skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"altruistic (something like the prime directive)"

Related to the solutions to the Fermi paradox, explanations for why the putatively abundant aliens have not contacted us need to cover all the aliens. And the "Prime Directive" is a very, very, very particular definition of "altruistic". I, for one, don't even agree that it's altruistic. Even Star Trek, where it has basically magical dramatic force severed from real concerns, couldn't really argue consistently that it was altruistic: http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Pen_Pals_(episode)

Why wouldn't there be a species that looks at us, concludes we're ultimately irrelevant, and just converts our solar system into computronium anyhow? Why wouldn't that be the cosmic evolutionary winner?

(They could even altruistically upload us into an equivalent simulation; while I don't particularly "believe" it, my favorite pet solution to the Fermi paradox is that Earth was uploaded an arbitrary amount of time ago and we've just been simulated ever since out of ethical concerns, a simulation which for simplicity and perhaps even ethical reasons has no other civilizations in it. For all we know they actually digitized Earth in the dinosaur era and in realtime it may in fact still be "millions of years ago" if our simulation runs faster than real time.)
Let's do an upper bound, assuming miners are making enough to pay for their electricity (at an extremely low price), but not to pay any of their other costs (cooling, hardware, server operation, profit, etc):

(12.5 * 6) BTC/h * 2000 USD/BTC * (1/0.02) kWh/USD = 7.5 GW

Ok, that is a lot. Energy usage is on the order of a few million Americans. Sorry, I based my first reply on a debunk that doesn't sound accurate!
The critical difference is that even if this statement is (mostly) true that doesn't mean we have adequate solutions available to solve it...

"Think of the children", etc.

A centrally controlled whitelist has as many (or more) risk than a pagerank algorithm. Moral panics about the gatekeeper's blacklist not being all-encompassing is also of questionable value... especially in regards to an event in the very early hours of a high-traffic news story which are generally full of incomplete information.
> If you rent a room from Trump, it matters a lot whether you pay the VAT for the concrete or Trump does. And you're the one who ultimately pays. Trump pays and reclaims. You don't get to reclaim.

Who pays the tax has nothing to do with who can reclaim what.

Suppose Trump has a local real estate monopoly. Then rents are high and the surplus is going to Trump. Any tax paid by anyone is really paid by Trump, because if it was "paid" by the tenants and Trump didn't lower rents by the same amount to compensate, the tenants would move out of the city because the rental cost would exceed the value of the real estate.

Now suppose the local real estate market is highly competitive. The rents are low and the surplus is going to tenants. Any tax paid by anyone is really paid by the tenants, because if it was "paid" by the landlords and they didn't raise rents by the same amount to compensate, the rents wouldn't be enough to cover costs.

Taxes are always paid out of surplus. Whoever would otherwise be getting the surplus is the one really paying the tax. If part of the surplus was going to landlords and part to tenants, they would each be paying part of the tax.

Now notice what happens with VAT. If Trump has a monopoly then he pays $100 in construction and the tenant pays $500 to rent, and VAT is owed on $500. If Trump is in a competitive market then he pays $100 in construction and the tenant pays $120 to rent, and VAT is owed on $120 even though the rental was worth $500 to the tenant, and the tenant gets to keep the $380 difference untaxed. So who pays VAT and who doesn't? It isn't collected on the surplus going to the buyer.
Preach it, brother. I bitterly regret my MacBook purchase for exactly the same reasons
I remember the endless IBM vs. SCO lawsuit discussions.
In this day and age of FUD, what are the odds that said open source software has a vulnerability or malicious code inserted by some state actor (ours included)?
Introducing AragonOS: Say hi to modular and extendable organizations
> users would have a better experience if the mouse was wireless

Where 'better experience' is defined as 'not having a mouse until it charges back up'?
And leave the old hint sitting on your drive as “\x00ld-password”? No thanks.
Oddly Sierra has been the easiest MacOS upgrade I've ever had. Barely noticed it other than having to rerun xcode-select --install; even some of the obscurer libraries I'd installed are still working. (I haven't moved to High Sierra yet.)
Just throwing this out there, but do you trust yourself to be capable of protecting your best interests? The prisoner's dilemma is a pretty clear example where people "looking out for their own" ends up causing everyone to shoot themselves​ in the foot.

There just a lot of situations where we are all individually better off by acting counter to our personal interests. Traffic congestion is a great, uncontroversial example I was just discussing in another thread. Lots of traffic problems come about because everyone is just trying to get home quickly without thinking of entire city's optimal traffic flow. If we all worked to maximize city traffic throughput instead of just getting where we want to go, we would actually end up getting home faster most of the time.

However, it's not really reasonable to expect this of each other, so naively, we want a way to "hack the prisoner's dilemma". We want to make the selfish decision somehow correspond to the globally optimal decision. We want cleverly designed roads and traffic flow control. Unfortunately, it takes a lot of work to identify where such hacks are needed, even more so figuring out how to implement them well.

My view of government's (ideal) role is to take on this "policy hacking" role. We want something to magically make Pareto Optima to also be a win situation for everybody. However, making policy is also part of the game, so there are hacks (e.g. the Constitution, etc.) in place to try and make people's personal interests align with making good policy.

It's hacks all the way down.

Sure, the system is buggy and runs on an old, crufty, legacy BIOS from the 1700s with a giant mess of spaghetti code hacks on top, but we're probably better off trying to fix this system's bugs than having to revert to Eniac and anarchy. Maybe we could do a rewrite??
I'm still in the prototyping phase, and juggling it between work and another side project. I have a decent understanding of the stack I will need. I have feed parsing and HTML/XML stripping in place, currently I'm comparing auto-tagging libraries and seeing if any of them meets all of my needs.

If you're interested in bouncing around ideas and possibly contributing at some point (I plan to open source after the research and legwork is done), let me know.
FWIW there's a lot of things Chrome won't do properly out of the box (fonts, emojis'... more). Most projects like this will work for _most_ of the web, but there's a lot of nuance in getting it working across the board. This is something I've been working on for quite some time: https://browserless.io
His page (http) -> MITM -> page you get with another public key

You write him something -> he doesn't read.

You write him -> emails is intercepted -> he doesn't read it but who intercepted the email reads.

So his computer is never compromised. But his email server (some provider) is.
I have one on my desk. It's the biggest non-issue ever. Do you ever need to go to the bathroom? Or get up and get a drink of water? Plug it in, and by the time you come back, you have enough charge to last you the rest of the day. Remember to plug it in overnight, and you've got at least a month of charge. It's just a ridiculous complaint that it can't be used while plugged in. It's a wireless mouse - why would you want it to have a wire?
No, they were one of the first projects on Ethereum back when Ethereum launched in 2015.
I have little problem with the reality that automation is taking away jobs machines are better at. We know machines build cars on an assembly line better than humans.

But generally, old jobs going away make room for new jobs coming in. And it seems to me like we have a whole mountain of new potential jobs in the content curation and moderation area. We see time and time again that this is something machines are not better at, but unfortunately, companies are very resistant to realizing their approach is inadequate.

I feel this is largely because they have no reason to. Due to a couple of laws, Internet platforms are largely not liable for these sorts of things, so they have no incentive to hire people and/or do a better job.
I have trouble believing there's more than a handful of spacefaring species per galaxy. Even without FTL travel, one species could fill up all of the habitable planets in a galaxy the size of ours in a few million years or less, thanks to the fact that we breed exponentially. And there's been Sun-like stars for a while now in our galaxy, presumably with Earth-like planets orbiting them. So it's a matter of getting there first.
If you just center it it would be perfect actually because it would be very readable.
> Does DataGrip let you do Kerberos authentication?

It allows you to manually specify every authentication parameter if you wish to, but the simple login page only supports password or client-cert auth.
I learned about Slashdot from a screenshot demoing the Enlightenment VM.
Hey Jerry2.

From the tone you're using and the things you're saying it looks like you're lost and are looking for Reddit.

I have no interest in taking your comment seriously and reply to your accusation that I am not writing this comment from a MacBook Pro.
Even robot spaceships are unlikely to make it very far (on the scale of the galaxy) before suffering a critical failure.

That seems like a limited vision of the possibilities of spaceships. Remember that we're now traveling through space ourselves, and barring self-inflicted problems, we're not in great danger of suffering critical failure.
Yeah, I'll believe it when I see it. Every president since Bush said something to this effect. My eyebrows will raise when NASAs budget does.
Yeah, that's where I've seen it as well. Unfortunately it's intermittent (which is probably why it's still just a known issue).
I’m sure the approach to dealing with this will be some variation of restorative justice instead of a public pillory and termination of an entire team like Steve did to the MobileMe Team.
Okay... can somebody spoof/re-spin the relevant xkcd? https://xkcd.com/538/
> To make this statement is akin to saying that the opinion of experts is useless.

That's not at all what I'm saying - absolutely, look at the opinions of experts, just don't expect a news service to present all the ideal experts to you in one place. Go out and seek those experts on your own and verify who you think is credible and where their existing biases are.
One controversy that has settled into the foundations of math was over what it means to use infinite sets, and comparing their cardinalities. I was unsettled when I first encountered Cantor's diagonal argument to prove the reals are larger than the rationals, for example. Up until that point, infinite things were still just a kind of "and so on" instead of actual things.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversy_over_Cantor%27s_th...
It is useful. I'm focusing on the effect on code generation: the compiler relies on that rule to deduce that x and y are not null. The special case for n==0 makes it harder for the compiler to deduce the non-null-ness and thus harder for it to optimise based on that. Restricting when optimisations can be applied is the effect of your special case.

You might not agree with this as a design decision but I'm not arguing that this is the right trade-off, just answering:

> I don't think your optimization actually exists. In what possible world can we generate better code by assuming that for memcpy(x,y,n), when n==0, x!=nullptr||y!=nullptr?
(Not to say that Chrome users shouldn’t feel good about themselves for other reasons, just not their browser’s html5test score)
On any issue not directly related to the divorce of the founders, it absolutely is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Free_Europe

Would you say this is propaganda?
Google Cloud Computer Engine VMs now up to 96 vCPUs and 624GB of Memory
I'm not saying it's an issue, I'm saying that it costs between 5-10 times more than other mice.

One would expect a little more thought would go into designing it.
Sounds great, but there is slim chance of finding them, and even if we do, they will be too far away. We should instead prepare to meet the artificial intelligences of tomorrow, which are a sure bet. It will be like Lee Sedol trying to understand AlphaGo, not like the linguist professor from the movie Arrival trying to understand Alien language.
A better test description would use a more password-like value for P (say ‘tqbfjoald’) and a more hint-like value for H (‘quick and brown’), decreasing that risk.

Maybe I expect too much, but a tester with any experience is going to use strings like "thePassword" and "theHint" to reduce those brain farts. One doesn't have to test software very long before discovering why using "test", "test" as the respective strings for that dialog will bite you.

I agree with your hypothesis, but it's one of those mistakes I'd expect out of a fresh-out-of-college person, and I would expect those folks to be testing, say, TextEdit and not security-sensitive pieces. But there are so many unknowns that I still reserve judgement. I'd just like to know what piece of the process broke down such that something like this gets out the door.
> "turbo" lets you boost briefly to speeds that will cause the chip to overheat if run long enough. Their idea to manage this was to play hot potato with which core gets baked. As soon as it reaches critical temperatures, they turbo up another core and the OS migrates threads.

This is not an accurate description of how turbo works. You don't have to migrate away from a core and switch to another.

Turbo simply recognizes that if you have a multi-core processor, and many of the cores stay asleep and don't contribute to power and thermal demands, then the remaining cores can take up the slack. The more cores stay asleep, the faster the remainder can go.
Neither of them would be considered "Media Outlets" since they don't employ reporters or an editorial board. You are overreacting because it's not Google or Facebook pushing bad content on you - it's you choosing to believe it at face value. And by "you" I mean "the collective you" - everyone has a responsibility to determine if the information they've received is correct or not. If you cannot verify it - don't believe it. If there aren't multiple sources claiming the same thing, it's probably an opinion.

To "fix" this, we either need to reduce the allowed error rate, or enforce a disclaimer which states something like "This information is collected automatically by a program. No human reviews this, so please do your own research."
"neutrinos and gravity waves (which are much harder to produce but much better suited to interstellar distances)."

No, they aren't. Both are freakishly difficult to detect, and we have no reason at this point to expect that to ever change. And gravity waves are actually terrible for interstellar distances because it is completely unclear how you would produce a source of gravity waves powerful enough to transmit across interstellar distances, and also transmit in a beam. If you can't transmit in a beam, you're stuck with very unfavorable dropoffs as distance increases.

It is also unclear why, having built the utterly massive complexes for transmission or detection of gravity waves, or the massive complexes required for high-probability neutrino reception (transmission in their case is a bit simpler, though collimating the beam is rough) it would not simply be easier to use electromagnetic waves, which are by comparison so easy that if we had a receiver in another star system we could transmit to them today.

Barring some major revelation in physics, aliens will use electromagnetic waves because everything else is literally (and I mean that in its original correct sense) dozens of orders of magnitude worse. Smart aliens do not demonstrate how much smarter they are than us by using engineering solutions dozens of orders magnitude inferior to what we could build today. However, as my previous text implies and as other commenters have already pointed out, the problem there is that efficiency is obtained at that scale with beams, not broad transmission. The galaxy could be hopping with point-to-point links and they would be much harder for us to notice.

(They wouldn't be impossible, because there would be some scattering on the interstellar medium. But they'd be much more difficult than if we were directly the target.)
Well the Pentium chip itself was a Russian design so why not use their AV - https://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/06/07/intel_uses_russia_m...
If that were true, why aren't sharks the most intelligent beings on the planet? They've been around in more-or-less their current form since the dinosaurs were around.

Intelligence (as far as we know) requires a brain, which requires a lot of calories to work correctly. Increasing calorie intake requirements is not something that survival-selecting evolution would select for.

Evolution selects for survival, not intelligence. Sharks and other animals have survived very well for millions of years without ever developing a higher level of intelligence. If anything, intelligence seems like it might be a happy mistake of evolution, and potentially very rare since evolution doesn't select for it explicitly.
Show HN: A bot that teaches you how to invest in crypto
In case the site is down, here's a mirror http://www.invitinghome.com/Mirrors/img/mirror-1534.jpg
Oh, the emoji bar laptop? Yeah. I tried one of those when they showed up in the stores and the keyboard is pathetic. Ended up switching to a Thinkpad (should have done it years ago).
You are not starting over every 2-4 years. A lot of what you learned is reusable, those frameworks resemble each other great deal. Even with changing languages, it is hard only when you are changing paradigm (procedural to object to functional). Things like syntax take less effort to pick up and re-learn. Algorithms, debugging and structuring of code and similar meta skills remain. Moreover, you dont have to chase every fad. They come and go and it is perfectly ok to skip some of them. Focus on things that you need or that promise longevity. Nobody cares now that I skipped COM+ years ago, nobody cares that I skipped browser differences or ruby just a few years ago and nobody will care that I am ignoring angular and python now.

I did jumped into established projects using libraries/frameworks I was not at all familiar with and liked it. Thankfully companies here are willing to hire like that. It is period when they literally pay you for learning on the job. That is awesome, it is hard to ask for more.
Pretty sure the ccontents of the container this Dockerfile will build isn't legal, given MSML Server is commercially licensed software. Use with extreme caution, and I would certainly not use it in production.

Also see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15407910
Blockchain Driven P2P Lending and Investment Platform Announces Crowdsale
Erhm, you click on the link? Every page on 4chan contains the following disclaimer at the top: "The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact".

If you want real fake news, Google any semi-obscure health issue. You'll be lucky to find one or two .gov's among sketchy sites peddling homeopoathic cures.
I would pay _more_ for a Linux laptop than a Mac if I _had_ to. It is a matter of taste and also what you are used to. I have the choice not to use KDE and Gnome and choose xmonad instead. Macs are horrible for many of those that are not used to them.
Clone, rebrand and remarket it, using the battle-tested tech of the first community?
Not just exporting though. I've seen automated systems that attempt to import csv files directly through SQL Server, and it would always break at quoted fields and fields with newlines. And nobody could figure out why it broke all the time, and fields would be out of order or shifted or missing.

I wasn't able to convince people to fix it but I ended up writing a Go utility to reliably import/export csv into sql server using Bulk Insert for my own use (and sanity). And it ended up being faster than other methods to boot.
How to properly install it on Xenial? When I go to how-to link[0] it still shows instructions for 9.6.

[0] https://www.postgresql.org/download/linux/ubuntu/
I honestly agree that ArsTechnica has lost something since Jon quit (or he quit because the writing was on the door).

And not as much the politics, as the feeling that the site has become more "partisan" in the tech world.
With so many people wanting to abuse our social media profiles, it only makes sense to use fake accounts.

That way our "real" one looks OK to our employers, parents, acquaintances, etc. Our fake profiles can have all of what we actually think.
pdx is certainly not the only one. Many of us who consider the entirety of Western Media to be a wholly controlled narrative fabrication oligopoly simply keep our mouths shut about it.
I always feel I'm alone in this world. Erlang syntax is short and way easier to read compare to Elixir(due to its close to Ruby).
You are understating and giving a pass for the real issue at hand - a lack of ability to think critically by a large portion of our population. Let's assume for argument's sake that Google News and Facebook shut down their feeds tomorrow - can you tell me with confidence that another one won't mushroom up and take its place or that people won't switch to "dark" networks - Whatsapp, Messenger, Email and what not?

I'm not absolving Google and Facebook. There are more trustworthy places to get your news and information. Why do you think people flock to less reliable sources? Unless that's solved, democracy and with it culture and progress as we know it is destined to be doomed.
Look for correlations that come from disparate sources. That's how I verify stuff that happens in Sweden.
Majority of meetings are not merit driven discussions.
there is an option to get Celsius. click on the gear icon on the weather app or on it. itll show the options. genius
I have the _exact_ same story. Parents thought I was reasonably smart so while the school starts teaching reading at 6 or 7 years old they tried to have me learn it earlier but I was extremely opposed to it since I didn't want to have nothing to do in school (and I thought that was all you'd learn there - which I guess is sort of true :^)
Or let any third party [view a photo | talk to you on the phone | listen to a voice memo ] with everybody else in the room. We already have answers to those "worth it" questions, largely.

The more important question is whether a third party can use that data to cause you harm, and if that's a concern, I'm afraid the only real solution is to limit your ability to be included in that data.
If there are a "handful," then there are probably 0 (besides us). You have to believe that there's a very narrow range of values to get precisely to a handful.

Like, the range quoted above is from "10,000 to a few million," so a factor of 200ish from high to low range.

If you think that there are 10, per galaxy, why don't you believe instead that there are 0.3 per galaxy (only off by a factor of 30?)? How much confidence can you have in your highly speculative variables that your output can be constrained down to just a single order of magnitude or so?
Russian intelligence reportedly breached the NSA, stole cybersecurity strategy
Clive Owen is thinking about thinking for this new SAP commercial