skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The github explains that you create a transaction as follows:

1) You have 50 coins in a 'bucket' or address?
2) You send 18 to a friend
3) You send 32 t yourself.

So you create two encrypted buckets, 18 in one, and 32 in the other. They seem to be the equivalent of UTXOs. I'm not clear if they need to be 'revealed' to be spent though.
>not a reasonable reason to return something.

I personally agree with you, but that's not the point.

If you're willing to pay a little premium over online outlets, and as long as everyone at REI is still getting paid, why shouldn't customers be allowed to return things for any reason?
I think that means you hate breakthroughs.
Lots of such qualifying details are not uttered, because they are assumed according to certain maxims which govern constructive conversation among rational people.
It could work, but wouldn't it be simpler , as a first step, to add this feature in a basic form to a python based BT client like tribler and see where it goes from there ? I.e.

1. At torrent delete , set a flag on torrent to hide

2. At torrent display , don't display hidden torrents

3. Periodically or on storage_full event - fully delete hidden torrents , based on some simple strategy like "remove those with most seeds" ?

And after building it and testing a bit , creating some nice web page , a bit of marketing , and gather developers/users ? Who knows, might become popular .

Might have tried to do so myself , but i'm not really a developer.

Anyway, is it realistic?
Buckets are basically Coins from the original paper. It was changed because a `Coin` implies things that it actually isn't, but bucket is an even worse name, so it'll probably either be called Coin again or perhaps "pour output" or something.
There are companies already doing this.
I had a friend who did Uberman once. It was hard to be around him at times because he would sometimes very rapidly deteriorate into sleep as he approached one of his sanctioned sleeping periods.

Aside from those sanctioned sleeping periods, I'd estimate he was maybe a third actually-awake about seventy percent of the time.
That Plane Overhead: Starring Our Friends SDR, ADS-B, I2C and KLGA
Years ago there was a thread on the old less-moderated /r/science about "Are there any of today's 'kooks' that you think might eventually be vindicated?" Hancock was one of the most popular answers, along with the two 'water weathering on the Sphinx' folks (forget their names).

Some of Hancock's ideas are a little wacky, but the core idea that civilization is older than we think probably has legs. Unfortunately the modern scientific establishment with its roots in the monastic system (academia as we know it is a direct evolution of the monastery and medieval guild systems) still persecutees heretics and tends to dismiss all works from those who espouse heresy. Having even a few "out there" ideas trashes a person's entire corpus and leads to a kind of excommunication.

The general trend I've noticed has been this: the more we learn about our history, the further back the dates go. I've seen this for both hominid evolution and civilization.

That and the standard narrative is just weird. We know from the fossil record that humans have had large craniums and by extension complex modern brains for at least hundreds of thousands of years. What the heck were we doing for all that time? Saying civilization is only ~10k years old is like saying "birds have had wings for millions of years but they only recently started flying." Huh? Really? This to me strains credulity more than the idea of lost civilizations and forgotten epochs. The latter seems like a straightforward possibility, especially if the end of the ice age involved catastrophic climate shifts that would have ruined agriculture, drowned coastal cities (we like to build on coasts), and dispersed people everywhere.

Even among recent ancient civilizations, only those that built massive stone megaliths are really remembered. We know little about native Americans that lived here only a few hundred years ago. There could have been massive and complex antediluvian civilizations and if they didn't happen to be in the habit of stacking up a lot of big rocks they'd have left almost nothing of themselves.

It's funny to me how much resistance this idea gets. I don't find it that hard to believe at all. I wonder if it conflicts with some residual "young-Earth creationism," even among some nominally secular folks. Even though most scientists no longer believe the Earth to be young, there still might be a kind of implicit bias against the idea that history might go back astronomically far into the past and that there might be forgotten epochs of history. None of that stuff is even hinted at in the Bible. I mean it talks about a big flood -- which if the ice age ended catastrophically would be somewhat accurate -- but has little if any detail about what came before.
Obviously, my own focus is on voice interfaces, and I agree with what's written here, in so far as it goes, though it doesn't mention the existing barriers.

As far as it goes, I think this is true:

"Before I begin, I want to clarify that conversational commerce (as I see it) largely pertains to utilizing chat, messaging, or other natural language interfaces (i.e. voice) to interact with people, brands, or services and bots that heretofore have had no real place in the bidirectional, asynchronous messaging context."

But it is very early days for voice interfaces, and there are numerous problems that need to be overcome. What I wrote in "Amazon has no idea how to run an app store" amounts to a list of problems that Amazon needs to address before its Echo platform can take off. We've already discussed that on Hacker News: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10876409

But those issues are very specific to Echo. There are more general issues which the article doesn't get into. Although the author does seem to sense the potential:

"I mentioned this in my post last year, but we can now see that the voice-controlled hardware trojan horses from the big companies haven’t necessarily been embraced with open arms. Yet. I don’t have specific numbers, so I may be wrong, but my sense is that it’s still very early days for devices like Amazon’s Echo (which is being shrunk) or Google’s onHub."

In this next year, I expect 2 big trends:

1.) The threat of Amazon taking over this space is forcing other companies to open up -- in particular, Apple is going to do a lot to open up Siri and make it easier for developers to take advantage of the full power of Siri.

2.) developers will learn a lot about what this style of development actually requires. I wrote about one of my first insights in "Dialogue designers replace graphic designers when creating voice interfaces"
http://www.smashcompany.com/technology/script-designers-repl...
but I suspect there will be hundreds of similar blog posts, as more and more developers gain experience and insights regarding the unique demands made by voice interfaces.
Actually it looks to me as if you are the one that took the parents response personally.

The parent gave a few arguments why he/she dislikes the article (if they are valid or not is another question), that's something you did not do.

Neither did you engage in any follow up comments to yours.
http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?ar...

"Estimates of employee win rates and damage award amounts based on the AAA-CC filings data indicate that arbitration outcomes are generally less favorable to employees than those from employment litigation."

"These results suggest that, while a substantial minority of employees use self-representation, in the large majority of instances employees are retaining counsel to represent them in employment arbitration. The cases in which employees do have representation by counsel are on average those in which they have a greater chance of success and recover larger damage awards. Thus employment arbitration appears to be a
dispute resolution system predominantly based on employee representation by counsel, as is the case with litigation."

So the takeaways here are the arbitration is worse for employees than litigation, and that employees usually need a lawyer for the arbitration process. The study notes that more research is needed, but it's far from clear than arbitration is a good idea for larger complaints, much less as the only option available.

I would love to see some citation that shows businesses without mandatory arbitration clauses have to buy insurance or otherwise have to offer lower wages. This sounds very similar to other unsubstantiated but oft-repeated arguments about unionization, torts, consumer protection laws, etc.

I don't disagree with you about the legal system, but how exactly will the court system become reformed through disuse?
It's also a surprisingly common accident type, and the speeds picked are typical for this accident type too - you may not see it because you live in a city, but in rural places with lots of two-lane roads its surprisingly common for a high-speed frontal offset collision to happen.
I don't know if it's just my browser (Windows Firefox) but the playback of songs seem a bit off. For example this one: https://musescore.com/user/3967646/scores/1673111 the red overlay is late by a few hundred milliseconds. Not much but it's quite noticeable.
IMHO, the big problem is in statutorily capping damages. Generally, punitive damage increase with the depth of the pockets of party responsible for the death. That makes it hard to insure. But once it can be capped and precisely accounted for, SDC makers could easily self-insure and take over insurance cost from riders.
Early Stage Investing for Entrepreneurs and Investors Just Got More Attractive
I don't pretend to know the commentor's intentions but, for reference, there's something in Brazil called the Stray dog/Mongrel complex which was thought up by a famous Brazilian writer, and which may explain it for you. Of his phrase, this writer said it's “the inferiority with which the Brazilian positions himself, voluntarily, in front of the rest of the world”.

From a NYT piece written by author Larry Rohter in 2004:

"Writing in the 1950's, the playwright Nelson Rodrigues saw his countrymen as afflicted with a sense of inferiority, and he coined a phrase that Brazilians now use to describe it: "the mongrel complex." Brazil has always aspired to be taken seriously as a world power by the heavyweights, and so it pains Brazilians that world leaders could confuse their country with Bolivia, as Ronald Reagan once did, or dismiss a nation so large -- it has 180 million people -- as "not a serious country," as Charles de Gaulle did."
as smt88 said, TypeScript sounds like the obvious choice. He probably enjoys the type safety aspect of C# along with Visual Studio (or whatever IDE he uses). You appreciate the fact that the same code on the server runs on the client. You could nail both of these using TypeScript.
There is a big difference between PCR and CRISPR though. Whilst PCR is effectively a reading technology, CRISPR is a writing technology. For many medical technologies then PCR is a standalone diagnostic tool (it is HUGE in mol. biol., pathology, biotech). However you can quite easily see CRISPR being a core tech within revolutionary deliverable medical treatments.

As Eisen points out its kind of odd that the group who rush to do the obvious human implementation should then get a share of all this potential... Not really a novel invention by that point in my opinion.
It was a question. I actually don't know.
OpenBSD is a great platform to find those bugs in your asm/c. Segfaults that would not happen on Linux. (e.g. closing a file before exit that you never opened).
http://nixdoc.net/man-pages/OpenBSD/malloc.conf.5.html is also another great place to tweak memory allocation behaviors to find those application corner cases that break.
One of the outcomes is that doctors spend up to 50% of their time making notes instead of seeing patients.

But, is that a bad thing? If the notes are relevant/useful and can only be entered by a doctor, then I'd say that's just part of practicing medicine.

How much of that 50% is purely red-tape? And, if it is red-tape, can that work be off-loaded to a less valuable employee?
"Buckets" contain cryptographic trapdoors which are necessary to witness spendable value. The sender constructs them and encrypts them with an IND-CCA2-secure key and places it inside the transaction. Only the recipient should be able to decrypt it to obtain the trapdoors which it needs in order to spend it.
Zerocash had a possible backdoor, which was its' biggest drawback. I don't see it mentioned on the web page, which seems like they're hiding it (it's cruital to know who we need to trust with the setup part, and whether anybody has the right to take part in it).

,,Security of Π relies on a trusted party running Setup to generate the public parameters (once and for
all). This trust is needed for the transaction non-malleability
and balance properties but not for ledger indistinguishability'' - from the zerocash paper
>I'm curious what makes you say that.

The experience of migrating to DVCS's. (Anecdotal, I know, but still...)

>...but with git you're pretty much stuck with the "standard feature branching" workflow.

Git is a loose collection of file manipulation utilities, it can be cobbled together to support even the most insane workflows.
The thing is, insurance is almost always meant to spread around risk from random events, such as a car accident, unexpected disease, act of nature, or in the most extreme case, an engineering or manufacturing mistake that causes a rocket to blow up. Except in cases of fraud, these situations arise randomly or due to systemic problems that can be quantified within the context of the insured parties. With arbitration, especially when mandated by an employer, the process is easily used to make possible behavior that the legal system would otherwise never allow, by people who fully intend to do so, just like when someone buys insurance with the intent of burning their own house down for the cash payout. Unlike the insurance company, however, the employee has no remaining legal recourse outside of a predetermined (and possibly biased) arbitration process just because it is in the contract.

If an employer is explicitly trying to minimize their risk and costs by mandating arbitration how can you ever trust them to pick an unbiased arbiter? If an agent is trying to maximize their outcomes by forcing arbitration, why would they then chose any arbiter that isn't more likely to side with them?

You can argue that allowing arbitration is a trust signal, but at the same time it can send a signal that the employer is planning on, or at least thinks it a possibility, that they will violate some terms of the contract, whether those terms are explicit or implicit (i.e. due to legislation or court precedent). The problem is that the information assymetry between an employer and employee is so vast such that arbitration is a tool easily used to further exploit workers.
I guess he means an electric water heater...
This is such a distinctly American(tm) problem that I can't help but chuckle.

Why are we so puritanical about sex, gender, etc?

I'm not absolving the guy doing this really creepy thing, but I sort of understand it.

If you were raised in a society that was very sexually repressed, then it's only natural that you'd develop these strange behaviors around the opposite sex. I can only shudder trying to imagine how warped that individual is.
Individual component prices to give a sense of how much it would cost you alone to make one versus NTC.
fast forward 15 years and my then teenage daughter and her kin will consider an app economy job similar to how we see manufacturing jobs today.

My point is, I thrived in the "app economy" mostly due to the fact that I was writing J2ME gif86a decoders before the word smartphone was even a term, and that lead me to my current success, however...

I have been investing more and more time over the last few years engaged in what's next - and although I have come to a personal conclusion, I invite you to future think. To engage in the affects of what you experience, instead if its causes or its circumstance.
> For Presentation, the HTML and JS are always coupled, whether you have them in separate files or not.

Absolutely not. Back when we were all just using jQuery, you could run $('.some-class').myWidget() to activate a widget on any element matching the query. There was no need to couple the implementation of the widget with the element to which it was applied.

If the widget had some internal element construction to do then yes, I would agree, it makes sense to have it be part of the same file, and this was often done with string concatenation back in jQuery days.

However, there is still value in being able to share the same html template across multiple models. You may have a general tabular structure you want to adhere to app-wide but you may want to implement different dynamic logic to those tables in different places. Now you're faced with having to copy/paste the same template over and over in React to accomplish the same task, or you have multiple mixins that define different behavior which kind of defeats the purpose of having the logic and the markup live together.
I have no qualms with either format. Both have their pros and cons.

But until ebooks have an equivalent of "used" ebooks, I'm going to continue buying used paper books. $1 or $3 for a beautiful break from backlighting, as well as the opportunity to [gasp] use my hands, is the way I'll go. Ebooks, no matter how old, are an order of magnitude higher in price. No thanks!

And although this has nothing to do with my personal consumption, publishers need to figure out how they're going to stop ripping off libraries. It's part of the reason I'm personally against subsidizing the ebook industry in any form (for now).
Hanging out with organizations known for harboring statistically significant percentages of douchebags carries social risk. You chose it, now cope.
I hope people who experiment with Uberman don't drive.
IIHS could be the best example of greed being a good thing in limited circumstances.

Markets work best when you can attach a profit mechanism to a worthy goal (or just the task at hand).
The section you linked to doesn't seem to say anything about who invented various automobile safety mechanisms.
I believe you! and didn't mean to imply otherwise.

I've posted a ton about this on the site:

https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix=true&page=0&dateR...

https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix=true&page=0&dateR...

But we haven't added it to the site guidelines yet. I suppose we should, but we try to err on the side of avoiding bloat. Maybe we can treat them like code and find something else in there that can be removed.
Sure, all the low-hanging fruit is gone. It's a lot easier and cheaper to cut fatalities by X% by installing three-point seat belts in every car than it is to do it by building advanced stability control systems.

But still, the returns are still significant and the dangers are still huge. I'd guess that your tremendous backlash comes from using a deeply misleading graph as the foundation of your comment and from the strong implication that additional safety improvements are no longer worthwhile.
There's a bunch of Phantom Edits; the name's been reused several times. The one I watched was this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9LEhOZZbuk

All three prequel movies edited down into a single 2-hour film. And you know what? It's actually... still not what you'd call good. But it's embarrassingly better than the originals.

But there are others, like the Phantom Re-edit, which tries to improve on characters like Jar-Jar and the Trade Federation by scrambling their speech into traditional Star Wars Alien, and subtitling them. With different dialogue. It's supposed to be pretty good, but I've never tracked down a copy.

I do wonder if the lasting legacy of the terrible prequels will turn out to be teaching an entire generation about film editing!
Announcing Scala.js 0.6.6
I thought so too, but I measured one of the paragraphs at 210 characters. Which can mean one of two things. Hopefully, it's unrelated to Twitter and there's another perfectly good explanation. Alternatively, it's inspired by Twitter, but was never actually Tweeted. It's a self-imposition of the twitter style, which feels both disingenuous and in poor taste.
From the article, “I started calling them identical twins because they are like identical people,” he said. “They are too similar to just happen by chance, but not absolutely precisely identical to the last molecule.”
Exactly so.
First of all, some of REI's prices are good. Some are not so good. In my experience, there isn't a consistent premium.

>If you're willing to pay a little premium over online outlets, and as long as everyone at REI is still getting paid, why shouldn't customers be allowed to return things for any reason?

Because, someone has to pay for that not reasonable return, whether it's coop members and/or other customers who end up paying just a bit more.
Realizing you did it goes a long way to stopping--kudos!
A better example would be ( vs ), checking neighboring pixels to weight that pixel correctly.
That's a good point. You could freeze safety at the current model year and you'd still see significant improvements for another decade or two as older cars age out of the fleet.
The interesting links are

https://github.com/nlf/dhyve

https://github.com/nlf/dhyve-os
Following that line of reasoning, everyone is actually writing machine code.
Technology Expanding the Boundaries of Art
I think they are counting on Open Source being the protection. Any changes to the code can be scrutinized, and the code can be forked (already has).
They didn't invent any safety features, but the basic research done by Colonel John Stapp in the field of human g-force tolerance was fundamental to the design of seat belts and restraint systems, and was later used in passenger car design.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stapp
Zcash is planning to use a new multi-party trusted setup scheme that allows a group to securely compute the mathematical structures necessary to protect the zero-knowledge proof integrity.

(Secure Sampling of Public Parameters for Succinct Zero Knowledge Proofs, Ben-Sasson, E. ; Chiesa, A. ; Green, M. ; Tromer, E. et al.)

Only if every member of this group were compromised or dishonest will the setup fail. That is, only 1/N participants need to be honest.
"I find [the index] a critical part of git's culture of making small commits with one logical change each."

I've never understood why the index has to be forced on everyone for every commit. Apparently it's due to a belief that everyone always just munges a bunch of changes together in their working copy in a mad coding frenzy and then later realize they need to filter and separate those changes into separate commits? That happens to me from time to time, but it's not the common case. When it does happen (since I use mercurial) I can use use tools such as commit --amend, or commit <list of filenames>, or record or crecord to filter and separate the changes in my working copy into separate commits. I believe even git has some of those same options.
My brother does this. Interrupts you, and if you don't stop speaking, his volume increases. I personally lose my train of thought and so I just can't keep up with him. But it's a fun game to play sometimes.
Docker does run natively on OSX.

Just forward a port with ssh/socat/etc and set the environment variable correctly to point to your build host that can run lxc.

There is so much over-engineering going on in this arena. :/
Basically everything pre-mid-'60s had this.