Peano arithmetic is probably inconsistent - <AUTHOR> http://www.cs.nyu.edu/pipermail/fom/2011-September/015816.html <comment><USER2> See [http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2011/09/the_inconsistenc...](http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2011/09/the_inconsistency_of_arithmeti.html#c039531) for interesting discussion of this result.

However <http://xkcd.com/955/> applies in spades here. While it would be really interesting if Peano arithmetic is inconsistent, it is also really unlikely. For those who don't know the Peano axioms, see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peano_axioms>.

Of those axioms, nobody has any trouble with any axiom other than the last one. Which is induction. His claim boils down to stating that allowing proof by induction leads to contradictions. But there is a pretty big tower of theorems needed to get there. Most people's guess is that he has made a mistake. If he hasn't, then it is still far more likely that some theorem in that tower is wrong than that induction leads to contradictions.

However if he proves to be right, in that tiny sliver, this will be really cool.

Now for the people who think I'm wrong, anyone want to wager $200 on the outcome? :-)

<comment><USER3> Overturning induction is a pretty tall order.

<comment><USER4> The longest road begins with a single step . . .

<comment><USER5> ... and has the property that if every step is followed by another step, then the entire road will be walked.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> What's interesting is that proof is computer assisted:

 _The proofs are automatically checked by a program I devised called qea (forquod est absurdum, since all the proofs are indirect). Most proof checkers require one to trust that the program is correct, something that is notoriously difficult to verify. But qea, from a very concise input, prints out full proofs that a mathematician can quickly check simply by inspection. To date there are 733 axioms, definitions, and theorems, and qea checked the work in 93 seconds of user time, writing to files 23 megabytes of full proofs that are available from hyperlinks in the book._

<comment><USER6> I suspect that the theorem itself would prove the unreliability of the program. I suppose that puts you in a "bit of a pickle".

<comment><USER7> I don't think so; from a quick glance, I believe the theorem deals with inconsistencies when dealing with infinities, and the program and its output are all finite. If the program hangs or runs out of disk space, then that might be confirming evidence for the theorem ;-).

<comment><USER6> No,

An consistent theorem system can know no bounds. There's halfway. If Peano arithmetic is inconsistent every statement in it is provably true and false. QED.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> For those who are wondering if this is a crank. He is a notable mathematician. He is most notable for his work on <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_set_theory> which is a way to simplify the handling of non-standard analysis (calculus with infinitesimals - hyperreals on a rigorous footing).

He also wrote this book <http://www.math.princeton.edu/~nelson/books/rept.pdf> that studies probability theory without measure theory - I've only been through a couple chapters but I recommend it as interesting. Different perspectives help to allow one to understand things more fully.

<comment><USER9> Radically Elementary Probability Theory (REPT above) is an excellent book. A very thin volume that anyone who labored through measure-theoretic probability would enjoy at least scanning.

It is fascinating and original, like the proof mechanism mentioned upthread.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Sensationalist title. A better one would be "Unreviewed proof claims that Peano arithmetic is inconsistent". This is self-published, hasn't been looked at by anybody else, and contradicts a very well-accepted and thoroughly examined argument for consistency from way back in 1936.

1: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gentzen%27s_consistency_proof>

[edit: as the commenters point out, I'm no mathematician, and I'm working off Wikipedia. Go with what they say.]

<comment><USER11> For this kind of stuff there should be a way to flag a submission as 'sensationalist title' or 'likely false'. I just don't have the time to read all the comments for all submission just to find out if the submission is true or not.

<comment><USER12> Then don't read them; the community will figure out over the next few months whether Nelson's proved what he's claimed. The Peano axioms have stood for 120 years, it's probably not imperative that you find out whether they've been shown to be inconsistent right this minute.

<comment><USER13> > Then don't read them

I think that's his point: it's difficult to differentiate things that are likely wrong/false and things that have been verified by the community. Flags could help that.

I prefer simply relying on the comments, personally. In the comments you can see who's knowledgeable about the topic and often they'll explain what's wrong with the article. Votes and flagging can't do that.

<comment><USER12> Flags are a binary mechanism just like voting, and as such are vulnerable to precisely the same epistemic problems. As you say, comments offer a way of demonstrating expertise, not merely asserting it.

For this reason someone interested in a disputed topic such as this will either have to read the comments, in the hope of discovering the main lines of argument and improving the likelihood that the picture they form is correct, or suspend their judgement until such a time as better evidence (in this case, peer review of the claimed proof) is available.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Nelson is a full professor of mathematics at Princeton.

Some more discussion here: [http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2011/09/the_inconsistenc...](http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2011/09/the_inconsistency_of_arithmeti.html)

Notably, Terry Tao doesn't buy it.

<comment><USER15> Nelson's short reply to one of Tao's comments:

[http://www.cs.nyu.edu/pipermail/fom/2011-September/015826.ht...](http://www.cs.nyu.edu/pipermail/fom/2011-September/015826.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Ed Nelson has now withdrawn his claim.

<http://www.cs.nyu.edu/pipermail/fom/2011-October/015832.html>

        Terrence Tao, at
        http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2011/09/
        and independently Daniel Tausk (private communication)
        have found an irreparable error in my outline.
        In the Kritchman-Raz proof, there is a low complexity
        proof of K(\bar\xi)>\ell if we assume \mu=1, but the
        Chaitin machine may find a shorter proof of high
        complexity, with no control over how high.

        My thanks to Tao and Tausk for spotting this.
        I withdraw my claim.

        The consistency of P remains an open problem.

</comment><comment><USER16> If this is true, it would be a bigger deal to logicians than a solution to P vs NP.

My guess is that there will end up being a mistake somewhere (based purely on statistics of huge claims without full posted proofs), but it seems too early to say anything definitive. Terence Tao has guessed it is wrong, which is evidence against it, but then Nelson acknowledged Tao's remarks and said it isn't a problem, which is interesting. This is making me wish I was more of an expert so I could decide for myself.

</comment><comment><USER17> I think the write-up has some bad signs (no central point, lots of side discussion, no new method ... see: <http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=304> ).

</comment><comment><USER18> IANAMathematician, but isn't this implied by the incompleteness theorem? Is this result significant because the seams in the consistency of Peano arithmetic haven't been formalized yet?

edit: After a quick visit to Wikipedia, it appears that completeness and consistency are actually separate things. I'll go back to coding now.

<comment><USER12> One consequence of the second incompleteness theorem is that no consistent arithmetic theory of sufficient strength can express its own consistency. One way of proving such a theory inconsistent is therefore to find a proof within that theory of its own consistency.

A complete theory is one in which, for any statement φ in the language of that theory, either φ is provable or ¬φ is provable within that theory. Note that this is a different sense of completeness than that proven in Gödel's Completeness Theorem, which states that any sentence satisfied by all models of a theory is provable.

A consistent theory is one which contains no contradictions. Because mathematics generally employs classical logic it is explosive [1] and any contradiction allows one to derive any sentence whatsoever in the language of the theory as a theorem. Because of this an alternative way to say that a theory is inconsistent is to say that all the sentences in the language of the theory are theorems.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_explosion></comment></comment>


Ask Mac Devs: How do you track downloads+host your app for download? - <AUTHOR>

Starting to dive into some Cocoa programming and making an app for fun.  I can easily throw the .DMG file up on S3 Cloudfront, but wanted to know if there was a simple app that lets me upload new versions/tracks download analytics of the app? <comment><USER2> Not exactly an app, but check out: <http://appsto.re></comment>


Ask HN: Linux laptop for developers with a reasonable budget? - <AUTHOR>

Looking for something similar to a Macbook in hardware, and can run Ubuntu. Thoughts on Dell XPS 13 (seems a bit pricey) or System76? <comment><USER2> I've put Ubuntu on many things, from beefy laptops to netbooks to part- scrapped desktops. Seldom had I needed to fix driver issues. So my advice would be to search in the opposite direction: find any laptop that fits your budget/specs and then search online if there had been any issues installing Ubuntu on it.

</comment><comment><USER3> I have a 1yr old System76 Galago UltraPro. I like it, works well, fairly quiet. Purchasing experience was good, even with importing to Canada. My two problems are 1) it will occasionally (once every 2 months) experience a power loss and reset the laptop. No clue as to what's happening, so infrequent that I don't care to look too deep, 2) the wrist rest finish is rubbing off in the corners, looks dirty, but it's just the black plastic showing through.

<comment><USER4> Anecdote: a colleague bought a system 76 and hated the keyboard, returned it. It wasn't an issue with where the keys were placed, he just didn't like the way the keyboard itself felt, or the way it made him feel, or something.

Try to fondle one before just buying one blindly online.

<comment><USER5> Their keyboards are notorious for being just plain defective. The issue with the Ultrapro was that it would randomly drop keystrokes if you tried typing at a decent rate. Some people might not have had this issue, but it was nearing epidemic proportions when this laptop was released. They released an "improved" keyboard which was really just the same one with a metal strip on the back of it which made it feel like less of a piece of shit, but didn't really solve the problem.

I wanted to support system76, but their laptops are re-branded clevos, and clevos almost universally have shitty build quality.

<comment><USER6> yes i had the same issue. I highly recommend not buying System76 unless they have improved significantly in last 12 months. I was bitten so bad by their keyboard issue that I wrote a whole post on it. [http://yashchandra.com/2014/05/06/do-not-buy- system76-develo...](http://yashchandra.com/2014/05/06/do-not-buy- system76-developer-laptop/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've had good service from the Dell XPS 15z I am typing this on. It is now over 3 years old.

I set it up to dual boot Win 7 and Kubuntu. I kept Win7 originally for gaming. I think I booted to Win 7 1 in the past year. There is even less need now with many Steam games working on Linux.

The Optimus(?) graphics system split between Intel and Nvidia was an issue initially. I played around with Bumblebee a bit but mainly have just used the Intel GPU as it provided better battery life and I haven't been doing anything graphically intensive.

The only unresolved issue is that the external HDMI port will only work if plugged in a boot and exclusive to the laptop screen. There may be driver fixes for this now but I haven't had the need so haven't checked.

I have also successfully run Ubuntu variants on Thinkpads (T series) and a couple of Asus Atom netbooks.

</comment><comment><USER8> I would strongly recommend looking for a used 2013 MacBook Air (non-Retina). I used Ubuntu on one of those for a while. You should be able to get one reasonably priced directly from Apple at this point.

<comment><USER9> Only caveat here: the keyboard is obviously a Mac keyboard, which can be very irritating to those of us who like to have dedicated Home/Backspace keys.

Edit: another caveat. I just realized I had one of these for a while and stopped using it because the resolution is just too small. There's just not enough screen real estate to be truly useful without another monitor.

<comment><USER8> True, the resolution is relatively small. If you can live with that it is great hardware for the price and everything in at least 14.04 worked perfectly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I am using a used ThinkPad. Great keyboard, great community around the ThinkWiki, Ubuntu certified hardware, much cheaper than new, solid stream of replacement parts at reasonable prices.

Good luck.

<comment><USER11> +1 for old ThinkPads, as my ThinkPad R60 still (~8 years old) still works perfectly with Lubuntu!

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I love my thinkpad T450s. Looks sleek, professional and handles ubuntu like a champ.</comment>


Open-sourcing Stylo - <AUTHOR> http://blog.alexmaccaw.com/stylo

<comment><USER2> This looks awesome

I had the same idea to build a web based graphical design tool: <http://upmock.com/earlybird> (<https://github.com/daleharvey/upmock-client>)

It works as a nice demo, but would take a lot of time that I dont have to make it reach really useful quality.

I am hoping a web based tool for graphically designing user interfaces at high fidelity comes around soon, this looks great, and certainly a better start than mine. but its still early days, I would love to see some momentum around contributing to it

</comment><comment><USER3> Nice work. Thanks for sharing the source, I'll have to look and see if there's anything useful there :)

For designers looking for something like this that's more finished and ready for use in web design production workflows, and supported, please give my bootstrapped web application Edit Room a serious look: <http://www.edit- room.com/>

Not only can you create semantic HTML structures and style them with professional design production tools, you can also animate your main blocks of content with visual keyframes and Edit Room generates CSS Animations. Works with both WebKit and Gecko browser engines.

The layout engine is responsive by default, with layout units defined as percentages... Key commands... undo/redo... constant autosave... Webfonts with Typekit integration... and more.

<comment><USER4> Hey man, not to be a buzzkill but your landing page needs a ton of work ... As is, only your slogan box fits in my browser window, and I have to scroll tons and tons while reading oversized text. When you make everything so big, you inherently de-value the emphasis that large text gives. You also have a TON of text, and I can't survey the page to see what I'm interested in. I'm forced to read through everything. Take a look at these resources:

[http://blog.hubspot.com/blog/tabid/6307/bid/7177/What-Is- a-L...](http://blog.hubspot.com/blog/tabid/6307/bid/7177/What-Is-a-Landing- Page-and-Why-Should-You-Care.aspx)

[http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2006/04/vocabulary_l...](http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2006/04/vocabulary_land.html)

<http://designmodo.com/landing-page-examples/>

Edit: I'm glad I didn't come off as a dick. Here are some homepages I like:

<http://postmarkapp.com/>

<http://basecamp.com/>

<https://kippt.com/>

<comment><USER3> Cool thanks very much for the feedback - this is exactly what I'm looking for!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Very inspiring! Maybe I'm just stupid, but I don't see what license you're using anywhere... MIT perhaps? If so, I'll definitely be using your color picker and context menu code.

For others who might be interested (as I am) in using Common.js modules in the browser, browserify ( <https://github.com/substack/node-browserify> ) does the same thing for Node.js as the sprockets-commonjs used in this project: compiles those modules into a single file for the client. It's especially effective there because you can use the same node_modules on the browser and the server, so you get effortless sharing of code.

<comment><AUTHOR> You're correct - neglected to included a license (fixed now). It's under the MIT. Yes, I'll be releasing an improved version of the color picker separately.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> > _As a self-taught programmer, color theory is one of those things I hadn't > had the chance to be immersed in yet, and learning about HSL and HSV was > fascinating._

For what it's worth, HSL and HSV (just like the RGB they're trivially derived from) are both terrible color spaces to be interacting with, as humans. Here's my fuller explanation why: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSL_and_HSV#Disadvantages>. That they've been enshrined places like the CSS spec and most software color pickers is yet another example of programmer convenience winning over human-friendly design.

</comment><comment><USER7> OT: Another Svbtle blog in the wild—anyone likes them? (serious question, would like to hear some opinions)

<comment><USER8> I can't say anything about the content, but I love the minimalistic theme. I want it for my blog.

<comment><USER9> The only problem is when you design a similar minimalistic theme, everybody will say you're copying Svbtle.

<comment><USER8> Well, the criticism would be accurate.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> What does Stylo do? I can make UI looking boxes and text but see no way to export or otherwise use what is created.

<comment><AUTHOR> At the moment, you can export selected elements by copying them and pasting their CSS into a text editor (Chrome dev).

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I love your work on sprockets, and this project is an excellent example of how to use it. I currently develop Backbone apps using the Ruby static site generator middleman which uses regular sprockets. So I have to namespace my app, but would rather use commonJS. Thanks for the awesome codebase!

</comment><comment><USER12> Awesome work Alex! One suggestion: CSS shadows have a spread parameter that your app is missing. Other than that, looks great!

</comment><comment><USER13> Very nice work. I couldn't find a way to export my quick design though, how was I supposed to do ?

</comment><comment><USER14> Amazing work and so useful to dig through. Thank you and keep it coming!

</comment><comment><USER15> wow the app is _really_ nice from a UX point of view. Looks like you nailed the fundamentals of manipulating the objects well.

Also the design is slick.

great work!

</comment><comment><USER16> Awesome stuff, Alex. Thanks for open-sourcing the code!

</comment><comment><USER17> Brillant job, hat's off!</comment>


Show HN: Method for evaluating the job market for a given technology - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@tboyd/which-language-should-i-learn-answering-with-real-market-data-e453346a387e#.gwzs56jvn <comment><USER2> Interesting concept. Wondering if the OP could share sample size...the only thing mentioned is that it is small and manually curated.

Would also love to see this over time.

<comment><AUTHOR> The steps I used to curate data are here: [https://github.com/tb0yd/job_dollars#adding- data](https://github.com/tb0yd/job_dollars#adding-data)

Edit: Sample size is not a concern, since my dataset is the entire population.</comment></comment>


Since there is no delicious I have created yabs - <AUTHOR> https://www.yabs.io <comment><USER2> Why not [http://pinboard.in](http://pinboard.in) ? The price is low and revenue incentivises Maciej to continue to work on it, whereas you might get married, or travel, or have a day job that consumes all your time, and suddenly yabs is rotting and one day it gets hacked and you decide it's a PITA to keep maintaining it so you shut it down.

If I'm putting data into someone else's software, and it's data that I depend upon, then I pay for that system. Else, back it up regularly and prepare to move between free systems as optimism boils off.

Sorry to be a downer, but "I have written a delicious replacement" is a song that many have sung before.</comment>


Is the web dying? - <AUTHOR> https://fabiofranchino.com/blog/is-the-web-dying/ <comment><USER2> Imminent death of the Web predicted, news at 11.</comment>


The state of Linux gaming in the SteamOS era - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/02/the-state-of-linux-gaming-in-the-steamos-era/ <comment> andhof-mt One of linux's biggest issues is that linux hasn't been developed with consumers in mind for such a long time.

Thats why I opted to use mint for recording DevCasts: [https://www.youtube.com/user/devfactor](https://www.youtube.com/user/devfactor)

other linux distros offer tons of tools for programmers, but are difficult to beginning users or non-programmers to migrate over to.

In order for Linux to really catch on, they need to offer at least a basic level of tools to attract regular (non-coding) consumers.

<comment><USER2> When did you last use Linux? 2003?

Linux [distributions] (because the Linux Kernel is fairly agnostic about use- cases) are constantly being developed and redeveloped. KDE5, Unity8+Mir, GNOME3, Cinnamon, MATE, etc... They're all aiming to be easy to use and powerful. They all have some distance to go but so do Windows and OSX.

Then there's the actual consumer-device market that Linux all but owns. Things like Tizen and Android and the dozens of frontends that the existing infrastructure makes super-simple to create a custom interface.

There is constant churn, making Linux more and more user-friendly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I'm hopeful. The idea of SteamOS disrupting the windows stranglehold on games, and possibly disrupting consoles as well. I personally hate the fact backwards compatibility on consoles is dead. I would love a steambox I could upgrade or buy new every few years, and still play my existing game library without having the clutter of tons of consoles just to play a specific game.

</comment><comment><USER4> 2015: Year of linux on everything except the desktop?

<comment><USER5> Linux is doing alright on the 'desktop'. Chromebooks, Dell is selling Ubuntu laptops, you can buy Linux preloaded on a variety of hardware in some markets. Raspberry Pi and Pi2s are out there, and apart from Linux desktops, open source is getting to be huge.

The real difference is that nowadays, the 'desktop' doesn't matter. Most new apps are either browser based, or built multi-platform from the start. There's very little you 'need' Windows for today.

<comment> vezzy-fnord With the exception of industrial and enterprise software, which remains a significant chunk.

The problem with the Linux desktop is that the people developing it are completely out of touch with how the average user thinks, and they assume that introducing another opaque monolith daemon to handle an entire subsystem is the only thing stopping all those Windows users from flocking to Fedora in an instant. The result is that they alienate the people who actually care.

Ironically enough, the examples you list (Google and Canonical) are ones that operate outside the general sphere of influence of the desktop developer scene. Canonical in particular is reviled as all hell by the Red Hat subculture.

<comment><USER6> I'm not familiar with much Industrial software, but i am continuously amazed with the amount of enterprise software available on Linux.

Support can be a little tricky, but it's absolutely out there.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Kerbal Space Program is 64-bit only on linux, apparently due to a problem with 64-bit unity...</comment>


Australian government unveils 'world-leading' regulation of tech giants - <AUTHOR> https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/morrison-government-unveils-world-leading-privacy-competition-regulation-of-tech-giants-20191212-p53j8r.html <comment><USER2> > Under the direction of Treasurer Josh Frydenberg, the unit's first priority > will be inquiring into the tech companies' advertising technology and > algorithms.

This seems like a weird thing to focus on. What exactly are they looking to find out? It's not like it's the advertising algorithms that are at fault, its the content of the ads that's the problem as we've seen by the content of the Conservative party's ads in the UK election (who use the same PR company as the current Australia government)

Anyone know how any of this is actually enforceable?

<comment><USER3> Obviously it's enforceable through the voluntary code of conduct!

What could possibly be more enforceable than a voluntary code of conduct?</comment></comment>


Introduction to Libp2p – David Dias - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRe_oDtfRLw <comment><USER2> I want to try libp2p, but the docs were completely unusable for me. Example: [https://github.com/libp2p/js-libp2p-kad- dht/blob/master/READ...](https://github.com/libp2p/js-libp2p-kad- dht/blob/master/README.md)

Whereas similar projects (built by volunteers) have usage examples and instructions on how to get started: [https://github.com/hyperswarm/hyperswarm/blob/master/README....](https://github.com/hyperswarm/hyperswarm/blob/master/README.md)

libp2p seems to have much better specifications, although I think (?) it's tightly coupled with IPFS and Protocol Labs. Projects like Hyperswarm seem to have much better 'getting started' instructions, but no protocol specifications (yet!).

I can't wait until NAT traversal is a boring problem solved by boring tooling, but I appreciate all the work everyone is putting into the bleeding edge right now.</comment>


VM export for EC2 - <AUTHOR> http://aws.typepad.com/aws/2012/05/vm-export-for-ec2.html

<comment><USER2> This is a useful tool, but spinning it as a victory against vendor lock-in is disingenuous. VM formats are well-documented and do not constitute a barrier to migration by any stretch of the imagination.

I would love to hear more about the real barrier to migration: the cost and latency hit of cross-cloud network communication. Who cares if you can move your app server to VMWare, if it needs low-latency access to 10TB of data sitting in amazon-us-east?

<comment><USER3> I helped to write virt-v2v[1], and one difficulty is changing the kernel config / Windows registry config / drivers / etc so the guest can be booted on another hypervisor (Amazon is Xen-based, VMware and KVM are completely different and need different drivers). You have to delve into the filesystem using libguestfs, and make some pretty complex changes.

As you say, the other difficulty is copying gigabytes of data across clouds. My colleague at Red Hat wrote snap[2] which can turn Linux guests into digests (basically a base distro name and list of packages and list of config changes), so this can be reduced massively. We're currently extending this work to support Windows and more Linux guest types.

[1] <http://libguestfs.org/virt-v2v>

[2] <http://mo.morsi.org/blog/node/347>

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Let's hope they support Linux exports soon then. This solves another problem as well, which is easily moving images around availability zones.

<comment><USER5> _moving images around availability zones_

Presumably you mean _regions_ here? Within any one region, you can use an AMI in any of the availability zones.

<comment><USER4> Whoops, yes of course. That's what I meant. Moving images between regions is currently a pain.

<comment><USER5> Agreed. Every time I publish a new FreeBSD AMI I spin up 7 instances and run a bunch of "dd | ssh | dd" to send the bits out to the right places.

At this point I have the entire process scripted, and it's _still_ painful.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm a little unclear on the specifics of actually running a foreign VM on EC2 and vide versa. Don't AMIs usually contain special provisions for running on Amazon's infrastructure?

</comment><comment><USER7> This is awesome - what would be the remaining use case/advantage for using an AMI when you can now snapshot to more widely supported formats and import them?

Edit: Oh, this is windows only, significantly less exciting. I wonder why linux isn't supported?

<comment><USER5> _I wonder why linux isn't supported?_

Linux runs on EC2 via Xen/PV, which is a kernel-hypervisor interface not provided by other (non-Xen) virtualization systems. Exporting linux AMIs would require reaching inside your filesystem and modifying your kernel, which is far outside of the scope of anything Amazon would want to do (both in terms of "really complicated" and "liable to accidentally break things"). The same applies to importing images, of course.

[I don't work for Amazon and I don't speak for Amazon. The above is speculation based on information published by Amazon about EC2.]

<comment><USER8> It's not really complicated. If you have, say, a RHEL 6.2 image booting on EC2 you can take the same root filesystem and boot it with a kernel from any other RHEL 6.2 installation with some editing of the grub configuration.

But you're right that Amazon isn't really interested in doing that work for you. Linux people who really need this are no doubt already doing it.

<comment><USER5> Sure, but if you're running a custom kernel you'd need to run a custom non-PV kernel. And there's no remotely sane way for Amazon to figure out what customizations people have made to their kernels.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> How about making it easier to get the sources of the packages (for Linux) so that things are easy to test locally?

Last time I checked (admittedly a little while ago), one had to do API calls through some convoluted way.

I was tempted to script it.

</comment><comment><USER10> I'd like to see the dependence on PV-Grub lifted.

Maybe Amzn is just not too skilled working with various bootloaders?

<comment><USER5> What's wrong with PV-grub?

<comment><USER10> Nothing, if you like GRUB. What if I don't want to use GRUB and I just want to use the OS's native bootloader?

<comment><USER5> Then don't use paravirtualized Xen. Other boot loaders don't understand Xen/PV.

<comment><USER10> Does "other boot loaders" include NetBSD 5's bootloader?

<comment><USER5> I believe so, yes. It certainly includes FreeBSD's bootloader.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: A docker-compose add-on to develop, iterate and run apps on Kubernetes - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/appvia/kev <comment><AUTHOR> Hello everyone,

We love docker-compose. Especially, how it helps you to get an app, with all its dependencies, up and running in no time.

We are familiar with Kubernetes and can manage all configuration hiccups manually, however many of our users aren't and it's rather frustrating to them to migrate from compose to Kubernetes quickly without getting bogged down.

A solution that is often mentioned here is Kompose. Which we've tried but has left us with a lot of hoops to jump through. Mainly, we constantly had to patch bits of config here and there. It got really frustrating quick.

Our idea was to use conventions and defaults to make working between docker- compose and Kubernetes as seamless as we can.

We hope you find this useful, and let us know if you have any questions.</comment>


Reddit pycon keynote video - <AUTHOR> http://pycon.blip.tv/file/1951296/

<comment><USER2> Would be cool if the video would work on my iPhone. It starts to load then says 'not supported although it looks pole they have an iPhone version of the site. Weird.

<comment><USER3> Try this file directly maybe?

[http://blip.tv/file/get/Pycon- KeynoteRedditSteveHuffmanAndAl...](http://blip.tv/file/get/Pycon- KeynoteRedditSteveHuffmanAndAlexisOhanian687.mp4?referrer=blip.tv&source=1)</comment></comment>


To end poverty, guarantee everyone in Canada $20,000 a year. - <AUTHOR> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/to-end-poverty-guarantee-everyone-in-canada-20000-a-year-but-are-you-willing-to-trust-the-poor/article1806904/singlepage/#articlecontent <comment><USER3> Can I vote this up twice?

A little over a year ago, I moved returned to Canada (Toronto) after five years in the UK. One of the most striking things I noticed was the difference in homelessness between here and there.

I later read Gladwell's article about homelessness. The story of Million Dollar Murray <http://www.gladwell.com/2006/2006_02_13_a_murray.html>

A homeless man who they had to repeatedly pick up off the street because he kept drinking himself into a stupor and falling down. (Hospital bills, etc..)

Apparently he cost the state 1 Million Dollars over 10 years.

So $20,000 per year $100,000/per year? Suddenly that low end guarantee is a serious cost savings.

Now certainly - "Murray" wouldn't get away with costing _ONLY_ $20,000 per year ... but in a safe, (partially) supervised area, he'd have cost a lot less than $100k.

Gladwell also mentions that the data shows "most people" won't leech off these programs forever. Most have an innate drive to want to improve themselves.

Some will but actually - it's probably still cheaper than "Murray".

I am 100% in favor of a program like this - in principle.

Now try and introduce it at a Texas town hall meeting :) With FOXNEWS cameras in attendance.

<comment><USER4> >One of the most striking things I noticed was the difference in homelessness between here and there.

So what is the difference?

<comment><USER3> I'm not entirely sure what the UK is doing differently. I didn't even notice that it "wasn't there" until I got back. It was only after I returned that I realized the difference.

I know that in Toronto, I sometimes get the feeling that the streets are paved with the homeless.

Maybe it was the Socioeconomic status of the area I was living in, but it just seems so much more prevalent here.

The UK does however seem to have 'council housing' projects that I think act as a buffer for many. The jobless and those on very low income, can obtain housing from the local council (municipal government). Essentially the risk of becoming completely homeless was very low.

The only reference to their housing program I could find quickly was an article about why landlord shouldn't take DSS tennants [http://www.propertyinvestmentproject.co.uk/blog/reasons- why-...](http://www.propertyinvestmentproject.co.uk/blog/reasons-why- landlords-shouldnt-accept-dss-tenants/)

But essentially it's a program where the municipality pays the rent directly.

I think the level of social assistance must cover quite a bit of the difference.

I really must add the caveat that I didn't study the problem while I was in the UK and am certain that there must be some homelessness there somewhere - but - it really isn't anything like what's in Toronto (and Ottawa that I've seen).

<comment><USER5> A council house in the UK is a dwelling that is provided by the local municipal authority. Rents are about 1/2 to 1/3 of the lowest market rent. They are generally set by the local council. In addition to this you can receive housing benefit to pay most of this if you are out of work, the rules for this are quite complicated.

The concept dates back to postwar reconstruction in the 1950s when they were originally built at a large scale to replace bomb damaged and run down private 'slum' housing. I think I remember a lecturer saying that in the 1970's as much as 60% of the British population lived in council houses. In the 1980's Margaret Thatcher introduced 'right to buy' legislation which forced local councils to offer tenants the opportunity to buy their council house for well below the market value. This lead to a large decline in the number of people living in council houses. I think the proportion is more like 20% of the UK population now.

There has been a big cultural shift in Britain in the last 30 years; living in a council house was considered 'normal' but is now stigmatised. The quality of the accommodation can vary widely.

<http://bit.ly/c3JuFb> <http://www.flickr.com/groups/londonsocialhousing/>

Council houses are not always in housing estates ('projects' in US) they can be normal houses intermingled with private housing that just happen to be owned by the council and rented out to council tenants. However this is rare now because of the 'right to buy'

There is a shortage of council housing, if you want to get one you have to be assessed as being in need of one and you go on a waiting list. Your position on the waiting list is based on points. The points are allocated based on criteria like: how long you've been waiting; how many kids you have; if you are being threatened; if you have disabilities etc.

By the way, I'm not totally sure about the percentage figures, they are based on a memory from a lecture about 10 years ago. I'll try and find some references to back them up.

<comment><USER6> Here in Scotland, our Parliament recently voted to end the 'right to buy':

<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-11675185>

Incidentally, I live in an ex-council flat, which was 'right to buy'ed by a previous owner. In the whole block of 30 or so flats, very few are still council-owned.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Worth a test on a small scale. I'd be most worried about very long-term multi- generational effects, given that such a program could be impossible to undo or adjust once people get used to it -- like other broad-based entitlements.

For example, the first generation to enjoy such a guaranteed minimum income might still have the traditional ambitions... but over time and with practice, the bohemian ideal of making-do on just the guarantee could grow in attractiveness. And, the discretionaty time offered by the stipend could be directed chiefly at lobbying/politicking/mass-protesting for ever-larger benefits. After a few generations, might we get a combination of the worst stereotypical qualities of both the 'underclass' and 'trust-funders'?

It's the sort of positive-feedback loop that -- like financial leverage tricks and other forms of moral hazard -- can build on itself until disasterous collapse.

<comment><USER8> The only solution would be a tradeoff no one would agree to--guaranteed minimum income, but no franchise for net negative taxpayers.

<comment><USER9> By that you mean "The right to vote". Here in the US I haven't ever heard of the word used in that context so I thought other's would find it useful to know what you meant.

[http://www.google.com/dictionary?langpair=en|en&q=franch...](http://www.google.com/dictionary?langpair=en|en&q=franchise)

<comment><USER8> It's the root word of "disenfranchised", which is the form most people are familiar with.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> It's interesting that this has never seriously gone anywhere, given that a number of prominent people on both the left and right have proposed it. Among many other people, supporters of a minimum income in some form include: Thomas Paine, Richard Nixon, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Milton Friedman, George McGovern, Friedrich Hayek, Paul Samuelson, etc.

<comment><USER11> Friedman proposed a negative income tax, which is not the same thing. A negative income tax often increases the marginal utility of work (if the rates are not too large), a guaranteed minimal income _always_ reduces it.

Assume a utility function U(P) (P is take home pay) which is downward sloping (i.e., dU(x)/dW < dU(y)/dW whenever x < y). This is just the law of diminishing marginal returns.

Negative income tax: take home pay is P = A x W, where A > 1 and W = wages. Marginal utility = dU(AW)/dW = A dU(AW)/dW. If A dU(AW)/dW > dU(W)/dW, negative income tax creates an incentive for work.

Basic minimal income: take home pay is P = BI + W (BI + basic income). dU(BI+W)/dW < dU(W)/dW. This is _always_ a disincentive for work.

I'd really be curious, do you have more information on Hayek's support for minimum income?

<comment><USER10> That's a version of the "negative income tax", like the current EITC, but not the one that Friedman proposed. His version refunds a proportion of unused deductions, and bottoms out at a guaranteed minimum income equal to the standard deduction times the refund rate.

In his version, there's an allowance calculated by family size, dependents, etc., and a "subsidy rate", which is the proportion of any excess allowance that's refundable. He proposed a 50% subsidy rate. If the allowance for a given taxpayer is $20,000, and the taxpayer earns $15,000, that leaves $5,000 in unused allowance, of which 50% is refunded, so the taxpayer gets a $2,500 transfer payment. If the taxpayer earns no income at all, the entire $20,000 is unused, of which 50% is refunded, so the taxpayer gets a $10,000 transfer payment.

So, if A is allowance, S is subsidy rate, and W is wages, the taxpayer earns W if W >= A, or W + S * (A-W) otherwise. The guaranteed minimum income is when W=0, and equal to S * A ($10,000 in the above example).

For Hayek, here's one of several places he discusses his rationale: [http://books.google.com/books?id=nclLLOfnGqAC&pg=PA55](http://books.google.com/books?id=nclLLOfnGqAC&pg=PA55). One reason is that, unlike many libertarians, he's strongly _against_ private- sector safety nets through e.g. church charities, because he feels those inhibit human freedom by making people scared to leave their ethnic/religious/racial/social group for fear of losing its safety net, which he views as a variety of collectivism. So he sees a guaranteed minimum income as a way of promoting individual freedom and undermining the power of tribalist collectives.

<comment><USER11> I'm not sure what makes that a negative income tax. That's just a flat out subsidy, and it always creates a disincentive for work (it reduces marginal utility of work by (1-S)[dU((1-S)W+SA)/dW ] / [ dU(W)/dW] ). But you are right - this is what Friedman proposed.

But I get Friedman's rationale - he wanted to replace the the "ragbag" of assorted other welfare programs with this. It does have the advantage that dP/dW is always positive (just reduced by (1-S) if you are poor), which is not necessarily the case for the existing system.

So I'm not sure it's fair to say Friedman advocated it - he just proposed replacing a much worse system with it. Do you know if he considered it _good_ policy, as opposed to merely _better_ policy?

<comment><USER10> I think you're right, that Friedman viewed it as a least-evil approach: that, if we're going to have social welfare programs, the least distorting and least bureaucratic approach is to just pay out cash.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> As you hand out more free money you just cheapen the money in everyone's pocket and make them poorer. The 20k you just gave away won't even buy the amount of goods it would have before you created the program. This is just some redistribution of wealth gimmick. Giving away money does not address the source of poverty. Would you patch your code this way?

To end poverty you must fix the education system. Perhaps vouchers would encourage competition and force schools to compete for students by improving the quality of education. Perhaps someone would have to balls to end the process by which bad teachers are transferred from school to school because the union and public admin refuse to do something about it.

To end poverty you must cut the costs of education. There is no reason a 4 year college should cost what it does today. Look at what some administrators and professors make compared to what they do. Look at the quality of what you can learn on the internet for free. These need to come in line. State universities don't need water parks.

To end poverty we must educate on safe-sex.

To end poverty we must encourage healthful eating choices. We must get partially hydrogenated oils and all the other crap out of are food.

To end poverty people in the US must realize that left/right blue/red republican/democrat foxnews/msnbc is a false paradigm. People must not be divided by these things. People must see past all of this noise and see who is working against the best interest of people in favor of the people who hold the most money. People must see that all policies we have are in fact creating more poverty. To end poverty, we must fix the source of the problem - <USER2> united states congress and the federal reserve.

<comment><USER13> I'm not sure whether a program financed by taxes (either existing tax revenue by cutting other spending or additional tax revenue by raising taxes or both) has to lead to inflation. Could you elaborate on that point?

It's certainly possible for certain tax increases to affect everyone or nearly everyone and consequently lead to a rise in the cost of living and inflation. Increasing the sales tax would certainly seem to increase the cost of living, making the stipend worth less. That is not the only way to finance such a program, though.

<comment><USER12> Your right. I concede that without knowing the parameters of this program I can not claim that it will create price inflation.

In an environment in which a private entity (federal reserve) is printing money willy-nilly it makes you pretty cynical.

<comment><USER14> no, your original assertion is absolutely correct. This will create price inflation, and this is exactly what happens every year in Alaska. Alaskans receive a dividend check every year for about $1500 to $3500 dollars, and every year around the time people begin to receive checks prices go up. I try to explain this to people up there and they don't seem to understand.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> We owe the existence of Linux to something very much like this. Finnish students not only do not have to pay tuition, they also receive a basic living supplement. Therefore Linus was in no hurry to finish his degrees, and spent his time doing Linux instead / as well.

We'd also end up with more entrepreneurs. Under this scheme, your startup would be "ramen profitable" without any income.

Currently, Canadian welfare pays $3 to bureaucrats for every $1 given to recipients. Most of the money to fund it comes from there.

I'm a huge proponent of this scheme -- I like to combine it with a "flat income tax" -- give everybody $20,000, and tax all income at a flat rate. The resulting curve is nice and progressive, as well as nice and simple, saving even more money on bureaucrats.

<comment><USER16> _Canadian welfare pays $3 to bureaucrats for every $1 given to recipients._

That's exactly the kind of irrationality it would be a pleasure to see swept away.

 _I'm a huge proponent of this scheme_

Who in Canadian politics is actually advocating it? The article mentions Hugh Segal. This is not someone with much power. So I guess my question is, of those advocating it, who has the most power?

If nothing else, it would be a counterexample to the principles that nothing in Canadian politics ever changes or is ever interesting. Hey, we could even call it Worthwhile Canadian Initiative! (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flora_Lewis>)

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I'm not convinced. I'd pay extra taxes for a limited time to see if this would work but I suspect it wouldn't.

My conclusion is based on one assumption: The source of financial problems is either bad money management or lack of enough earning capacity. Giving away free money fixes neither in the long term (this is another assumption.)

If their problem is bad money management, giving them more money and hoping that they'll fix their money management habits sounds like a very ineffective approach to fixing the problem.

If their problem is lack of earning capability, that needs to be addressed through education and job creation. Giving a single mother with 2-3 kids an extra $1500 per month might make her life a lot easier but it won't allow her to begin earning an extra $1500 on her own unless she uses the extra money to make very smart choices. Given the real world demands that she would be under, it seems that probability is not likely in her favor and again seems like an ineffectively approach to solving the problem.

The article really boiled down to: give people free money and they'll make wise decisions to help themselves. It didn't provide enough arguments to support that thesis and from just my understanding of human nature, I can't see this being an effective approach to solving the problem of poverty.

<comment><USER17> But what if those aren't the only two causes of poverty? I don't know if the idea has merit or not, but I think poverty is much more complicated than that.

<comment><USER9> I fully acknowledge that the two causes I listed may not be the only reasons for poverty.

I guess my main point was that it's important to understand and treat the causes, not the symptoms.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Milton Friedman advocated an interesting, soft version of the minimum income called the negative income tax.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_income_tax>

<comment><USER19> An equivalent way to describe Friedman's negative income tax proposal is that everyone pays their taxes as normal and then $20k/year (or however much) is given back to literally everyone, regardless of income.

I like that version because it makes more clear that you don't have perverse incentives with respect to working: you never get more money by working less. The $20k/year is guaranteed unconditionally and you can supplement it with a job if you choose.

<comment><USER20> That's also the same as the FairTax, which is a major policy proposal in the US. And it involves sending _everyone_ a check each month.

So this idea is actually not that far out for the US, at least.

I should also point out that the FairTax is primarily supported by conservatives at this point, though from my point of view, liberals should be even more supportive.

<comment><USER8> The FairTax is a sales tax, not an income tax. It's quite different from an income tax, negative or no.

<comment><USER21> The FairTax as I have heard it advocated included a _huge_ annual transfer payment to redress the highly regressive aspect of all consumption taxes. (If you are poor, you consume 100% or more of income, resulting in paying taxes on all of it. Richer individuals consume a fraction of their income, thus paying a much lower overall rate.) It would instantly be the most extensive wealth transfer program in the world.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> As a Canadian, I'd be willing to pay an extra $X in taxes just to see if this would work or not. They should probably roll it out provincially in isolated areas first rather than going the full 9 yards (or metres as the case may be.)

<comment><USER23> You wouldn't necessarily have to pay an extra if we cut down on public services and let people manage their money.

<comment><USER24> While this is a perfectly logical statement, there's absolutelty no chance it would reduce the cost of public services in reality. We don't fire government workers, they just get new titles / department names.

If anything the public service costs would increase as new oversight commities and other completely useless entities were created to manage the migration from our current system.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> ... think of the startup you could bootstrap, if this happened.

<comment><USER25> This is ultimately self-defeating. Following the principle breached by this and countless other abrogations of individual rights, what right does anyone have to keep or reinvest the profits from a startup when that money could be taken and spent on exactly this sort of minimum income program?

<comment><AUTHOR> It's quite possible that this could end up _cheaper_ than the current welfare system, due to cutting through the bureaucracy and red tape needed to manage such a system.

It sounds to me like you're posing a philosophical question about the nature of the problem, and I'm talking about a specific scenario if this was actually implemented.

<comment><USER8> Don't bother arguing with this guy. Just take everything you say and put it through the "what would Ayn Rand say?" filter and you can pretty much generate most of his ideas by yourself.

<comment><USER20> Interesting. Are you saying that Ayn Rand's ideas are so obvious that anyone could come up with them?

<comment><USER8> I'm saying that if you've read Ayn Rand at all, or for that matter run into Randroids on the internet at any other point in your life, you can pretty much predict what they're going to say within a given context. As a result, Randroids don't really add much to a conversation once they join in; rather than presenting original ideas, they just harp on the same Randian talking points everyone who's argued with a Randroid or read an Ayn Rand book is already well familiar with.

<comment><USER26> If they are so predictable then you must know how they will respond to being provoked with condescending names such as "Randroids?" Is there a specific response you want to see? Are you trying to exploit some known stack overflow bug in this specific Randroid model?

Why be so dismissive and insulting and then respond to the same poster you advised others to ignore?

I'd much rather read the predictable respectful discussion than a presumptive judgement designed to prevent discourse.

Edit: removed a redundant adjective.

<comment><USER8> When the topic is government assistance to the needy, it's indeed trivial to predict what one of Rand's disciples would argue about the subject.

My point (which you can view either as a tangent, or as a point of order) is that most of us are contributing original thoughts from our own perspectives, not simply adopting and commenting from the perspective of some novelist with some admittedly seductive ideas. If we were interested in Ayn Rand's ideas, we could read Ayn Rand herself. It's not useful to have her ideas proselytized to us.

<comment><USER26> Again, "some novelist" and "disciples" are dismissive terms that you're using to shut down the conversation by belittling the source of one poster's ideas.

If you think the discussion is not useful, make an argument to support that claim. Link to criticism. Or demonstrate that the Randputer is not arguing in earnest.

If you don't consider the fact that you might be wrong, that there might be something useful about the discussion in question, then how are you any better than someone who won't consider that Rand might be wrong?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Book about a similar plan for the United States:

[http://www.amazon.com/Our-Hands-Replace-Welfare- State/dp/084...](http://www.amazon.com/Our-Hands-Replace-Welfare- State/dp/0844742236/)

</comment><comment><USER28> This is the dumbest and most dangerous idea I've heard in a while. Go ahead and vote me down, but I hope some on this site have the common sense to see how bad this idea is. This is essentially welfare, and in the US, we've been down that road and we know exactly where it leads.

<comment><USER29> _This is essentially welfare_

Yes, and? The point is that we're already providing welfare, just often in a convoluted, inefficient, and counterproductive manner. The unfortunate fact is that some people can't provide for themselves. We can either ignore them, establish fifty government agencies to "help" them, or give them money. Option 1 isn't on the table, and 3 makes a lot more sense than 2.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Amusingly, the UK is trying to backstep out of this sort of system (though a less generous one) that has bred a "workless class" who find it pays better to not work rather than start working and both pay taxes and lose "valuable" recreation time smoking and watching Jeremy Kyle.

<comment><USER31> But part of the problem in the UK is that the highest tax rates paid are those by the working poor : As more money is earned, benefits are subtracted at an alarming rate. That means there's a huge disincentive for getting off the couch.

The idea of this 'flat payout' is that it provides a baseline - and any money earned thereafter is a pure win (even after you pay taxes on the money earned).

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> It seems like this would cause a lot of low-end inflation as rental prices of cheap housing and such adjusts to the fact that people can now pay more reliably for such things.

Equally important, it seems like it'd suddenly be hard to hire someone to a position making (say) $27,000 a year when their alternative is to simply collect $20,000 a year - so a lot of lower-paying jobs will vanish... and the ones that adjust $ to compensate will of course have to pass on the costs to their customers. I'd expect an abrupt spike in the prices of restaurants, grocery stores, and the like.

It's an interesting thought experiment but sure to cause some social upheaval.

</comment><comment><USER14> The is absolutely the most horrible idea ever, and on so many levels morally and ethically wrong. First off, the $20,000 has to come from taxes; so this means higher taxes for people who are productive and produce in society. Probably would require atleast more than 51% taxes; what is the purpose of working if the government is just going to steal from you more than you make? Second, what is the incentive to better yourself, train for better skills, and get an educate when you are guaranteed a basic income -- there are no incentives. Third, politicians love the dependent mentality this creates: voters will never ever vote against the welfare state and so this lets the politicians to do all sorts of draconian legislation, because they can always threaten to reduce welfare if the citizens don't go along with the state -- and the citizens will always vote for more welfare. Fourth, this creates a bureaucratic state that can pick and choose winners and losers: instead of your quality of life being based on if you are a hard worker, your time and money investment and your risks/rewards, your quality of life is based on a central planning state sponsored bureaucracy. This can be politically motivated. Fifth, this keeps the poor poorer and the rich richer by eliminating the incentive to better oneself.

</comment><comment><USER33> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_guarantee>

</comment><comment><USER34> This seems like a great way to drive up rents. Poor people don't tend to hang on to their money, they're awfully tempted to do things like pay rent, make car payments, and buy things to eat. Not that I blame them, I do these things too.

Such a scheme would essentially be an indirect subsidy to all those the poor do business with. A rising tide lifts all boats.

<comment><USER35> Which is basically another way of saying "printing money," which, as we know, causes inflation. Money can be flooded into the economy by means other than cheapening interbank lending rates.

<comment><USER36> Except we are not talking about creating money, we're talking about re- allocating that which already exists (via taxes). Not the same thing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Most people will spend it on drugs, alcohol and gambling. I say give them some money for basic food and shelter and some more (plus training) to start their own business so they can learn to be self sufficient and not to depend on the government.

As the saying goes, give them a fish...

<comment><USER33> give them a fish... and they can start thinking.

One cannot think with an empty stomach

<comment><USER37> "I say give them some money for basic food and shelter and..." == start thinking

"start their own business so they can learn to be self sufficient" == learn to fish

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Reading the article, it sounds like they already have some version of the basic income guarantee already in place. According to the article, Nicole Gray (the subject of the article) already subsists on government provided income.

Currently, if you want to avoid work and take advantage of income support, you must navigate an unpleasant bureaucracy and perhaps endure suffer feelings of shame. If you get a job instead, you can avoid this unpleasantness. This is an incentive for work. The only thing that the proposal seems to add to the table is removing this incentive for work.

Why would we want to do that?

<comment><USER3> Doesn't it also reduce the cost of that bureaucracy?

The article also argues that people actually have an intrinsic motivation to work (to get nice things for themselves and their children).

Notice the bits about the findings in Nimibia?

<comment><USER11> Is the bureaucracy of welfare distribution a significant portion of the cost?

 _The article also argues that people actually have an intrinsic motivation to work (to get nice things for themselves and their children)._

If your sole motivation for work is to get nice things for you/your kids, and someone hands you free money, why bother working?

As for Namibia, it doesn't seem that Namibia replaced a welfare system with work incentives by a welfare system without. All they did was create a welfare system. News flash: giving money to poor african villagers can help.

<comment><USER38> Should there not exist an amount of money which can help you to live in decent conditions, yet not be spoiled?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> I first read of a similar idea 7 years ago in a piece by Marshall Brain.

<http://www.marshallbrain.com/robotic-freedom.htm>

Skip down to "Capitalism Supersized" for the meat of the idea. It is one of those experiments I would love to see in reality, as I believe I would still be inventing and trying to better myself and the lives of those around me without having to worry about that pesky "job" thing. Though, the main risk I see isn't the people blowing their money, but the inflation and greed this would cause.

</comment><comment><USER40> How about instead of offering everybody $20,000 a year, we offer everyone a government job that pays $20,000 a year?

There's no sense in paying people without receiving something in return and there are always infrastructure improvements that could be made.

<comment><USER7> With a stipend, the money is theirs. With a government job, some of their salary would go to a politically-potent union that constantly lobbies for raises. Might not be worth the 'work' they're doing!

<comment><USER40> >With a government job, some of their salary would go to a politically-potent union that constantly lobbies for raises.

That sounds like a separate unrelated issue. Hand each worker a check for $1,666 each month they work, and leave it up to them how to spend it. It would (obviously) be untaxed...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> [http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(the+population+of+cana...](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=\(the+population+of+canada/10\)+*+$20,000)

</comment><comment><USER42> Will you pay $20,000 extra taxes to prevent crime i.e you don't need police force?

</comment><comment><USER25> Where will the $20,000 (times millions of recipients) come from?

<comment><USER16> The cost would be partly offset by dismantling much of the welfare apparatus (Edit: as semanticist already pointed out here: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1926049>). It wouldn't even be too surprising if the measure largely paid for itself in this manner, especially if you consider side-effects like health care and prisons. It would be interesting to see some reasonably objective numbers on this.

<comment><USER43> Another benefit, wages and living standards would rise, since there would be increased competition for workers.

Increased wages likely would drive better education and training, leading to a German-style skilled workforce. In turn, a skilled workforce is much less likely to be arbitrarily fired, look at German unemployment during the slowdown of the last two years.

For an analysis on one reason why the US is in such a mess, take a look at this article by Citi: [http://www.scribd.com/doc/6674234/Citigroup- Oct-16-2005-Plut...](http://www.scribd.com/doc/6674234/Citigroup- Oct-16-2005-Plutonomy-Report-Part-1)

<comment><USER16> We'd probably get better art too!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> To end prosperity, guarantee everyone in Canada $20,000 a year.

</comment><comment><USER45> With ~300MM people in the US, to provide everyone of them $20K would cost $6T.

Assuming you get the maximum draw off EDD of $450/week - that is equal to $23.5K per year.

So, for those '99ers' (Those on EDD for ~99+ weeks), they are already receiving greater than the $20K this article states.

However, assuming the current unemployment rate of 9% -- we are spending ~$600B per year on unemployment at this time. (unless I screwed my numbers)</comment>


Apple's secret NoSQL sauce includes a hefty dose of Cassandra - <AUTHOR> http://www.techrepublic.com/article/apples-secret-nosql-sauce-includes-a-hefty-dose-of-cassandra/ <comment><USER2> I thought that they intended to replace Cassandra with FoundationDB:

[http://www.businessinsider.com/why-apple-bought- foundationdb...](http://www.businessinsider.com/why-apple-bought- foundationdb-2015-3)

<comment><USER3> That was an acquire hire. They shutdown foundation db.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> this seems like an ad for cassandra, many comments on how it scales and how partitioning is easy but no concrete examples at all. Having used cassandra in the past, it sure isn't the holy grail of nosql dbs, especially not for analytics that this article suggests

<comment><USER5> I have used Cassandra in the past and would consider using it again but I agree its strength is not for 'analytics'. I'd say its strength is needing to scale reads and writes out on large large quantities of relatively simple data that you do not want to lose and you need low latency access to, and for when data needed to be easily partitioned across machines and data centres. I used it for data needed in realtime bidding systems for ad exchanges. It seemed well suited for that.

Then again, it's been 5 years since I worked with it, there have been improvements. Back then it had a _lot_ of warts, and I spent a lot of time fighting JVM GC pauses.

<comment><USER6> Warts are still there, maybe worse with vnodes. Enjoy!

<comment><USER5> At the time it felt like it should be something rewritten in C++ (or Rust now).

I do miss getting to play with stuff like that.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Is the a Hacker News for Space Related Discussion? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Follow both #space and #astronomy (and related) on Hubski.

[https://hubski.com/tag?id=astronomy](https://hubski.com/tag?id=astronomy) [https://hubski.com/tag?id=space](https://hubski.com/tag?id=space)

</comment><comment><USER3> I know a couple on snapzu:

[http://snapzu.com/t/space](http://snapzu.com/t/space) [http://snapzu.com/t/spacescience](http://snapzu.com/t/spacescience)</comment>


Ask HN: Why can't any companies turn a damn profit? - <AUTHOR>

With all of the LinkedIn and Groupon hype, as well as other companies like Pandora, why can none of them turn profits? These companies seem to hemorrhage money like no tomorrow, with investors only looking at revenue not profit. I'm curious of everyone else's opinions. <comment><USER2> LinkedIn blows it on a bloated staff and expenses. No excuse, they just suck.

Pandora has been bent over by content owners. They're not powerful enough to dictate reasonable terms.

Groupon is waging all out war to dominate. They're hoping when the dust settles they'll own one of the richest markets in the world.

<comment><USER3> Maybe I'm cynical, but I think they are trying to grab a ton of money while the getting is good, knowing that their business model is not sustainable. They spend enormous sums of money on sales-staff (to get the deals from vendors) and many vendors say they are unhappy after the groupon goes live. Apparently most groupon-buyers are cheap one-time-visitors and the local vendor doesn't recoup their expenses.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The valuation metrics look at revenue growth, not sales and not profit. Wall Street loves the mystical growth metric and have cash by the fistful ready to stuff into firms that can show some sort of growth. Especially with hard-to- value tech companies, showing a strong number of users makes a marginally profitable (or even unprofitable) firm appear to be strong.

Supposing that the target is to attain the highest valuation, the right idea is to spend as much money as possible to show strong growth numbers. Then, when you hit the peak growth rate, sell it to the public!

When a more attractive professional network or daily discount site emerges, the value may dip. That being said, if the target is to make the most money, the easiest way is to ride the bubble

</comment><comment><USER5> <http://37signals.com/bootstrapped>

</comment><comment><USER6> I've noticed this too.

Many startups focus on getting acquired and moving on the next "big thing" rather than finding a steady revenue stream.

<comment><AUTHOR> They are getting their IPO's too, and I feel sorry for the sad saps who lose money. Second Bubble is coming!

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> From what I've read Groupon makes a fortune. The others like LinkedIn are trying to convert their user base into a revenue stream without driving the users away.

The problem with many web 2.0 companies is that they don't have a clear revenue stream.

<comment><USER8> Groupon does not make a profit: <http://www.geekosystem.com/groupon-ipo/>

<comment><USER7> Wow, I read something a year ago saying they were making $30 million that year. They must have crazy expanded.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Dealing with too many browser tabs? - <AUTHOR> When browsing/working, I end up with like 20+ opened tabs. Sometimes because I don't really notice it, other times because I'm anxious about losing any of the tabs. I'm curious how do you guys handle multiple tabs? Don't you get lost often? <comment><USER2> Use Firefox Tree style tab ([https://addons.mozilla.org/en- US/firefox/addon/tree-style-ta...](https://addons.mozilla.org/en- US/firefox/addon/tree-style-tab/)) Unfortunately, same is not very handy for chrome. But this will help you a lot

<comment><USER3> Seconded this. Been using it for as long as I can remember.

I'm one of those freak that easily have 50+ tab open when doing "research" on certain topic.</comment></comment>