing pieces are held in stock and can easily be replaced.

Lego can go into a washing machine/steriliser.

It is light and virtually impossible to damage in transit (assuming they devise good packaging)

There is minimal depreciation, and demand for new sets won't be absurd. (vs textbooks and general toys)

You have to work hard to hurt yourself with faulty lego.

The only problem I see is (for my family at least) Lego was faddish. We didn't touch it for months, then couldn't get enough of it for three weeks. This is a difficulty for a subscription model.

Overall this is an excellent idea.
The IETF doesn't standardize cryptography.

If you think Joan Daemen is an NSA plant, you've got bigger problems than hash functions.
Basic income means taxing people with income, and redistributing it to everybody.

Where did you get the idea that disposable income increases for everyone? How could that be even possible?
not to mention mc donalds business would probably boost since now everybody can afford to have some junk food if they feel like it, paying some more wouldn't be a problem, I imagine.
How many of the Snowden cables were regarding actions by GCHQ?

If anything intelligence is something that's easier for other states to do as long as you're willing to be less capable than "I could plant a SCADA malware that would slightly affect UF6 production in an airgapped network, in a way that would be irreversibly destructive before it could be detected".

For the rest of what they do, the resource investment costs are far lower than fielding a "real" military, and it's even much easier to find quality amateurs and train them up to professional standards since you don't need 100,000-man armies to have an impact. That's the unpleasant reality of automation for the U.S.; it levels the playing field for the rest of the world.

VUPEN doesn't work in a vacuum after all; I'd be willing to bet the French state itself has quite capable cyber surveillance, attack, etc. capabilities.
'the logic of the larder'. There could never exist as many cows in a state of nature as are supported right now, for similar reasons to why the earth could not support 7 billion human hunter-gatherers. Is the cow suicidal and would prefer to have never been? If not, then the cow is right to praise the farmers.
Currently, the downvote button is only supposed to be used for unproductive comments

pg has previously stated that it's perfectly acceptable to use the downvote button as "I disagree".
"with intent to convert trade secrets belonging to Microsoft, specifically Microsoft's Activation Server Software Development Kit, to the economic benefit of someone other than Microsoft" "All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1832(a)(2), (a)(4), and 2."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1832

So had Alex Kibkalo simply published this in the public domain, there would be no criminal case?
I think the reliability of charity in this case would increase as the number of people who need it decrease. I don't think we can rely on charity to solve everyone's financial woes, else said woes would already be solved. But when the percentage of people in need of charity grows smaller, the impact of the same pool of charity increases for those left in need.
The number of bad comment is relatively low. And what kind of bad comments are we after?
Disagree on your first point, the top comment is often obviously spawning a huge argument that goes nowhere because it touched some hot-button political issue that was a minor part of the story.
Well if it causes inflation then it calls into question whether it really is a "first step."
This is an interesting point. Could you imagine if race and / or religion mixed with capitalism lead to several mega-corporations battling with each other for control of the economy? It sounds far-fetched but the ideas are very plausible when you look at what happened with mining towns in West Virginia.
I'm guessing these are all comments made by accounts created within the last 24 hours.
I'm not particularly optimistic, but I'm all for experimentation.
>Because you don't live in a vacuum. Our society makes it possible so that you can earn a living.

This argument doesn't hold water for me. Society makes it possible for everyone to earn a living, so people who aren't doing it should start.
Finally someone thought about adding the sound, and losing the yellowish graphics.
It breaks down for threads that only ever get a single viewer (who comments).

At least, I don't get the impression that this update is intended to prevent such posts regardless of content (eg a reference to a related paper on some obscure topic).
Yes. It should be possible to endorse something without agreeing with it.
I agree that this is going to be a net win.
There is already a vocabulary for why you are conflicted. It is called the insurance effect: Even though all the non-heavy users of the Internet are paying, in their flat rate bill, for the heavy users, most of them are OK with that arrangement because they are "insuring" themselves against the day when they, too, might become a heavy user.

What you are articulating is the risk that one day, you might move a few terabytes of photos, or upload your music collection to Google Play Music, or buy Carbonite backup, and you have only a vague idea what each of those services are going to do to your bandwidth use.

In theory it is rational to pay per bit, but that also assumes you know much more about your future use patterns than any consumer would know.

Now here comes the plot twist: Do m2m customers get cheap rates because they are willing to pay per bit? Noooooooo! They take it up the ass on a cost per bit basis. So maybe ISPs are just greedy bastards.
Only if they were colluding with one another. Lower prices remain attractive to consumers even when they have extra cash to spend. Reasonably priced goods would still win out in volume of sales over unnecessarily high-priced goods.
This is bike related, not tech related, but I couldn't see "Full-suspension 29'er from a well-known manufacturer for about $2,900" without wondering why the GT Sensor 9r Expert didn't make your list. I have the 2013 model, and it kicks ass if you're looking in that category.