skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> When I see that discussion about basic income I am always wandering, who is going to pay for that?

Just look at all the social "safety nets" that many European countries have. That money then gets relabled "basic income". Pensions, unemployment benefits, paid sick leave, child support money, etc...

For people who are working full-time and don't get anything at the moment, the taxes would have to be increased slightly to offset their "basic income" on average, so maybe with a low wage you would have a small gain, with a big wage you would have slightly less than before.

The advantage could be a massive reduction in bureaucracy. The disadvantage in Europe at least is that many people prefer perceived "fairness" over efficiency, i.e. they are more worried that someone who "should not get that money" will get it than they are worried about their social systems wasting money and peoples' time.
I know one single person like that. Wanting this is very rare and is a symptom of mental illness. Most people want to be proud of something. Granted, MacDonald's will have problems finding workers, but is that so bad?

Living in Norway it is perfectly possible to slack off on the taxpayers' bill if you want to, but society doesn't collapse. People would rather avoid the low status associated with living on the dole than avoid work.
That's probably because you've found a job that you like. In reality however most people hate their jobs and would rather do something else. This idea of living in a society where people need to do something they don't want in order to survive is a form of slavery.
Yeah I'm sure you could find that missing £85bn down the back of a sofa in whitehall.

Sorry, but the whole idea is laughable. Not to mention the fact that it's another incentive to have more children and bigger families because the state will give you more money.
The Marriott in San Bruno is $300 a night during the week.
In the current system, yes. But at least we do away with one set of means testing. I would actually argue for a flat tax rate in the presence of a basic income. As for "asset rich, cash poor, no income" there are plenty of ideas out there for capital or capital gains taxes.
People have forgotten that attention is transitive: you pay attention to something. If you're paying attention to the environment, what is your attention being diverted from?
I have this [uninformed/idealistic] view that Ancient Greece was generally a very peaceful place, where people discussed ideas and freedom of thought was paramount. I'm aware that there was of course still war within and around Greece, per the likes of Homer's Iliad, but it punctuated an otherwise highly enlightened society. (Beyond external influences, my reasoning is based on asking, "How could things like democracy, philosophy, mathematics, etc. flourish in an unstable environment?")

Moreover, I also have the view that afterwards -- whatever that may mean -- things kind of went to pot! The Romans were obviously great engineers, etc. but my impression of them is more that they were the start of Europe's descent into imperialism and warmongering. Something that the West is still clinging on to thousands of years later.

Is my view of Ancient Greece wrong and it actually was a politically unstable and bloodthirsty place to be, where all the good stuff was fostered out of luck? If not, what went wrong? Could we be a thousand-or-so years more advanced if we'd stayed on the right track?
How we scaled data science to all sides of Airbnb over 5 years of hypergrowth
Somewhere in-between those points, I'm guessing:

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/07/01/nsas-google-wo...
We tried without goods redistribution, it doesn't work (19th century anyone ? ). Beyond a certain level of poverty you don't have the lawful/legal means to reach a better situation, you need external help or to turn criminal. There are a lot of (documented) threshold effects.

Beside, without some form of solidarity, a society tends to degrade into some "every man for himself" : the poors use violence (that's all they have), the richs task evasion because they feel no obligation to their fellow men. We have too many examples of that, local or national.

The mechanisms you describe might happen but they may be minor forces in the end. A real economic system is very complex, many many forces and behaviours are at work (and many are social/cultural). A complex reactive organism.

So no, this experience is not silly and it's hard to see what it will produce.
They probably get half of the strands, to mirror all the data passing through the other half.
sign deals with production companies

This is not going to happen.
"Wow, that's fast!"

Sure, at least 3x the speed of light... :-p
and my take on people arguing for basic minimum income have not understood the human nature.

communism was doomed from the beginning as they were removing all incentives to do something useful in the long therm.
FrontJS – Straightforward MVC Framework
> If you extend it with your own syntax, it becomes a different language.

No. This is exactly what Lisp is for. If you're not transforming it into hundreds of small DSLs (with their own syntax and a wide variety of semantic properties), then you're not using it right, and missing on all of its expressive power. In such case, yes, you may get rightfully puzzled, what all the Lisp buzz is about if it's just all the same stuff, but with an ugly syntax.
As a parent, and an introvert, I'm not convinced that kids (or anyone, for that matter) absolutely need social interaction all the time. If a parent/adult were to teach the kids all the time, in some ways, they're interfering with the child learning to learn.

Surely there is a middle ground between tablet parenting and helicopter parenting.
Self-directed learning at a young age – the ability to explore and discover – is a top level skill for succeeding in the world they'll grow up in. Tablets and the like make this a lot easier than ever before for certain things.

Overspending time looking at a screen is real easy though.
The money can come from the same place it came from when the banks needed bailed out.
Checking the latest figures for 2016: 155B for pensions and welfare 56B. I assume the point is to replace both of those completely with the basic income so the net cost is not 240B, it is 29B. Not cheap, but not pie in the sky either. Sell a bank or two :)
I'd have thought they'd want to spend their employees' finite daily decision making and problem solving skills on their business.
Basic income is openly and explicitly redistribution. Many of us in Europe have found redistributive tax-and-spend policies to be quite successful.

> Let's forget about the question if this is moral or not to take away money from people who are working hard just to give away these money to those, who are not working at all.

In civilized countries those who are not working at all are already given money that's taken from the rich. The big difference with a basic income is that those who are working hard at low-paying jobs also get money.

> the taxation will make costs of work higher and higher. Country economy would become less competitive.

A country with closer income equality will be more pleasant to live in, so maybe people will be willing to work for lower take-home wages and this will balance the higher income tax.

It would be good to have some kind of international tax settlement though. Otherwise we have a race to the bottom (we already see that with corporation tax and e.g. Ireland) that ends in no country being able to tax and the whole world (except for the very rich) being worse off.

> In addition avoiding taxes would start to be really profitable - people would start opening fake companies abroad, create fake costs, etc. it happens now as well, but the scale could be much bigger.

People already avoid tax as much as they can, I don't think this would change that. If you're the kind of person who avoids 40% tax you would still avoid 30% tax, IMO.

> As usually, big players would be able to avoid taxes, so the one who would be hurt most are the "middle class".

The whole idea of it being universal is that it's the working / lower middle class that benefits the most. Blindly assuming that the rich are just not going to pay their taxes is no way to run a government - if they're not paying, make them pay.
the average apartment to rent in all of the cities you mention is $3000+

That's a free market cost, the cost of being a popular place to live.
Crepe bandage cloth manufacturing company in modinagar, rolled bandage,
To put it further into context £240 billion is slightly less than what the UK government spends on pensions and welfare. Since basic income would replace much of the need for pensions and welfare, it might just end up more or less balancing out.
It would be interesting to learn what high profile clients are getting their connectivity and how it affects their business either by a) severed or no connectivity or b) that a splitter device is running somewhere near the cut and doing MITM.
They would get it from economic growth among other things.
The right questions get actionable answers
Are you that scared that it might work? It's a social experiment carried out by the government, not judgement day. Let's see what result it produces before rejecting it.
> I'm very skeptical of blatantly unenforceable nanny-statism like this.

Enforceability is not necessarily a criterion for the usefulness of the law. It only is in western states with an emphasis on individualism so our skepticism comes from our own cultural background.
I think you need to define most. Where is your sample data? You have a biased opinion and you are sticking to it it seems.
>"The software firm opened shop in 2002 with six employees. It now has 246. "

Surely that is not really a startup?
Facebook has its ‘Europe’ moment – what does it mean for you?
That were my thoughts before, or at least how I'd do it:

- seal deals to get x strands

- tap it while still unlit

- mirror what you need and exfiltrate directly over your own private strands

- profit
The problem I see with any basic income scheme is that lazy people can get in the trap to become trapped in a lazy for ever state. Basic income should be accompanied with a policy to motivate people to develop their capabilities and enhance their self confidence. Once you are trapped in the basic income scheme and automation replaces all the low skilled jobs, lazy people can see themselves as completely disposable objects, so you need a great self-confidence and a change of mentality to change from a lazy people to a do it person.
BigML Opening New Lab in Valencia to Harness Innovation and Drive European Exp
> When I see that discussion about basic income I am always wandering, who is going to pay for that?

The real question is why are we hindering the whole of humanity in terms of social development, medical and technical research, environmental management and..pretty much everything.. because we are beholden to an artificial system of numerical control (ie: money and finance) which we invented as a tool for stability and control, but has become a total, fucked-up liablity because the numbers don't line up properly and has large parts of the world limiting themselves artificially (ie: austerity measures) just to make the digits on a spreadsheet tick over in the right way.

We need to reset, respawn and start again.

Edit: And because my original post doesn't make it clear, I mean we need something other than 'money', ie: get rid of the whole damn concept, or reengineer it completely - something a few notches below 'shoot all the bankers and accountants'.

..and now back to my day job in support.
The real software security problem is us
The term "documentary" covers a broad range of material. There are in-depth explorations of fact or investigative reporting at one end; and populist fly on the wall fluff at the other end. Benefits Street is definitely on the fluffier end. There was little attempt to explain how benefits work; what the rules are or how they're applied to most people.

The OFCOM investigation is, I think, evidence that the programme was low quality, and focused on sensationalism rather than accuracy. (Although they didn't uphold any of the complaints).

Channel Four is publically owned but is not non-commercial -- it has to mostly fund itself; it carries ads and sells its programmes.
When I see that discussion about basic income I am
always wandering, who is going to pay for that?

The typical justification is that it pays for itself in simplified management, improved education, lower crime, etc. I haven't seen the sums, but given that the US incarcerates 1% of it's population at exhobitant (direct and indirect) cost, it doesn't seem that unrealistic.

Let's forget about the question if this is moral or
not to take away money from people who are working
hard just to give away these money to those, who are
not working at all.

We might have forgotten it, but you brought it up and left it hanging like a yeasty fart in a confined space.

Your interpretation of 'moral' here is a narrow one. Socialism is a moral economic solution; it's just not as efficient as well-regulated free markets. In a post-labour-scarcity society this will broadly be moot anyway as much fewer of us will have marketable skills.

Update: I say socialism isn't as efficient as well-regulated free markets. It actually depends on the market. The UK's NHS for example covers the entire population and costs less per capita than the US spends on Medicare (which only manages to cover the elderly). Funding healthcare through insurance creates moral hazard, conflicting incentives, information asymmetry, etc. which adds up to a deeply inefficient market.
Used to be a way to detect IE back in the days.

http://ajaxian.com/archives/ievv
That sounds even better than welfare then!

And for the countries that have already got welfare, the argument of "But nobody is going to work!" is already out the window. If that were a real problem, everybody would already be on welfare.

Yes there are people that abuse it. The vast majority doesn't. Even if it's just because they couldn't look their friends in the eye if they did.
PYTHON DEVS - REMOTE OK (Well, we only want remote)

Looking for 5-10 Python Devs for a 3-4 week contract paying £500/day at the well-known company I currently work at. Timezone not an issue. Looking for bug fixing, testing and some miscellaneous tasks. Looking for experienced devs in Python 2.7 and 3+

Get in touch with me at nile.frater@gmail.com and shoot me over your CV If you're interested and I'll pass your CV along to my manager!
> 'problem' with most European benefit systems that I am aware of that as soon as you take the money, your time is no longer your own.

Getting a job has similar disadvantages.
This white woman is literally the best rapper
> This idea of living in a society where people need to do something they don't want in order to survive is a form of slavery.

i want do dispute this. it disregards and diminishes true slavery. having to support one self is not slavery but the normal way of living...
Alternatively you could interpret American Idol as people spending one day a year pursuing an unlikely dream of lavish wealth before going back to the couch to see how the few contestants that made it through get on :)

I'm not sure "practising for reality TV shows" falls into the category of self-actualisation I'm particularly keen to uproot the economy as we know it to fund.
Simpler isn't always better or easier. When traveling it's a lot easier to change your watch (or more likely, have your phone update automatically) than to re-calibrate your understanding of what times represent morning/lunch/bedtime/etc. Similarly when coordinating meetings or events across timezones, it's much easier to simply see that someone is 3 hours ahead of you than to try to guess roughly what they'll be up to at a given time of day based on their location, without the aid of time zones.

Unless you're suggesting that everyone keep the same hours everywhere. In which case I'm all for it, as long as my side of the world gets to be the one awake in the daytime.
French spy agency also tapping Internet backbones
How to Future-Proof Your Management Team
That's ridiculous, and I didn't say or imply that.
There are more than 38k plug ins available (https://en.wordpress.org/plugins/). And also from what I have seen so far - there is no extensive (if any) reviewing done regarding safety and quality.
Struggling everyone. Why the hell is some bank CEO making several hundred million a year and we have people that can't even reliably be home in the evening to tuck their kids in because they're working 5 jobs. I'm all for taxing high-end income (coporate and private) even more to pay for this.

Why would everyone need to work anyway? It's not tenable. A few more years/decades and we'll have automated so much it'll be impossible to actually employ everyone. So unless you suggest we let everyone who is in a now obsolete field starve, I suggest we start thinking of how we're going to manage a society where it's just impossible for everyone to work.

EDIT: Also, where's this 240 billion figure coming from?
"Thanks" to TISA, TTIP and whatever else this soon won't be a problem anymore. Big corps will be able to do whatever they want.
Where the money came from in our society ?

Let's normalize the total amount of money of today at 100.

If the economic grow of a 5% a year, in 365 days the total amount of money will be 105, where those 5 come from ?

Suppose you build a fountain, you pay whoever physically build it, and your money go from you to the builder, the total amount of money in the system is the same, it just change hand, however now your city enjoy a new fountain which bring some amount of new value.
Qt is an amazing framework which got many things right!

The combo C++ QML QtQuick made my life so much easier for a cross-platform OSX/Win app.

I was able to develop most of it on Linux, and it even looks nifty!

What else can you wish ? :)
What's with the all the fake comments (sock puppets)?

vanitas,ariasworks,jevjescha1,larsbo,lucus_hansen,chimes (more have been added as I write this) all have only made 1 comment and it was on this post.

At least 4 accounts were recently created just to comment on this post.
I love this idea -- as an experiment. The trick, I think, would be the difference between "how it affects employees the first week or two" and "how it affects employees over several months or years" Of course, as a marketing move, it's brilliant. Here we all are talking about it.

Good teams are both able to spin off into fun and distraction mode -- and dive deep into concentration mode. There's an edge of chaos thing going on. If the place sounds as quiet as a library all day, we mix it up. If the nerf gun battles go on all afternoon, we tone it down. There is an ebb and flow to these things. Things tend towards a line, with variations from time to time. Groups of humans working socially remind me a lot of chaotic systems.

When the disruptions are constant, like working next to a large industrial plant that makes noises, it doesn't all come together. When the disruptions are responsive, like working in one room with 6 or 7 other guys, it's much more unpredictable.

Since this sounds predictable over time, I'd suspect that the affect wears off rather quickly.

But all of that is just unsupported speculation. I've found with things like this, it's much more important to let folks try things and then observe how it turns out. Interesting stuff.
Amazing that it took basically a confession to find these guys, what a different world it was 35 years ago.

Reminds me of the YouTube video on never talking to the police. A key tactic being to get you to say even one tiny little lie, if they can disprove anything you said, however irrelevant to the case, you've committed a serious felony and are now their pawn.
Only at 115 - 120 IQ points one starts to be interested in "looking for information on their own". Not to mention things like building stuff on their own. 115-120 IQ is top 10% population. Maybe 20%. You are definitely over estimating general population. It is easy to do so of meeting only the smartest 20% when at university, work, family. I dare you ask McDonald's cashier next time what they want to do in life, or a salesperson in car dealership or retail store. I guarantee you it won't be "save some money to start my own business or build stuff". It will be "win a lottery and retire on tropical island". Don't trust me on my words, go outside your bubble and and run this experiment and let us know the result. Also, don't direct them into an answer, so it is honest.

It is not that they need to be punished on purpose, but yes, you need to have a system in place that incentives work and success, otherwise, yes, 80% of the population all they want is "free stuff". Obviously taken from top 20% because, you know, to them it is not like you had some sincere interest in something, or wanted to build something. To them you just got lucky, because to them the whole of humanity just wants to "win a lottery" and retire. As you can't understand and see that there are people in the world who just want to sit, watch TV, and enjoy themselves, the same way they can't see that there are people in the world who sincerely want to build stuff or obtain knowledge, not for money really, but because it is important to us.

Go outside your bubble, go visit a few places, and ask people about their long term plans or what they want to do. It won't be about contribution. It will be about consumption.
You can't change people with a formula. There's a lot of lazy people working now today, to the detriment of society and the economy. Think of the opportunities though, a bunch of nerds could move up to the countryside and work on nuclear fusion and cure for cancer instead of having to apply at a bank or some ladder-climbing corporate gig.
like the multi select very much :)
Agree. However, please list all the tools that you use in place of CC. How do you collaborate with people who are part of the Adobe monopoly?
I wonder if it is possible to design a schema to provide basic income to whoever need as a startup...

For sure you won't have problem find user, the churn rate would be very low, and you will really change the word.
Hi, do you accept candidates from Europe who want to relocate to Australia?
Instapaper is a lot stickier now. But the API appears to be write-only; neither there, nor anywhere else in the documentation, do I see any way to pull my data out of Instapaper if I should decide I no longer want to use it.
> it's another incentive to have more children and bigger families

Should be easy to back that wild claim up with statistics. Can you?
Images of modern buildings must remain on Wikipedia
Recommendations for (OSS) permitting systems?
Can anybody recommend an open-source permitting (i.e., "permit to work") system? I'm thinking along the lines for planned work on a large, multi-customer network.

Planned changes generally require a permit with a specified start and end time, which aligns with monitoring, changelogs, signoff, etc. We currently do this manually, but are looking into whether common tools exist. (It's a hard combination of words to google!)
A benchmark would have been nice.
> lazy people can get in the trap to become trapped in a lazy for ever state

Do you have any evidence for the existence of these lazy people, and in any significant number? The literature and actual experiments done with basic income shows that people are not lazy, but rather they lack opportunities, or a safety net for small risks, or any of a number of other things.
Memory of a Broken Dimension