skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm generally a fan of this idea, as long as its implemented correctly.

At the moment lots of western countries, spend billions on welfare entitlement, and billions more administering a complex system, so that politicans can change particular benefits to win votes from certian groups of voters.

Under this system, all benefits are replaced with a single, universal level, so politicans can give rises either to everyone, or no one. (The only additional benefits should be for those with serve disabilities).

You also lose the withdrawal issues of going from out of work, to in work, you can get rid of things like minimum wages, as their not needed any more, and you can support a more flexible labour market.

Politicans cannot fight over, how particular benefits can change, say increase pensions, but cut unemployment.

If you also merge this into the tax system, with a flat tax as a negative income tax, it is even more efficient.

And eventually you also get what alot of people on the right want - a smaller, more efficient goverment, while doing what alot of people on the left want.
Meaningful programming
> As you can see, there is no mention of Luminati, or the underlying mechanics at all.

They didn't write "Luminati" but they wrote this:

"Hola and Hola premium are free for private, non-commercial use. For a commercial license to Hola please contact [...]. Your commercial license will provide you with these additional features: Hola For business: License to use Hola for commercial purposes.
Automation: developer API that enable controlling the routing of your HTTP requests via software.
Allow many concurrent sessions.
High bandwidth/high request rate with multiple IPs.
More precise resolution of exit node IP.
Faster changing of IP.
Engineering technical support."

"Typical VPNs need to maintain servers in various countries and to route your traffic through those servers in order to change your IP. This is very expensive. Hola is a network of peers that help each other to access sites, thereby eliminating the need for servers, and thus operating without costs."
Might that be related to a watchface that you already installed on your watch / downloaded to your app, perhaps the Modern watchface? http://www.mypebblefaces.com/apps/1486/1299/

The domain name seems belong to this gentleman: http://forums.getpebble.com/discussion/4453/light-enable-int...
Because they are much more enjoyable jobs and because they pay more.
These may count as libraries, but they are all building blocks for bigger projects.

Game engine: http://www.piston.rs/

HTTP library: http://hyper.rs/

Vim like editor: https://github.com/mathall/rim

Also, the built with Rust webpage: http://builtwithrust.com/
What's to stop a nation implementing BI from capping the
number of immigrants it admits?

Such an action is pretty difficult in say the EU on a country basis. European residents (currently) have a right to live and work where ever they want in the EU. Countries can't block that without major changes to Tue EU rules.
Show HN: Chrome plugin to rate and review sites' terms of use and privacy policies
Yes, it appears I was wrong lumping Norway into there, http://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?queryid=36499.
The tragedy, though, is because of the way the very rich are embedded at the very top of political and economic power structures, they got away scott-free and are now more powerful than ever [1].

Their wealth is pure rent-extraction and they will happily consume and destroy every person and resource on this planet before they voluntarily surrender a single cent ("nu-philanthropy" notwithstanding).

These are complicated political problems that I think the tech community cannot solve on it's own (and possibly lacks the language to even discuss sensibly).

[1] e.g. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/19/world-wealth-oxfam_...
Calculus for mathematicians (1997) [pdf]
GDP is value added. If there are less people working, I'd hope that value added would go down.
5 Podcasts Worth Listening to for Bootstrapping Startup Founders
Oh sorry, I misunderstood. I just thought you meant it was paid for by the company. That sounds pretty cool!
I think if you could see close-up how these systems work now, you'd be convinced that it's completely not worth the vast cost (in time, energy, money) to try and figure out who "deserves" each of the many, many special benefits/allowances/exemptions available (plus it's incredibly difficult for potential recipients to figure out what they're eligible for, plus it imposes those costs on the people who aren't eligible, but end up having to jump through all the same hoops.)

Based on my experience in the last year working on healthcare.gov etc., I think it's become increasingly clear that the implementation of well-meaning policies intended to separate the deserving from the undeserving ends up adding an incredible amount of complexity and overhead, along with unintentional side effects, edge cases, and bad incentives.

That said, there's no way politically a basic income is going to fly in the US anytime soon. So since this is HN... is there any way to get to an MVP without having a sovereign state to experiment with? Or is this solely in the realm of public policy?

(I asked this a while back on another BI thread, trying again)
The question I want answered is what's to stop the people who own the automation technology/patents/natural resource rights from leaving the country so they don't have to pay the taxes for everyone's minimum income?
One reason why I am currently not so much in favor of UBI is immigration. I have three uncommon beliefs about immigration:

First, I don't believe the idea of human rights allows a state to tell people where they are allowed or forbidden to live.

Secondly, I don't believe immigration controls are ultimately feasible. In the US this is obvious in the big population of illegal immigrants, other countries are also discovering that they can't really stop people from entering and that hunting down and deporting hundreds of thousands of people is harder than it looks.

Thirdly, I don't believe a society can save money by withholding social welfare to someone who lives among them. The cost in health care, crime, and lost potential may very well outpace the savings.

I also believe a UBI would force countries to try and tighten their immigration controls. The problem is not so much that the immigrants wouldn't ultimately benefit that society, but the upfront payments and increased financial risks are just scary as hell.
"And the Gods of the Copybook Headings, I notice, outlast them all."
I think so too.. I sent them an email asking them to respond to his post.
That is not old fashioned at all. What systems to get people to work do not rely on coercion? Even nature, which got us to work on the first place, did so by coercion.

The only way we can make a society more accommodating is to change the type of coercion to a more gentle one. I.e., instead of working to avoid starvation and being eaten by wild animals people now work to avoid going into debt, losing their preferred place to live and having to rely on food stamps (at least in the US). In a society with basic income they would be coerced to work though social pressure and the desire to have nice things. (Edit: The latter may seem like an intrinsic motivation but in a society with advertising it is one that
is actively generated. Advertising may actually gain a new, vital role in getting people to work if a basic income program is implemented.)
A Song Made by 14 Year Olds ON ITUNES
Hotwheels broke this story first, you are just regurgitating it.
I agree on 1 and 2, but don't see how 3 follows. If you live as an "illegal immigrant" you are playing life on a higher difficulty level already. UBI wouldn't apply to non-citizens.

Of course you might argue that it very well should, but that to me is a different argument that comes at a way later stage.

EDIT: I believe this argument is confusing how the world should be with how the world can feasibly be at this point in time. Baby-steps :)
Well this will consume some of my evenings, thx!
Likely the same people, but with a large salary bonus!

If you agree or find reasonable that the incentive to "not work" of BI affects the lowest paying jobs the most, lets go around a few cases.

1) Automatable-minimum wage jobs: today they are not replaced by machinery because its either expensive or through social concern (i.e. Walmart doesnt fire all the cashiers and replace them with automatic ones because of many political, social and some economic measures).
In the world today such automation is not pursued because of its consequences and the marginal profit. If these people stop working, we would quikcly start finding automatic solutions. Bartending, cashiers, some construction, product assembly etc.
I would expect these jobs to dissapear from human hands.

2) Non-automatable jobs: if the minimum wage people drop jobs that are too hard to automate or require a human touch (retail sales, nannies/child care, cleaning?, Garbage management, etc.) lots of people would drop out, which would reduce supply.
So income would increase a lot for those that still do those jobs.

TLDR; decreased supply would increase wages and let this work still happen but it would be more expensive for businesses, and it would push automation.
Think about moving around hash buckets, not sites nor files. You can decide what you want to keep in memory data or metadata. Now you need both sites+file metadata, neither of those need to be stored when serving static files you yourself rename and place everytime they are published.
Submit.co – Where to get press coverage for your startup
> But I do think think that countries which offer a great deal of socialized benefits (such as Finland, Norway, Sweden etc.) have a significant problem with a unemployment in the youngest generation of the labor force.

Youth unemployment in Norway is significantly lower than in the US, using the data from ycharts which should be from here: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/...

United states: 12.3%

Norway: 8.6%

https://ycharts.com/indicators/norway_youth_unemployment_rat...

https://ycharts.com/indicators/united_states_youth_unemploym...

Edit - I see someone else has already brought this up :)
> But I do think think that countries which offer a great deal of socialized benefits (such as Finland, Norway, Sweden etc.) have a significant problem with a unemployment in the youngest generation of the labor force.

Youth unemployment in Norway is significantly lower than in the US, using the data from ycharts which should be from here: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/...

United states: 12.3%

Norway: 8.6%

https://ycharts.com/indicators/norway_youth_unemployment_rat...

https://ycharts.com/indicators/united_states_youth_unemploym...
In principle I like the idea, but :

- the System (corporations / politicians) will never allow it

- we're on a planet with limited resources and all economic theories fail to acknowledge that
Rule changes are not even enough. European borders are impossible to secure against "illegal" or "unwanted" migration of individuals. They always have been. Even the GDR wasn't able to stop its people entirely from leaving for the west. And nobody wants to use their methods.

Of course, "illegal" immigrants can't apply for UBI. They would form a permanent underclass, who work for minimal wages, don't have any representation, no social security, and no social mobility.
On your first point this is not a new problem. Machines replaced most humans in most factories decades ago. What is new is that the few humans left operating the machines or doing complex work too expensive to build a machine for, might get replaced by robots too. We absorbed the first wave of mechanisation. There is no reason we can't absorb a second wave. In fact the second wave already happened in western countries since these manufacturing jobs went to asia. It created mass unemployment for uneducated people that will remain a problem for a while (and which I believe is the primary reason for any rise in income inequality). And the only solution is more and better education. Not financial incentives.

On your second point, an open country only has limited control over its immigration. First illegal immigration is massive and difficult to control, and when people have lived in a country for many years it is hard to not give them documents. But the main reason is that the majority of immigration is an immigration countries have no control on. People marrying foreigners or legal immigrants bringing their family. These are rights that should certainly exist but are easy to abuse, particularly for originating countries where there is little vital records.
"In Russia, they thought everyone should have bread. That was a decision made by those in power, and they then tried to make that happen, whether everyone wanted bread or not. This did not work so well, and there were shortages."

So they produced bread, but then there were shortages? This doesn't make sense.

There is something that we could call "The Central-Planner's Dilemma".

People need shoes. Hence, there are people who will be looking to get into the business of supplying shoes. If you find a way to get shoes, and then sell them for more than it cost you, you can buy nice things and that impresses the ladies. You get entire firms dedicated to small problems like shoes for kids, business shoes, variations that suit people with wide feet. Market economies are like the mold on your bathroom ceiling - they just happen.

In Russia, the government went to great lengths to stifle that dynamic. They said: all people will need shoes, so the government will supply shoes to meet their need. Everyone will work together to give the government all the resources to do this. If you try divert resources from our project by getting into the shoe business, we'll shoot you.

So it's a new game. Now if you want to get the ladies, you need to become the resource allocation guy.

But let's assume that you are the planner, and that your motives are pure. You're a really good guy, and you do this for the sheer love of people having shoes. Here's the Dilemma: how do you convert the need of the people to the reality of the goods you're getting to them. This is crazy difficult.

To start with, how do you get signal about what the people need? This is hard. You could have a shot at it, by judging birth rates in regions, and getting height variation. You could send out teams to measure foot dimensions and then run statistical variance on sizes.

Then you'd needs to communicate that intent to the factories. And then the factories need to execute at producing the things that they should be producing. And then you need to somehow get the goods from the different factories through to the correct regions.

You're doing all this through a fog of politics, because jobs in resource-allocation are the only game in town, and everyone wants a piece of it.

The Alan Greenspan biography includes a neat section where he got to meet /the/ Russian central planner after the thaw. As in - the guy who sits in the room and decides how many shoes to produce. He describes a complicated mechanisms he set up to plan things. It's a good read.
Nothing generic about the Walt Disney Concert Hall either :)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Walt_Disn...

But as you say: less well-known.
Web of Things Framework [pdf]
This video is a must-see for people interested in UBI - Milton Friedman, in 1968, on a negative income tax: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtpgkX588nM
And someone younger than you without savings would step in to fill your role. Youth unemployment in first world countries is very high right now.
I imagine the idea is great and most people are not like you. But that is just my imagination. On the other hand, the article presents very good arguments for the system and why would it work.
I would too. I'd do so immediately. And what would I do with all that leisure time? I'd teach the local children robotics with Arduinos and RasPis, just like I do now with every scrap of my meager free-time only then I'd get to do it every day.

Imagine how impoverished the world would become if thousands like me took to a life of such mooching!
Fascinating.

> Such concentration at the very top occurred in 1915 and 1916, as the Gilded Age was ending, and again briefly in the late 1920s, before the stock market crash. Now it is back.

Quite literally, "Every time this has happened in the past there was a crash." Said without the least hint of irony or indication that anyone should worry.
Have the economic consequences been studied on a deeper level? There are so many complex correlations in economics that I'm afraid Basic Income can lead to some kind of disaster that's not so obvious at a first glance. How does it affect the national export/import, monetary value, growth, tax income, GDP, housing market, demand/supply on jobs/goods in different sectors etc etc?

This article touches those things, which is refreshing compared to most things written about BI, but I would still like to see a real study.
Just because I find an hour journey fairly reasonable, it doesn't mean that every journey I make takes an hour.
People stopping to work does not necessarily mean GDP reduces. Precisely because they still have money to spend, GDP will almost surely go up. Maybe you are thinking of amount of hours worked, that would go down, but that does not mean productivity, or quality of work, or amount of services and goods.

If only 10% stop doing minimum wages and go to school, and pursue a typical corporate carrier, and make 10 times minimum wage, the offset of the 90% not working minimum jobs anymore would be completely offset.

Not to mention that people needing to get a job within 2 or 3 days pick terrible jobs with no future, so those that dont go to school will still be able to pick jobs better.
2015 Top 100 Brands [pdf]
True, hadn't thought about that.
I'd say that simple understandings of economic theories fail to acknowledge limited physical resources. But most "theories" I know don't even talk about limited physical resources.

Economic growth is about "value", not necessarily "consumption of physical resources".
Agreed. more and more jobs are being automated and going away. Both in big ways and smaller ones. Heck sometimes as a programmer I have bad feelings about making things more efficient for humans, thereby requiring less of them. In my career there has many projects that fit that description.

This is a complex idea, not without a large amount of challenges.

However as a citizen and programmer, I would rather see more things being automated, and instead of more unemployment, people could either not work, or find work they are more passionate about.

Just imagine if everyone that decided they want to not sit around all day, actually was working on something they were passionate about.
Deeplinks: The End of the Road for the Mobile Web
Hence it is advisable to store the encryption key somewhere where erasure was properly accounted for during design, e.G. a TPM (trusted platform module).
iOS bug lets text messages crash iOS
The planet offers basically unlimited resources. Assuming the population stops growing, as it is predicted, and settles at some reasonable number, then only limit is the expiration date of the sun.
Yes, it is. The daily credit changes from company to company, of course, $12 is on the higher end, but not the highest I've heard of (plus you do pay part of it out of your own pocket, as it is taxed to some extent).

When I used to work in an area with a lot of tech companies, there was a daily ritual of walking together and picking between about a dozen restaurants, and you'd see tons of geeks doing the same thing every day around noon.
> But I do think think that countries which offer a great deal of socialized benefits (such as Finland, Sweden etc.) have a significant problem with a unemployment in the youngest generation of the labor force.

Unemployment and youth unemployment are big problems in my area. I don't think the benefits are to blame though. It's just that ends don't meet and we don't have enough jobs.

In fact, there's been a strong push to get the unemployed to "do something" (however useless it is.. it's fine as long as they look busy..) and so now we have people who are more or less forced to work for 9eur a day in order to be eligible for the unemployment benefits. Which puts them well below the minimum wage for typical low income full time jobs.

I've been involved, and I know for a fact that many of these young people are very unhappy about this. They really would rather have a real job if they could.

EDIT: Finland
That would be interesting. They'd be considered foreigners, and it'd hopefully erode the social relation of "property rights" to capital the government grants them.
Jawbone Accuses Fitbit of Stealing Information by Hiring Workers Away
Oh well, looking at history and drawing parallels from the 19th century, we will probably get something like a basic income, or perhaps a massive police state. Either way, something will have to change. At least assuming that satisfaction with current administration and economy is not going to increase.

It is good that we start to discuss such ideas.
> There's nothing stopping a compiler from implementing Option<T> as a possibly-null reference when T is a pointer type, which would give you the same efficiency as having nulls in the language while making unchecked usage easy to catch at compile time.

Rust does exactly that for its Option<T> type. In fact, it automatically works for a certain category of enums, not just for built-in ones. For example, this type:

enum E<'r> {
A(&'r u64),
B,
}

has the same size as a pointer (because references are guaranteed to be non-null), as has this type:

enum F {
A(Box<u64>),
B,
}

where Box<u64> is an owning pointer to a value on the heap. Rust's Option type doesn't get any special treatment and is not built-in, instead it's implemented like this in the standard library:

pub enum Option<T> {
None,
Some(T)
}
Things are a little better now - most vendors have disabled cipher 0, and they're at least starting to pay attention to vulnerabilities (everything I've reported in vendor firmware has been fixed within 6 months or so, which is pretty impressive for groups that gave no fucks about security until recently).

As far as the industry goes, with luck we're seeing a transition away from IPMI and to the re-use of more general protocols. Redfish handles many bits of IPMI functionality[1] using standard web technologies rather than reinventing authentication and encryption, so ought to be less bad than hand-rolled crypto.

[1] Serial over LAN is probably the biggest missing piece
> Things do get rather boring potentially outside the usual nerd crowds

Yeah that seems to be the case - or at least the challenges are on a different level.

The thing about competitive sports: I've found a good way to handle it is to be very firm and confident about not being interested in it at all, thankyouverymuch. Just brush it off in a non-awkward, humorous way.