skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Wow, thanks for that link.

In 2012, banks took in $32 billion in overdraft fees up $400 million from the previous year. The record was hit in 2009 with $37 billion in overdraft fees collected by banks.
The steep barriers to entry into becoming an exchange due to these laws/policies and the whole cloudy and non clear nature of what protocols to adhere in each country ensure that exchanges are not started by the most competent but by the most reckless and foolish, see magic the gathering.

There are several exchanges in the works but they are bogged down with regulation and not able to open.
> This is a big problem with current envy-driven politics surrounding wealth.

It seems like most of the envy is more perceived by the ultra-rich (or wannabes) than actually exists...

> I like to think that if the people supporting these high rates of tax for those with some above average level of wealth realised who they were really targeting, we'd have a different attitude to taxation today.

You realize the 75% tax rate is on year income exceeding one million euro, right? One million euro is 34x the average salary in France, which means that anybody hit by that tax makes more money in less than two years than the majority of their countrymen will earn in their entire lives.

I make way more than an average salary where I live and I don't really have any problem paying higher tax rates. Sure, I work harder than lots of people who work 9-5 jobs, but I don't work any harder than friends I have who work two jobs. There is no question, in my mind, that people who work harder and take risks should reap greater potential rewards... the real question we need to answer is how much higher those rewards should be.

It's time to stop pretending that the doctor who spent years training, working as an intern, etc did it in a vacuum. It was tax francs that built the hospitals, that created the institutions that taught them and made them the best of the best. The entrepreneur sells a product shipped on roads built with taxes, over an electric grid built with taxes and might very well bill people using letters sent by mail... well, you get the idea. Not to mention the employees they hire, who were educated with what? Was it taxes? You betcha.

Besides with progressive taxes, that doctor will always make more, because progressive taxes do not penalize you for earning more. If you're making 100,000€, your after-tax income is ~62,500; if you're making 200,000€, it's ~133,000€.

> usually they are people who have reached those positions not through good fortune or family connections but through a lot of hard work over a long period of time.

You're a little delusional. France has a pretty high level of social mobility because of it's high taxes, not in spite of them. Having access to free higher education is a massive boon to lifting people out of poverty. France has the second highest birth rate in the EU due do a generous social safety net. These things cost money, but they're excellent long-term investments.

People don't exist in a vacuum, economies are wonderfully interconnected things and acting like the people who take risks and succeed are some kind of superheroes who shouldn't give back because of some deranged notion that they "did it themselves" is myopic, dishonest and, to be frank, total bullshit.
This is not a taxation by envy, this is Adam Smith "ability to pay" theory, it's the guy who rules UK who invented it, it can't be wrong, on an authority ground! Man! Adam Smith!

You have to understand that absolute tax rate is just not meaningful, you can't say it's high or low, you need a reference. The real question is: where does the money go?
In France it's easy the accounting is public: it goes mainly into retirement and medicines. (yeah, technically it's not taxes, but it's still money the State takes, it's bigger than actual taxes and the debt incurred there is carried by the State General Budget anyways). And then the discussion goes, are the pensions fair in France (and the system where one generation pays for the previous one), what about medicine prices? etc.

Don't believe the complaint of the wealthy, they still have a better life than the rest of the population, the only difference is that their friends are journalists. Doctors in France have a better life than street workers. And the thinking than a banker is more important and deserve more money than the garbage man is more alive than ever (also only one of them is literally protecting us from the plague, and only one of them can say: "it me or the chaos in 3 days").

Nobody has been punished by taxes here, the wealthy are perfectly happy to come to Paris through a tax-funded airport, through a taxpayer maintained highway, or through a tunnel that was used to fuck over middle class people.
We have gated communities, we give truckloads of money to big corps, and some of the biggest fortunes in the world are here, we're not very different.

One difference is that the average people here don't think that they are temporarily embarrassed millionnaires, they know that only a very few people get out of their birth class. And they are conservative (and that drive me crazy).

I think the real problem is that we should enjoy the safety net for doing innovation, not mess with the taxes or what some special interests in the UK and US are saying.
Flying Upside Down
Thanks for the tip on UptimeRobot!
Here's a good one someone linked below

http://www.forbes.com/sites/halahtouryalai/2013/06/11/yes-ba...
"should" as in "I remember reading something about it". Makes sense, if that's default. Anyway, thanks for pointing that out!
...climate change is real. To ignore that...

You are arguing against a straw man. Neither Silver nor Pielke claimed it wasn't.

...to reject expertise period is to reject the role that knowledge can and must play in forming an understanding of our world.

No, rejecting "expertise" is simply rejecting the idea that you must outsource your thinking to others.
I find lists like this to be rather naive. A lot of people think that businesses are all about: good idea + great execution. Wrong! A business is about: making money. Plain and simple. You don't need a fancy idea and the latest execution 'methods' (e.g. agile, lean, etc.) to make money.

You need a market, hard work, smart decisions, and a bit of luck. There is way too much conversation conflating the concepts of innovation and business. I would say that in the case of innovation it IS about: good(novel) idea + great execution.

I imagine many startups feel that they MUST innovate to be a 'worthy' company. But, you really don't. To be a company you just have to make money. You do whatever is necessary to do just that. Nokia sold rubber tires FFS [0]

[0] http://www.nokia.com/global/about-nokia/about-us/the-nokia-s...
Clive Wilkinson helped Google ditch cubicles and embrace glass
>Why do people continue to trust their funds to incompetents and fraudsters?

At this point its a gamble. You either give up and admit
Vircurex has lost all of your wallet or you keep using them and hope the profit they generate from you will make its way back into your wallet while at the same time hoping they don't have any more security issues. Its not so much "trust" as it is hope.
It would be a feature if 538 was intended to fund actual research.

But it's not; it's a content website that sells ads, and according to Silver, aspires to deliver truthful reporting. Hirng Roger Pielke to draw naive correlations is neither research nor truthful reporting.
So tonight I'm gonna party like it's 1929...

Most US Financial regulation stemmed from Depression-era screwups. Thankfully, people-who-say-fiat are in their own little world that I can mostly ignore, but in the real, we're not doing much better with regards to forgetting the lessons of the depression. The 1999 Glass-Steagall repeal, for instance, was a major cause of the issues of the past decade.
I never did any jailbreak or homebreak in my devices. I rather have memory safe languages.

To put it in perspective, I code since the days C was UNIX only so I had the pleasure to know better designed languages for system programming, that sadly went out of fashion as UNIX spread into the enterprise.
You forgot "People who have a small enough amount of money to not exceed the number of games available for pre-order."
>The amusing part though is that he assumes that Nate Silver isn't an expert at this point. I've been following 538 since before 2008, and the quality of analysis from a non-statistical level was consistently far higher than almost any other publication (except perhaps the Economist).

Krugman isn't disagreeing that Silver is good at political analysis. In fact, Krugman has been a huge supporter of Silver and his work, because (at least to my eyes) Krugman identifies with him. Keep reading the post.

"In that case, he pitted his statistical approach against campaign-narrative pundits, who turned out to know approximately nothing. What he seems to have concluded is that there are no experts anywhere, that a smart data analyst can and should ignore all that. But not all fields are like that — in fact, even political analysis isn’t like that, if you talk to political scientists instead of political reporters."

If you've read the new 538, there are a great deal of non-political analysis stories - covering, for example, climatology and economics - that just have it all wrong, for the very reasons Krugman is talking about. Krugman is not the only one saying this.

>Krugman hit an impressive low in January with this column - a rather vapid dismissal of the Silk Road as (and I quote) "libertarian derp", devoid of any actual analysis or supporting argument

That's not a column, it's a blog post. Krugman posts lots of unserious stuff on his blog, like his undying love for Arcade Fire. He's spent plenty of other posts giving as much thought he as a Keynesian who readily admits he's not technologically saavy to Bitcoin-related matters should. If you want serious analysis, read his economics-related posts. If you care about what Krugman the man feels about something (and I don't know why you should, unless you know him personally), read the others.
9664 is my lowest
"I've had the bookstore call me and tell me that there is a new edition and they won't order the old edition"

Eh? How does a single phone call from a single bookshop prevent you from assigning a particular edition of a particular book for your students?

Are you in a remote location in a country without an Amazon or Abebooks equivalent?

This is not meant as snark. I honestly don't get it, and would like to understand the background to the situation you describe.
I don't understand why Bitcoin businesses don't simply exercise full transparency about their holdings through the blockchain.
What you've described would be desirable were it not for a widespread flaw in human reasoning. When people invest time and/or money into a place, they want to make sure it doesn't change for the worse. The default strategy to achieve that goal is to fight any change at all, which doesn't work in growing cities. You can try to keep the buildings the same as they are, but the people will change, as will the transportation problems.

A growing city requires more housing to slow the rise of housing prices. A growing city requires more housing near its transportation investments (especially where capacity can easily be increased) so more people can get to where they need to go quickly. NIMBYism prevents both of those, and is the cause of many problems in the modern American city.
So... you're saying its easy for the reckless and foolish to somehow overcome these steep barriers and understand what it takes to open while those who are competent are unable to do so?
Sorry to go meta, but is there a review of that review which lays out some or most of the things you object to in it?
>Personally, there's probably a number that would sway me.

Uncharitably, I could say "So we've determined you're a thief, now we're just haggling about the price."

But actually I don't think that thinking that there is a number that would probably sway you, means that that number really would. I'd like to think you'd actually say no to any number, through to billions.

At the end of the day, morality isn't nearly as elastic as people suppose. You either have it or you don't.
Honest question: can somebody explain what problem Keybase addresses?
> Doing your own analysis doesn't mean you believe there are no experts.

Krugman isn't criticizing Silver for doing his own analysis, he's criticizing the lack of judgement he displays is hiring Roger Pielke, Jr., -- who is neither a neutral data scientist nor a climatologist, but a political scientist who has long been selling a very specific position regarding climate change -- to do his analysis for him on the issue of climate change, and then publishing his report with the specific flaws that critics have identified in Pielke's piece, and suggesting that the process that allowed all that to happen was a result of Siver's disregard for expertise in the domain.

Personally I think that Krugman is attacking Silver for the wrong reason -- I don't think that Silver's problem is a lack of respect of real expertise in any domain (and in his own work, while he was conducted his own analysis, he has also demonstrated respect for -- without unquestioning deference to -- domain experts), I think its more likely that if there is a problem its just a simple failure of judgement regarding someone else's abilities and interests.
Is there a way to compare / access the success rates of different prosecutes?
Given that all modern languages do support some form of MI, maybe it is time to stop bashing C++ about it.
Social Media lead Gen software
And yet, he's been right about the consequences of the financial crisis, austerity, and debt hysteria where everyone else in the punditry has been wrong. I'm sorry that he thinks Silk Road and bitcoin are stupid. I happen to agree with him, but even if I didn't, I think with his track record you ignore his analysis on macroeconomics at your peril.
Q: What's the difference between working on data mining and designing missiles?

A: When you build missiles, you can at least take comfort knowing that they'll only be used to harm people who are far away.
They would have averted the whole thing had they just paid the fuck attention to rubyonrails-security and updated in January when the bug was announced: https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2013-0156
Without touching the gun issue, ad hominem attacks are not helpful.

Secondly, your statement shows a lack of appreciation for the heterogeneity of crime rates and public safety quality/availability in U.S.
Nate Silver is not an expert on the scientific study of climate change, and neither is Roger Pielke.

Silver built his reputation by taking the results of professional pollsters seriously, rather than attempting to spin them as most political reporters do. It was not a high bar to clear.

If he's going to report on climate change, or indeed any area of scientific study, then he needs to start with what actual scientists are reporting, just like he started his political reporting with what actual polls were saying.
I guess this was before Moravec's paradox was "discovered" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moravec%27s_paradox
Bitcoin wallets shouldn't be accessible from the exchange's code base. When a user wants to transfer funds out there should be a small fee and a human should process it from an secured computer. The verification step should include signing either with a cryptographic key, logging on with a hard to hack account, like gmail, or by sms verification. None of this passport / utility bill bullshit.

It's fucking amateur hour here.
Don't be blind when KIF fails on Travis.
Psst, Android is open source. So if you want everything open source, Android-powered car infotainment should make you very happy.
Everyone Who Tried to Convince Me To Use Ember Was Wrong
Nice. That sounds like a good explanation.
Does the same logic apply to companies dealing with Taiwan, in (probable) convention of Chinese law? Huawei has no responsibility to follow US export law.
I have been enjoying some of the tutorials on the Century Link Labs blog: http://www.centurylinklabs.com/category/docker-posts/
You misunderstood the question. Do you think that only the government can provide this insurance?
I'd like to throw an idea into this thread that's relevant to the recent events in Turkey.

Twittor - A Twitter client with built in Tor integration.
What? I think you did not understand what I meant by that.

Legislation in this case does not eliminate your freedom, but protects it, forcing companies to obey to privacy and data protection.

The only freedom that would be eliminated here is the freedom of a company to abuse data they do not own.
Hear, hear! I agree.

For context, I'm implementing a compute exchange: https://www.stackmonkey.com/ - whitepaper: https://github.com/StackMonkey/xovio-pool/blob/master/whitep...

While I'm not implementing a crypto currency exchange, I will still have to disburse float based funds over short periods of time. As the site code will be responsible for this, there exists a hypothetical opportunity for a bad agent to break in and siphon off those funds. I'm toying around with making it impossible to withdraw funds once they are deposited by a user. If funds were limited to penny value drips to keep instances running, the site could be made aware of larger transfers of value out of given addresses. If that was noticed by the system, another secret system could 'pull the plug' on the API tokens for the Coinbase API. I'll need Coinbase to implement token revokes in their API...

Better, if the code is Open Source, I can have more eyeballs on it to prevent such an eventuality. You can review my code here: https://github.com/StackMonkey. The pool controller is the one which will need to be closely scrutinized. The appliance can only watch incoming payments, so it's not really that venerable. I choose to make all this code Open Source because it will be in charge of customer funds and, more importantly, the infrastructure of the Internet.

Moving forward, I don't think it's a good idea to use anything hooked up to your Bitcoin float that isn't Open. Still, it's a choice people can make freely, even if it's a poor one. Education matters.
I am the author of a text that has been Freely available for some time now so I've read this post with interest. I'm seeing responses both here and on the Reddit post saying things like, "If I was in charge I'd make the class professors staple together some pages and make a free text, dammit." I appreciate the sentiment, but developing a text is a great deal of work. For instance, in math developing a set of quality exercises is, in my estimation, 2/3 of the effort, so just putting beamer slides in a comb binding is nowhere near enough.

At least part of the issue lies in the reward system. Lesson One of economics is that people do what they are rewarded for doing and at this point most faculty would not get professional credit for being part of an open text development effort (obviously the situation now with printed texts is that people get money, and obviously also people do things for a variety of reasons but generally ..). Since a quality text takes hundreds of hours of close work by experts, you can't be surprised that quality open texts are not thick on the ground. (I'm fortunate in that my institution has been willing to recognize my work in this, but such generosity and foresight is not common.)

So it is not as simple, at least in math, as making an edict.
How do you do that without bringing cold wallets online regularly?
My favorite part of the whole flapperdoodle: John Holdren's fisking of Roger Pielke[1]. Best quote:

"Senator Sessions quoted from testimony before the environment and Public Works Committee the previous July by Dr. Roger Pielke.... Specifically, the Senator read the following passages from Dr. Pielke’s written testimony:

"'It is misleading, and just plain incorrect, to claim that disasters associated with hurricanes, tornadoes, floods or droughts have increased on climate timescales either in the United States or globally. Drought has “for the most part, become shorter, less, frequent, and cover a smaller portion
of the U.S. over the last century”....'

"Footnotes in the testimony attribute the [statement] in quotation marks [...] to the US Climate Change Science Program’s 2008 report on extremes in North America....

"...[A]ny reference to the CCSP 2008 report in this context should include not just the sentence highlighted in Dr. Pielke’s testimony but also the sentence that follows immediately in the relevant passage from that document and which relates specifically to the American West. Here are the two sentences in their entirety (http://downloads.globalchange.gov/sap/sap3-
3/Brochure-CCSP-3-3.pdf):

"'Similarly, long-term trends (1925-2003) of hydrologic droughts based on model derived soil moisture and runoff show that droughts have, for the most part, become shorter, less frequent, and cover a smaller portion of the U.S. over the last century (Andreadis and Lettenmaier, 2006). The main exception is the Southwest and parts of the interior of the
West, where increased temperature has led to rising drought trends (Groisman et al., 2004; Andreadis and Lettenmaier, 2006).'"

Yes, Pielke argued ¬P by carefully picking a quote immediately next to a statement of P.

Extra credit for the mention of "Dr. Roy Spencer of the University of Alabama", who is the smarmiest goof-ball I've ever heard present. Really, no one is a bigger fan of contrarian scientists than I am; one of the best things Einstein ever did was to ensure the quantum mechanicists had their shit together. But starting off your talk by referring to everyone else in your field as "politicians and scientists who want to be politicians" just isn't "god does not play dice" and it sets off every kook alarm I have.

[1] http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ost...
Do you know of any such email service? Google, Apple, and Yahoo will all read your email:

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/mar/21/yahoo-goog...
> do we know anything about googles behavior with law enforcement wrt gmail?

Yes, quite a bit: https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/

But the problem in this scenario is law enforcement wasn't involved. I'm unaware of any other email hosting company doing this so far. Not to say they haven't, just it hasn't surfaced.
There's a very well funded company in Vancouver (yes, really) that's working on #38 a crunchbase for charities. So far they've linked up all Canadian charities to their platform (US next) and are themselves a registered charity.

What's unique is that you can 'donate' to them anytime, get a tax receipt, & decide which charity to give to at a later date.

They're called Chimp Fund (Chimp.net) - I've met the founders and contracted for them before.
The school that I attended rented textbooks to students. It was included in tuition ~$300/year and everyone had to pay it. I could understand how they would prevent you getting a particular edition because they effectively purchase new books about every 3 years (depending on the enrollment in the course). Unfortunately, I still ran into a problem like this article speaks about in that one of the professors wrote a book and charged about $25 for their book for the course and made it required. Granted $25 is not a lot but they were effectively skipping the system's rental program.