skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is a major question that has no real answer but can potentially be a big problem. Robots and "the future" are great and all but what is in store for a society that has no work/purpose to do? Some of this stuff I feel requires a closer look with regulation and maybe some checks in morality and weighing what's the greater good.

CGP Grey had a decent video explaining some of the points: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU
Someone has to program a specific task for a specific robot. Then that can be copied over almost instantly all over the world to thousands or more physical robots.

Making a copy of the software for a robot can be considered as cheap as sending an e-mail. Hardware is hard, but that might change too in the near future.

I'd be interested in how the economics will work, since we already sometimes have silly pricing for software/music/eBooks. Piracy/DRM for robots?
They'll start figuring out ways to kill people or otherwise prevent the next generation of non-capitalist class people from being born.

Compulsory sterilization for those unable to fulfill the needs of their children is a thing even today.

Well, that or we could destroy capitalism as we know it. But only dirty socialists want that to happen here on Hacker News.
> We all have to deal with the designer's choices, good or bad.

You'll have to deal with them anyways. Every government site is pretty much horrible - they don't even need any advanced UI capabilities to make them unusable.

This discussion is about enabling advanced UI capabilities for top designers.

> How is it appropriate to discuss the web in this manner? The web is a communication mechanism, and it was intended to be easy for people -- end users, real people -- to make their own webpages.

The web is a one-way communications medium. It's not a two-way medium. You'll need to go to phone/chat/email for that.

And, with a one-way medium, the message should be decided by the sender, not the receiver.
If the same message (or similarly known messages) were decrypted in serial, the pattern could be quickly separated from the noise.
Except we now live in the Internet age...where nothing happens unless you can post it on Twitter or Facebook.
That increases the noise floor, yes. However that does not stop the attack, it merely makes it more complicated (and probably taking more time)
Oh God, Mother Earth Motherboard was so great. Im really upset I lost my copy of that issue. That was a real treasure to 16 year old me. I'd love to read it again, in print.
beats didn't require much "energy" to produce

I think the point is that the "energy" isn't what was required to make the product, it was the energy expended to acquire the it. Collecting shells means time spent not collecting food. Wearing the shells signifies a kind of wealth where you have an abundance of time and thus an abundance of resources. Spending hard earned money on shitty earphones is a similar kind of wealth.
> but comparing Docker and Guix is weird, because they aren't really competing technologies.

I think that's his point; he doesn't want the future to be Dockery, he wants it to be Guixy. A different direction; a different future.
Smores Mini Pies with Bacon
As I understand it, the advantage of any blockchain (Bitcoin's or another's) is a shared (among participants) causal ordering of events (which is legitimized via the avoidance of double-spending, the "chain" aspect of it, and a few other properties). All the potential falls out of that: proof-of-existence, signed transactions, digital currency, etc.
I think it's an amazing achievement and definitely worth studying. The nytimes have been doing a great job with visualizations and engagements like this - not in a spurious "hey click the flashing light" way but in a "think carefully, and now here's this article in terms of what you think" way.

Incredible! If only text books worked like this.

Desmos is trying to do this for math lessons: https://teacher.desmos.com/
This is nonsense because they're implying that, but for lack of money, people are denied opportunity.

Face it, intelligence is heritable, and is correlated with income.
Jon Stewart’s blistering monologue
I'm happy somebody tries to put some sense into the whole absurdly overblown machine learning field.
Great idea with the molecular model kit, and I remember the graphs of the orbitals from school - they are nice.

The kids are too young for Quantum Physics, but I'll need some time to understand it myself first :-)

I think I can stomach the maths, but it probably won't be useful for the kids.
OK but you're not the audience these sites are designed for.

How many fashion sites do you visit? Do you use your own style-sheets when browsing them? How does your own font enhance your shopping for their fashion items?
It's income rank, rather than actual income. In my explanatory text they mention that the difference between two points on the far left is a few hundred dollars and the difference between two points on the right is a million or so (I forget the actual numbers).
This is _much_ more fun that drawing graphs about poor people and college.
How does that comment break HN's guidelines?
> But they note that the boundaries of what counts as routine and non-routine are moving all the time. It was once thought that driving was a skill so complex it couldn’t be automated only to see it turned on its head by Google and others.

What happens when programming becomes routine? I expect there will be a very scary moment when we all realize that someone with the right resources has discovered the right learning algorithm, before all of us plebes die.
That list of features is a tall order indeed. The author is looking for a lot more than just a JS build tool.
Private prisons are profit making enterprises. Keeping that in mind, how convenient that America's penal system is for many offenders a revolving door that keeps them locked away for decades if not life. Oh! And the prison industry has an influential lobby advocating on its behalf. Do you not see the problem here? Who owns and operates prisons is a very real issue indeed.

I really wonder about this country and its dysfunctional and, frankly, dehumanizing institutions. We deny a significant minority of our citizens the most basic benefits of living in the world's most advanced society. And I'm not talking about the small minority of dangerous offenders that are justifiably kept in prison for life. We also have a difficult time admitting that the profit motive almost certainly guarantees a corrupt and unjust prison system.
The Canada thing is probably a rebuttal to the "highest paid doctors in the world" line in the original comment.
Actually wealth is another factor for FAFSA, it's just so seldom that a family has wealth but not income. Things like college savings accounts are actually factored against FAFSA applicants.
I once had a good friend who told me he was unemployable because he was a felon. I don't know what he did but it must have been bad.

I suggested that he learn to write code then hang out his shingle as a self-employed consultant.

It turned out that he was already quite a good computer programmer as he was taught how while in prison. But even so he refused to consider self-employment because he was so down on himself.

While there are many reasons to pursue self-employment, among them is that one cannot find paying work any other way.

The reason prisons are commonly called "Penitentiaries" or "Correctional Institutes" is that they are not intended for punishment but to set their inmates onto a righteous path.

At least that was the stated intention at one time.
Perhaps too cynical after seeing medicos botch treatment for two family members. The main reason is the bottom line. If the allow people of marginal health to die too early, then their maximum utility diminishes unless the victim/patient can be kept alive for another 5 to 10 years.

This is a similar monetary basis for the cancer model - to extend the treatment period. Prolonging life has little to do with quality and meaning of life. The medical community is fundamentally corrupt.
Nah, it's unlikely you'll be forced to, and you might enjoy the sights in any case.
I'd go to the bookstore and leaf through a few popular science books and get the ones that I liked the most.

Other than that, there are a lot of TV series and youtube videos/channels that do an excellent job of explaining science and maths. Dr Brian Cox does a brilliant job in his Wonders of the Universe,and Wonders of the Solar System series.
Yeah you'd have to use log or sqrt of income.
Running Swift Scripts from Sublime Text 3 in MacOS X10.11
Visual C++ strtod(): Still Broken
iObject actually does not sound malevolent at all. Quite the opposite actually.

Reminds me of http://somebodyapp.com/
The page I linked has resources for each state. Maybe not always sufficiently detailed, but I think ex prisoners in Alaska probably understand what unconditional discharge means.

The point of my reply is that you said and then we tell them they can't vote in elections, which does exactly what it complains about. Hearing that they probably can vote is going to get more people to look into it than overstatements of the disenfranchisement.
> "Are you saying that if we ban advocacy for murder, soon we'll be banning other things"

Yes.

> "Why is there no middle ground where we can just stop at banning advocacy for murder?"

Because "murder advocacy" is just something that you're hung up on. There are many more people who are hung up on offensive speech, hate speech, pornography, blasphemy, etc. And the reason those aren't illegal is that the first amendment doesn't judge expression based on its "benefit".

If this weren't the case, then every successive government regime at every level would seek to apply it's own agenda to your speech, and all those things I listed above and plenty more would be at risk. Because while you have your own opinion about "murder advocacy", there are many more powerful people who have their own little opinions about other speech that you might actually value. Once again, the only reason you don't have to worry about those people is that the constitution doesn't allow them to judge your speech by the rules you're proposing here. Sort of ironic huh?