skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't even understand what point you are trying to make (aside from telling me that you hate me) as it is totally unrelated to my previous comment.

Do you have anything substantial to add? Again, 1.1 million refugees registered, only 467.xxx of them submitted an asylum request and on top of that there's a large number of refugees that are not even registered.

Therefore the 60% figure cannot be correct for anyone who is able to calculate properly.

Edit: Sorry can't create a comment to reply, that's why I'll reply here again to madaxe_again:

There is no need for you to appeal to my emotions, I'm interested in facts here. And yes, the default should be and always is "I don't believe you" because you have to prove that you are really a refugee whose life is under threat in his home country.

Right wing and nationalistic parties are on the rise in Europe precisely because the current governments are waving these kinds of statistics around that clearly give a false impression of the situation instead of telling the truth.

They wilfully ignore our own laws and not just enforce an open border policy but even invite everyone who'd like to come like Merkel did in 2015 with the rationale that it is not possible to stop this migration, while Hungary and Macedonia were perfectly capable to do it by constructing a fence and controlling the border.

And then they also had the gut to tell us that these migrants are comparable or in case of Syrians even better educated than our population and that's why we'll prosper from these migrants. After a year statistics then showed that the majority couldn't even read. This must be a sick joke, who comes up with this stuff?

I don't like getting lied to. As long as this lying doesn't stop the right wing will continue to rise and at some point the EU will collapse.
I know I'll get napalmed for saying this, but why is this all over HN? Why are people obsessed with cryptocurrencies?

It's bad enough that those with sufficient computing speed/power can already rip off the stock market; why does the world need another way for people to rip each other off?

Since we've determined over history that some people will take advantage of weakness for their own gain, no matter what system you create to transfer goods, resources, services or value representing those, it will be exploited. So- why even spend time on it?

If everyone who cares to maintains their own accounting data does so, regardless of what technologies we are using, we really could just trade in goods, services, and coin and completely get rid of all virtual currency. Investments could go back to literally to providing coins, goods, resources, or services to those that we'd like to support possibly in exchange for reciprocity.

Since that won't happen right away,
if you really want to secure your financial future, major S&P 500 index tracking funds have been one of the smartest things over its history to invest in: http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=%5EGSPC+Interactive#symbo...

While some of you made money on bitcoin, many lost. Now the same game has been played again with people believing that someone can write code to replace our currency system and if they get in early enough, they'll be kings or queens. Well- again, it didn't happen. What really is to gain from this fantasy world of cryptocurrencies? It is harming more than it is helping, from what I see.

And if you downvote this, tell me why, otherwise I'll just assume you are with those that want to exploit me and others.
Why Facebook is so addictive – A simple scientific fact
As a credit card holder they still send you a physical card, I don't think than anyone is waving that if you say you have an Iphone.

If you lose your phone you just fall back to the physical card that you presumably have in your wallet somewhere.
> I know I'll get napalmed for saying this, but why is this all over HN?

Because the DAO's failure is interesting.
> I just find it bewildering to even imagine how any of this stuff would be interpreted by lawyers.

Agreed, and that's essentially what we're seeing here, some kind of rough equivalent between lawywers hacking human language and programmers hacking code. A 'smart' lawyer is equivalent to a hacker, finding a loophole in the law to enforce some novel interpretation of the letter rather than the intent of the law.

Trying to do an end-run around a whole bunch of established systems all to end up with re-inventing the exact problems of those systems that you were trying to get away from in the first place, it's kind of funny.
But it's trivial to prove that it was the attacker, they can just sign this message with the public key used for the transaction.
Seems to be retaliation for this: http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-international/obamad...
What's your take on the camps in France [0] filled with migrants trying to get to Britain? Which wars in France are they fleeing?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calais_Jungle
>It seems to me that these alternatives ... all compete poorly with the "tap my phone to pay" offerings.

I don't always carry my phone. A credit card requires no power supply either.

Of course cash is preferable to both.
"employment numbers?? you should be in school for the pursuit of knowledge no matter what your socioeconomic situation happened to be, this clearly applies to everyone"

I'm on a roll today
Refueling, according to Elon, is about 200k.
Yes but China is not the UK and I don't think this is the only place in china without planning permission.

That's not how 3rd world countries work (I know because I live in one...)
Love the photos! Could you share info on what gear you used?
Can anyone comment on the CPU requirements for such a system? (either this one or AlphaGo)
How many commutative CPU/GPU hrs are required to get to here?
But forking is a consensus decision of miners on the chain. Nothing to do with the DAO or its implicit or explicit terms. By that logic I can write a contract that dictates future behaviour of anyone choosing to mine this particular block chain.
Most applicants from Afghanistan are not granted asylum at the moment. The problem is that Afghanistan isn't willing to take them back.

Also it isn't like everyone from Iraq is given asylum.

Oh and btw - NGOs in Europe are actively teaching prospective asylum seekers to say they are from Syria. Most of them do not even speak Arabic.

Edit: reply to comment below:

Please see this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=11928413

"More than half of those fleeing to Europe from the Middle East and Africa are economic migrants and not asylum seekers fleeing the horrors of war in Iraq or Syria, according to first vice-president of the European Commission, Frans Timmermans.
Do you have a better term for young, white, arrogant, entitled young men?
Maybe rather than forcing people to cross the sea, we could send money directly in the first place.
I liked the story of Emma Zunz as a grieving daughter. The Garden of Forking Paths is clever and cited as an important work on possible worlds and predestination.

Further coverage of the 30 year anniversary of Borges' passing here:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-36516216
Please, don't let this site turn into reddit. Comments like this add no value to the discussion.
Don't be stupid vs. don't be stupidist?
The article is - sadly - a lie. There's an idealisation of productivity, which has somehow become correlated with IQ. (Even though in practice the relationship between IQ and productivity is subtle and context-dependent.)

Most of US culture has absolutely zero interest in clever people unless they're also making money and/or running a business. There is no situation where IQ and abstract intellectual output are valued purely for their own sake and not for their financial productivity - not even academia.

Which means the real problem is the way that "business" has become the de facto state religion - in the sense of being the ultimate moral arbiter of personal value and the one true absolute definition of how "good" people are recognised.

Hard work and money. Or money at least.

Trump's success is based on a weird identification - the belief that Trump represents the interests of the 99% because he's a non-intellectual plain speaker who says what he means and means what he says using language that everyone can understand.

That makes him "one of us" to many people, even though of course he's nothing of the sort.
>Now the same game has been played again with people believing that someone can write code to replace our currency system and if they get in early enough, they'll be kings or queens.

Is that all you see?

Decentralized currencies, ethereum and DAOs are fascinating from a technological standpoint. This is major news in the field of smart contracts, which are related to both programming and technology. How could this not be posted here?
Let's not cherry pick. I'm talking about menu items overall.
I agree with your analysis there.

But my point was the patent trolling exists because the law is unfavourable. Not because there is a system of mediation in place. If the patent system should be abolished or not doesn't really relate to how inconsistencies in contracts are handled, as far as I can see?
So we should just stick to our current currency system forever? Why even bother trying to invent new things if they fail sometimes?
I tend to agree with the letter. I'd probably feel differently if I was a DAO token holder, but I think forking the blockchain would be a severe compromise of the principles laid out by Ethereum and the DAO: the code is the contract.

Just like it was unethical for the banks to get bailed out from bad, risky mortgage-backed securities, it's unethical for the DAO to get bailed out for writing bad, risky code.
What specific aspect of blockchain technology?

It's slowness?

The transparency of the consolidated order book?

I place orders on Counterparty a lot, which offers a decentralized asset exchange that settles to the bitcoin blockchain. It would be nice settle stock trades on something like that, slow, too slow, but it would be a nice option.
> Why are people obsessed with cryptocurrencies?

Because they are interesting in a theoretical way and because real world implementations are even more interesting, they show us what the future might look like.

> It's bad enough that those with sufficient computing speed/power can already rip off the stock market; why does the world need another way for people to rip each other off?

That's not the intent.

> Since we've determined over history that some people will take advantage of weaknesses for their own gain, we should assume that as a given until proven otherwise.

Agreed.

> No matter what system you create to transfer goods, resources, services or value representing those, it will be exploited.

That remains to be seen. There is an outside chance that it is possible to create something solid, my guess is that it will have to be something extremely simple.

> So- why even spend time on it?

Just like it took a while to map the globe, mapping this 'space' takes time - and effort - and funds. I'm fine with it, it isn't my time, my effort or my funds and I end up learning just as much as those that put forward their resources. Think of it as free education on someone else's dime. That's a pretty cynical view but to date I have not seen any system that appears to be solid enough to warrant backing.

> If everyone who cares to maintains their own accounting data does so, regardless of what technologies we are using, we really could just trade in goods, services, and coin and completely get rid of all virtual currency.

That would severely limit the amount and kinds of trade possible. On the other hand, a really strong cryptocurrency has risks all its own and it is worthwhile to consider the downsides with the upsides.
NASA Uses Node.js in Space Suits – Director of Software Engineering Confirms
I couldn't agree more with this sentiment. I haven't spent too much time on Ethereum contracts but this is such a ridiculous language/platform design issue.
so, the DAO contract is the only authority, and everything is on the blockchain, except when the collective decides it's not? you say "nothing changes", but something obviously would - "the attacker" would lose their money. and not because any smart contract decided so, but rather >1/2 of the involved participants.

of course, he's a thief and should not get the money, but maybe the DAO was flying a bit too high too quickly.
> "Being able to move all the way to Germany, Denmark or Sweden isn't exactly being fleeing war anymore."

> That is because of how international travel works.

Refugees fleeing from war are forced to travel through the entire European continent to the northern countries with the most beneficial social security because of how international travel works?

> "60% according to some are migrants not refugees."

> Do you have any references for that statement?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/12123684...
Couldn't one just simply open an office in Canada and operate for a year before transferring the company to the US?

Would that work under the L1 requirements?
I don't think Facebook is wrong.

It just so happens that video works better on Facebook (and probably other social networks), where the stream of information is huge. People, most of them anyway, suck at describing things. Most of them can snap a picture of something nice, exciting, cute, whatever. Not everyone is writer, nor should one be to share some everyday thing.

Text has it's uses. It's just that other mediums usually tend to work better on Facebook.

And that's fine.
Renunciation is defined with reference to your mental attitude towards possessions, not the presence or absence thereof. See, for example the 'Royal Sage' (Raja Rshi).
Wow. Those are the most beautiful slums I've ever seen. Thanks for sharing!
It's funny that you mention crtitical thinking when working with data. this data reports country of origin. Now make that critical thiught work please, and tell me why these refugees insist on goingfrom the safe Turkey to Germany?
According to first vice-president of the European Commission, citing some internal report from the Frontex (EU border agency), 60% are economic migrants.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/most-fleeing-to...
Seeking Answers in Space for Accurate Emissions Data
It's the proverbial rock-and-a-hard-place dilemma. Stick to the contract and the original description: lose the funds. Fork and change how ethereum works and you've proven conclusively to all participants that a power grab is possible and that the contracts are all subject to future novel interpretation.

DAO -> DOA either way.
History rewritten once again...

Apple's fse implementation is based on an open-source work from an individual which predates lzfse by about ~20 months.

https://github.com/Cyan4973/FiniteStateEntropy

It's even less optimized than the original one, due to a few errors that slipped through during lzfse conception.

http://encode.ru/threads/2221-LZFSE-New-Apple-Data-Compressi...
SMART CITIES NEED SMART CITIZENS – Fab Lab BCN
So, this review makes me wonder: Will the hard fork of the ethereum blockchain be of any use at all? The DAO appears to be fundamentally flawed, are all the coins there simply lost? What prevents an attacker from exploiting the DAO after the hard fork? Or will they simply invalidate all the transactions that went to the address of the DAO?
Direct link:	https://github.com/GitAlias/gitalias
The rhetoric of the letter falls flat to me.

It misses the point that the "contract" is also code, and contained a legitimate bug. Exploitation of that bug in most places would be a crime.

If I figure out that an ATM spits out hundred dollar bills every time I type in a certain pin, that's a crime. I don't get to make the claim that I was rightfully using the ATM.

The quote that "The DAO’s code controls and sets forth all terms of The DAO Creation" is a disclaimer that is meant to protect the DAO from those who would seek to imply some sort of guarantee or warranty from the organization. In other words if the attacker makes off with the funds, and the DAO decides to keep the code as is, then as an investor I have no recourse against the DAO.

Ultimately the letter misses the main point. The DAO token holders are free to amend the contract code as they see fit thru consensus. The disclaimer never states the contract can't change. And even if it did, the idea that their would be some legal recourse for the attacker, should the community decide to fork, is hilarious.

So the letter comes across to me as something an immature troller would write. I'd be suprised if most sophisticated DAO token holders took it seriously.
People are trying to flee to somewhere familiar, be it because of language or brand presence. Additionally, many report they want to join family (cousins etc) already in the uk through legal means. I'm sure there are charlatans among them - but we are enacting collective punishment currently, which was largely abolished centuries ago.

What's your take on the 3000 refugee a year limit the uk is working to? (20,000 by 2020)
Here's my evidence that Rule 611 is more about protecting resting limit orders than marketable orders:

1. It's called the "Order Protection Rule".

2. It defines "protected quotations" and makes it illegal to trade through them.

3. It doesn't just apply to agency trading (where you could argue that it's meant to protect the client); it's also applicable to principal trades.

4. There's no allowance for trading off fees or latency or probability of getting a fill against price. For example, you can't choose buy immediately at $10.01 on Nasdaq instead of waiting for a 30ms round trip from Chicago at $10.00, because it's the quote on Chicago that's being protected, not you.

5. If you send an ISO order to an exchange (which basically says "don't route this elsewhere even if you see a better quote"), and it turns out that you traded through a quote somewhere, the SEC will fine you, because they're protecting that other quote, not your marketable order.

6. This quote from the SEC: "Many commenters on
the proposals ... strongly supported the need for enhanced protection of limit orders against trade-throughs. They emphasized that limit orders are the building blocks of public price discovery and efficient markets. ... by enhancing protection of displayed prices, would encourage greater use of
limit orders and contribute to increased market liquidity and depth. The Commission agrees that
strengthened protection of displayed limit orders would help reward market participants for
displaying their trading interest and thereby promote fairer and more vigorous competition
among orders seeking to supply liquidity." [1]

[1] https://www.sec.gov/rules/final/34-51808.pdf
I imagine they sent the cease and desist letters to any prominent personality with stake in DAO that publicly advocated forking. They might try to sue shareholders for inciting other shareholders to breach contract.

What makes it weird is that they can't just buy back the shares, because that wasn't in the contract. They have to convince the body controlling the currency, which backs the issued shares, to essentially invalidate and reprint a pallet of virtual cash.

Although the DAO shareholders don't necessarily have to participate in the fork for it to succeed, publicly advocating a fork, before the fork, in order to nullify a contract seems like it could be considered a breach of contract.
Google and Facebook provide tools to help people implement their dreams. For example, our nonprofit heavily relies on Google's services (email, drive, sheets)for everything. In fact, sheets doubles as a database that can be used for all sorts of functionalities without needing to learn how to code. My point is that tools that help other companies in their journey to innovate can make a real difference. I realized this only when we were in Nigeria setting up the entire program. I am much less convinced bout Facebook of course but I imagine it helps new businesses with an avenue to get a lot of early revenue. Substitutes, at least for Google products for me seem much less functional in comparison and would probably require an equal # of engineers.

I have no stock in Google or Facebook and don't benefit by promoting either in any way. I just genuinely appreciate what Google's tools has allowed us to do (linked spreadsheets, email, docs, Android, Chromebook, drive and search of course!). I don't care much for fb but I imagine there are businesses that wouldn't survive w/o it and whatsapp is amazing at bringing ppl closer.
Let me get this straight: You are saying that if the attacker has to resort to taking me to court to prevent me from forking, the DAO is dead?

I beg to differ. If those events come to pass, the DAO will be far from dead!
So all this hoo-ha is really just because of a capitalised "T"? If the code were fixed, is the DAO model still valid in the real world?

(I'm a cryptocurrency noob... Some of technical stuff just went over my head)
I agree that greed is a world wide problem.
But even when we trade in goods services and coins it doesn't change the fact that a lot of people are greedy.

This is on HN because this story is interesting from a technical point of view.
Even though I disagree with some of your conclusions, I personally have no problem with your comment except for the very first and very last sentences. I generally downvote people who complain about submissions or about their comments being downvoted, which I view as unproductive.
Society historically confusing religious convictions with human worth is somehow becoming worse by confusing intelligence with human worth. Fascinating case of rationalization.
Bored computer scientists: analyze contracts that are less popular but still have money attached to them and see if you can locate a bug. Apparently you can get the money legally and the only way to stop you is to hard fork the entire currency.
Nordic countries have very high taxes("taking away one's fruits of labor"), and manage to do well.
In some parts of America, if the taxes for the property go unpaid for long enough, an interested party can start paying taxes and improve the property to gain legal ownership. This is effectively a formal method of squatting called "adverse possession".
According to the Article 26 of the document I posted above, "each Contracting State shall accord to refugees lawfully in its territory the right to choose their place of residence to move freely within its territory, subject to any regulations applicable to aliens generally in the same circumstances."; according to the second point of the Article 31 of that same document, "the Contracting States shall not apply to the movements of such refugees restrictions other than those which are necessary and such restrictions shall only be applied until their status in the country is regularized or they obtain admission into another country. The Contracting States shall allow such refugees a reasonable period and all the necessary facilities to obtain admission into another country."
Take has many shades of meaning. "We take AmEx" means "We accept American Express card if you wish to pay that way." It doesn't mean that if I see an AmEx card I grab it.

If it helps, feel free to interpret my use of "taking" as short for "taking in", with meaning of "to admit; receive".
> There's no law to stop the Ethereum Foundation from changing their software protocol in arbitrary ways.

tortious interference with a contract.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference