skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
We are at 2 TX/sec because, well, people simply don't transact more than that.

Bitcoin CAN support a much higher transaction rate with ZERO increase in mining resources. All we need is (1) more transactions and (2) a block size increase. Let it be clear: the only "dumb" thing is not the system itself, but Bitcoin developers who have not yet agreed on increasing the block size.

Secondly, seeing the mining resources as spent only validating transactions is failing to see the whole picture. Miners sustain a system that is already a net benefit to the economy. Venture capitalists invested more than $1 billion into at least 729 Bitcoin companies which created thousands of jobs. Is all this worth the 150+ megawatt of (practically all) clean energy used by miners? Hell yes! This argument (and others) is explained in detail in:

http://blog.zorinaq.com/?e=82
I remember when Java was being sold as having the same first class support as Objective-C, Web Objects, the Qt framework for Java, how GC support in Objective-GC was going to be great, how Carbon was going to stay around.

Before Mac OS X, I remember Pascal being the best thing, only to be replaced by C and C++, then as they couldn't improve their own tools, having them based on Metrowerks.

I remember Common Lisp, Dylan, Hypercard, Newton, Quickdraw, Quickdraw 3D,...

So I think it is more than fair to put them on the same bag.
They call them refugees but a big point of contention is often they migrate half way across the world and pay for a people smuggler, when 25000 genuine refugees were accepted that didn't try to push their way in. This leaves a black mark against your name and takes away the chance from a genuine refugee that couldn't afford to migrate and pay a smuggler to get asylum.

Can we take more? probably.

Should we let people that can afford to migrate to Indonesia and pay a people smugger to jump the queue get preference? Hell no.
And 8 years is justified because of it? Why not 1 year? Or none?
When the advantage provided by doing an in-house ASIC goes away, the limiting factor becomes cheap electricity, and the amount of people who are able to compete grows.

Right now, a couple groups of people are trying to make the fastest ASIC so that they can convert electricity into money, using their proprietary efficient converter.

But if everyone can get the same efficient converter, suddenly it's viable for anyone that can produce cheap electricity with a stable internet connection. And there are far more people/countries who are able to compete on the cost of electricity than there are people/companies who are able to compete on making the best SHA-256 ASIC. This tends towards decentralization.
The mining work is used to prove that a certain amount of computational 'work' was done. This work takes a predictable amount of time (in aggregate), and because of that, it can be used as a way to timestamp transactions in a globally serializable way, even in the face of malicious adversaries.

Consider a block chaining system without proof of work: I want to send some bitcoin so I broadcast a signed message to the network saying "send 10 bitcoin to dandare". But let's say I also send another message to the network saying "send 10 bitcoin to <my other address>" at the exact same time.

Now what happens is the chain forks. Some people consider transaction #1 canonical and some people consider transaction #2 canonical, but they can't both go in the same chain because they conflict. So now your blockchain has a split at the end of it, how do you decide which one is the real one?

Well, everyone in the network is incentivized to add their transactions to the 'real' chain, because obviously everyone wants their own transactions to be real. So if either chain gets a small edge in 'realness' everyone will pile into that one, looking out for their own self-interest.

In the absence of proof of work, no chain ever becomes any more 'real' than any other, because there is no effort in adding to the chain. Me with just my laptop can keep extending the one that I want to win indefinitely, and roughly 50% of the time it'll come out how I want.

Proof of work solves this, by making the network 'invest' computational effort to extend a chain. Because it takes enormous computational resources, no single actor can significantly or reliably influence which chain is going to win. And as each additional block is chained on after the one containing a given transaction, it becomes exponentially more difficult for another 'side chain' to catch up.

This means that if you wait until about 3 blocks after the transaction I sent you, you can have a very high degree of confidence that the chain you are looking at is and always will be the canonical bitcoin blockchain. In order for that to become untrue, someone would have to find two consecutive solutions to the proof of work problem in the same time it takes the entire bitcoin network to find 1.
He has promised to bring manufacturing jobs back by ending "free trade" (i.e. imposing tariffs on the countries that have been imposing tariffs on our exports for decades) and punishing American manufacturers that move factories abroad, significantly lowering taxes for lower income brackets (including no taxes for the nearly 50% of the population in his lowest bracket), and encouraging domestic investment by reducing corporate tax rates to extremely competitive rates while imposing a repatriation fee on offshore corporate accounts and ending the tax exemption on corporate income earned abroad. The "automation is going to put 99.9% of humans out of a job" dystopian futurist crowd may see this as punting the ball down the field, but I'd much rather pump some wealth back into our lower classes today and wait until everyone else is contemplating post-scarcity economics, than commit economic suicide while China snickers.
Saying that there was no bias in their news selection, when it should be readily apparent that having humans select thing would introduce bias. Not quite outright lying, as you might possibly think they're naive enough to think humans are unbiased, but I don't think they get the benefit of the doubt here.

IIRC they also started off saying it was all algorithmic.
Forget the box, look at PiedPipper!
Rise of the robots: 60,000 workers culled from just one Foxconn factory
At the time we started, MySQL was more mature. Today, having a lot of MySQL installations at Wix we have no need to try HStore as well. Having said that, it we would have stared today we may have considered it, among other options.
A man's life ruined. The cost to society of imprisoning a person for life. Over something that's worth what, $5? Probably less.

I guess now every person in California pays > $5 each for his imprisonment. If he were to be properly rehabilitated not only would Californians not need to pay for his time in prison but he would contribute to California by paying taxes.

IMHO it seems the big difference between the US penal system and much of the European is that the US prioritizes vengeance whereas the European prioritizes rehabilitation.
Yes it is definitely a tradeoff for the employee. For the employer, the cost of issuing RSUs I believe is tied with the fact that there would be no chance that the employee let go of their shares via not exercising their options (I do not believe RSUs are subject to employment tax).

But if you have 10 year exercise periods, that accomplishes the same thing for the employer's perspective. The difference them becomes the tradeoff for the employee between optionality and a possibly lower tax rate.
We don't know if they tried to get a tax ruling beforehand. And unfortunately I'm not familiar enough with the case to speculate on it.
A lot of people quote this as the best place to start, but I'd like to respectfully disagree. I don't have a concise alternative, but I found that paper pretty much incomprehensible, and even now with a decent handle on bitcoin it's still pretty opaque.
This could be rigorously studied. A group of people could attempt to plant false advertising opportunities in their speech and then measure the frequency at which related ads/posts arrive in their feed. I would trust something like this more than an assertion by FB that this is not happening.
I use Metal, which Appifies the mobile site. It even supports notifications, I think, but I turned them off.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.nam.fbwrap...
Juries have a rather minor role in criminal justice. Far less than 1% of crimes ever get to a jury. There are some US jurisdictions where the only cases that ever get to a jury are those with mandatory life and/or death punishments that preclude plea bargaining.

Even amongst those who want to go to trial on lesser charges regularly opt for a judge rather than jury.
too many interests is a symptom you've still to find your true calling
I do this with an LCD projector. Works great. (Dungeon required.) Having a massive picture archive on slideshow mode is a fantastic time-keeping mechanism.

So yeah, I'm with you.. it'll be fun to move up to the tower and still get requisite background art.
The basic technology is not that hard to understand. The implications are less obvious.
Learn programming by playing games
Actually, it would be even worse if it was run on gamma-corrected (proportional to light intensity) pixels. The sRGB space is designed to approximate human perception, which is only advantageous for this application.
Collection of AOP/AspectJ Java Aspects, 0.22.5 Released
In theory. Who said an attack would happen by allocating computing resources? That strikes me as https://xkcd.com/538/. Suppose that the majority of the miners are allied with a small number of organizations. People/organizations with sufficient influence can strike deals with those organizations to orchestrate a majority attack.
We did hear about it, if a bit late.

Our response -
https://vimeo.com/138432267
But is there an actual modern-day example? Like, someone was punished for picking strawberries out of season because it's against common law even though there is no legislative law.

It's sounds to me like this situation no longer arises -- everything has been written down as a law.
So the solution is to stop taxing dollars spent on health care, period. Which, coincidentally, is a large part of Trump's health care plan (untaxed contributions to "Health Savings Accounts" that can accumulate without limit, can be shared with any family member, and are completely transferred on death as part of your estate).
I run 9front in my laptop and netboot, so root filesystem is at home and I boot off that. Only thing on my drive is a bootloader and kernel.
WeChat failed to go global
> nobody has time to keep up with everything going on in the world

Exactly. Self directed education is as much about ignoring information you don't need as it is about absorbing information.

> at some point you have to find trustworthy news sources if you want to be aware of activity outside of your main interests

At many points we need to re-examine already-trusted news sources. For example, the Discovery Channel which lost its ability to be scientific.

To hear even more different perspectives, learn a foreign language so you can read their news or talk to foreigners.
Anyone care to explain why this is being downvoted?
Nice news, but I doubt this'll be any easier for hobbyists to acquire without harvesting them from devices
Quicksync is fine for real-time communication or streaming, not for files where you want maximal visual quality with minimal bits used.
The fly in that ointment is that govts tend to have these deniable 'deals' with these major cloud providers. So make sure whatever you push is encrypted well.
Just use the mobile web site. I'm doing it because of the zillion of permissions the FB app ask and it is good enough.

However they could do it with Whatsapp. There is no alternative to that.
Matt Bruenig (yes, the guy who was recently hounded out of his job for calling a powerful Hillary supporter a scumbag) had an interesting description of this argument, or rather this series of arguments. First, he says, libertarians defend inequality through desert:

* People should keep their money, they worked hard for it!

Then Bruenig points out that there is capital income, which does not come from work. Capital will keep "working" for you even if you stole it or inherited. It's extra obvious in the case of owning fully autonomous robots that could do anything a human could, but it's true for much simpler forms of capital, too.

Then they retreat to voluntarism:

* OK, so capital owners didn't work to get that money, but it was all voluntary. I'm just against force and for voluntarism.

Then he points out that property rights are enforced through violence too - the only reason you will make those "voluntary" trades for food and shelter, is that men with guns will come and arrest you if you just take it.

Then libertarians retreat to common-goodism:

* OK, we could imagine a society where people could just take as they please, so property rights are in a sense man-made. And they do require violence to enforce. But not having them would lead to the tragedy of the commons. Without property rights, we would all be miserably poor!

And this is certainly true, but if the common good is what we target, why not have a proper welfare state, a solid UBI funded by high taxes etc.?

Usually at that point they go back to the first step.
Ether is not a currency like Bitcoin. Ethereum is a pure platform play that enables multiple Bitcoin competitors to rapidly experiment and find the product-market fit of crypto-currencies in the real world.

I believe there can be a crypto-currency with better properties than Bitcoin.

Once one of these Ethereum apps finds their hockey stick, Ether will continue to play its role in securing the Ethereum network for this killer app which removes the need for both Ether and Bitcoin to play the role of crypto-currencies.

While you are distracted by one DAO, there are many other DAOs successfully in operation on the Ethereum network. There is only one that made a lot of noise because it had to, the others are silently building their products after raising money from a passionate set of users.
If you think Flappy Bird is a clone of SFCave or any prior title you have completely misunderstood the game. Have you played it?
I can't take Bitcoin seriously because its community, at the same time, holds strong anarcho-capitalist ideals, and supports various companies which are trying to monopolise various forms of Bitcoin transaction.

For example, a physical "Bitcoin payment card" which can only be used with terminals sold by one vendor with bitcoins stored on the same vendor's servers. If that had taken off, it would quickly become nearly impossible to replace - and yet Bitcoiners thought this was the best thing ever, instead of applying critical thinking and realising it'd be possible to create a similar system but open to any vendor you'd like. As long as it's not the Government restricting your choice, it's not bad, right?
Peter Thiel secretly bankrolling anti-Gawker lawsuits
There is nothing terrible or stupid about avoiding joins/transactions for speed. The technique of using blobs of data in MySQL rows in this article is perfectly valid and widespread at this point. As long as you understand the trade offs.
the jury/judge ruling does not match exactly the civil law/common law split.

I.e. france and italy both have a civil law system but some crimes (murder, for example) depend on a popular jury in addition to the judge.
Google wants to replace your password with a 'trust score'
Does it need to be? Most people don't know anything about the underpinnings of the bank and credit card systems. I talk about btc as pseudonymous digital cash first (and the tradeoffs of consumer/producer benefits that entails), mention its capability for more (escrow, 'programmable money', store of value, signatures...) next, and give my best go at explaining what I know of the more complicated details of the implementation only to people really interested. It's fun to try metaphors (and there are a lot, even just around asymmetric encryption) for those without the tech background but I don't think it's very fruitful.
I like it. It's simple & elegant and does exactly what it promises to do. :)
It won't accomplish anything for the victims' relatives, that's true. But other people will feel safer knowing that at least some percentage of children murderers are locked out for good.

It's not about making the murderer suffer either, it's about preventing future crimes. When you have cancer, you don't kill cancer cells because you want them to suffer. You kill them to prevent them from killing you.
You were given a certain number of GOOG shares that vest over a 4 year period. That is your vesting schedule. You typically do not "buy" your RSUs as an employee. They are granted to you and thus are subject to ordinary income tax. A company's founding team will "buy" the RSUs as part of the initial capitalization of the company. Young companies may have RSU sales to employees rather than a grant (one could argue that this is a small financial optimization).

If you left after 2 years, you would only receive half this amount even though you were "given" these shares when you joined. On the books, you are listed as holding all those shares. For example, since you are a RSU holder, you have the right to make an 83b election, though at such a mature company most of the tax benefits would be suspect.

As a RSU holder, you have full rights of being a shareholder, even for the shares that have not vested yet (this is why startup founders will have voting power from Day 1 even though 0% of their stock has vested yet). That being said you hold GOOG shares and not GOOGL shares (the latter has voting rights) so for all intent and purposes what you describe is accurate for what you see on the surface, despite the underlayers being more subtle.
> Also FYI, your homepage has a 2015 copyright notice on it. No big deal, but thought you might like to know since it could put off particularly "nit picky" types of customer :)

If that's when the work was created, then that's correct. Copyright notices aren't there to tell you what year it is today. They are there to tell you when the work was created. If they change it to 2016 when the work was really created in 2015, then that's an invalid copyright notice and equivalent to no notice at all.
To paraphrase Malcolm Gladwell: the only situation in which you're better off being tried by a jury is when you're actually guilty. If you're innocent, bad luck.
distance in this instance, is your friend. (have you ever looked at a bus stop ad or billboard up close?)
Bitcoin's competition is not Ether, it will be another token built on Ethereum. There is a very high chance that a lot of Ethereum tokens individually will exceed the Ether market cap. Ether's main purpose is securing the Ethereum network and it will be used for staking in PoS and its own valuation will depend on the number of transactions in the network.
I was very confused by the good reviews too, it was literally the exact same story as A New Hope.

I don't hold much hope for the next films.
This article reminds me as a designer how Hacker News (and Reddit) could use a face lift. I have a hard time reading the small text and identify in the listings that what's a link and what's not. :/
Exactly, the tv show Oz by Tom Fontana covers the subject entirely. When Tim McManus tries to build a micro-society to prepare convicted fellows to live in a real society, it shows how it's very hard and that many disciplines such as psychology, sociology, philosophy... are very much needed.
Be warned, this article has only a passing understanding of "system[s] of common law". The odd phraseology I put down to translation, but some of the specific statements are just wrong. I would say this is a wikipedia-level understanding of how systems of legal authority work.

For instance, in common law countries (ie those taking their traditions from the Brits) judges are not in fact obligated to follow rules of precedent. That's the sort of thing that a textbook might say, but the reality is that judges regularly bypass or ignore previous rulings on similar matters. Similarly, in Civil law jurisdictions (those that take traditions from the French) judges regularly rely on past rulings by respected judges. The process may not be formalized, but to say that judges no not regard previous decisions on similar matters is disingenuous. They write. They read each other;s work. They learn and share in much the same way as common law jurisdictions.

Speaking as someone working in common law jurisdictions, I'd say that the primary motivation for a judge to follow a previous ruling by a higher court is not some rule of precedent. Imho they are motivated by the likelihood of their ruling being turned on appeal. That gives them much more room in which to act. That is judicial discretion. That power is why we must respect judges and why they in turn must work to deserve our respect.
New precedents are created all the time. Just look at the US supreme court which is a court with the primary responsibility of establishing case law precedents when lower courts disagree on statue and case law. They recently legalised gay marriage (I'd say good outcome based on bad reasoning, but whatever) and made it impossible for the US states and their courts from blocking gay marriage due to the precedent set as the highest court. Lower courts can now prosecute against states and officials that try to block it. The only thing that could override that ruling at this point is a constitutional amendment.

I don't think we get many courts creating laws on picking strawberries out of season though. There would need to be an existing legal context in which strawberries picking out of season is an edge case that can be decided by case law.
SWERVE – WebGL game made with PlayCanvas
And this is how schizophrenia gets triggered.
I think to focus on the angry ideologues is actually to divert the attention from the real issue, to the extent there is one; namely, that neurotypical humans, whether happy or angry, have a strong, automatic in-group bias. If you are one you can't really stop having an in-group; the best you can do is try to give out-group ideas a fair shake.

Now, this ability appears to be quite rare. I wouldn't be surprised if, worse yet, the kind of personality needed to do it made you less likely to become a journalist. In short, I doubt you could staff a newsroom full of people receptive to out-group ideas. (And if you think that you, yourself, aren't biased this way without very strong evidence for it I would suggest you take an outside view, per https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Outside_view)

Because of all of this I'd appreciate a genuine answer to my question even if I end up disagreeing with it.
I'm actually a bit surprised that there aren't gopro videos of spectacular hikes that go real time step-by-step from start to finish, that one could use as wallpaper. Wouldn't you want to get one from, let's say, climbing Everest? Or mount one on the nose of a locomotive and film a coast-to-coast train journey?
You left out perhaps the most important part: "...in the most cost-effective way possible," where cost includes repeat offenses, taxpayer money, the opportunity cost of lost productivity, destroyed families (multi-generational effects), etc.
Millions more workers will be eligible for overtime pay under new federal rule