skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is what ICOs have recently enabled. It's not insane, in fact it's already happening.

VC investing has traditionally been a good ol' boy club, but I think that will change. Openings up investing to everyone will provide more people with an opportunity to prosper.
Unfortunately people are really bad at assessing scale, so they forget that there are always going to be people who "have to" do this kind of job. Always. The goal should be to give people the choices to not end up this way. It is extremely harsh. But life is harsh. We should do what we can as a people to push equality of opportunity, but if we look for equality of outcome, we're just burying our heads in the sand re: the harshness of the world.
> Unlike ARPANET, PLATO was not designed to be a seed that sprouted into a tree of networked computing. Rather, it was a single branch that grew in the wrong direction, and subsequently withered.

I'd disagree to an extent, as multiple PLATO sites, each with its own CDC mainframe host, were networked with one another. The point stands that the terminals-into-mainframes paradigm persisted, but almost anything that would have been on ARPAnet in that era would have been a large (VAX-class or bigger) system save for the lucky few with Sun workstations.

I was at UIUC in the mid-1980s, and I thought it odd that PLATO and ARPAnet were isolated from one another. Usenet was available via the "notes" client that mimicked PLATO notes in style, but was never linked to PLATO. I guess it didn't help that PLATO lived in the CDC mainframe world and spoke neither ASCII nor EBCDIC.

Online networked discussion forums, online chat, even MMOs existed on PLATO decades ago, and not integrating it with ARPAnet was a huge wasted opportunity.
"fast lanes" is just a euphemism for throttling. It's still a protection racket.
Has any company in history taken "inspiration" from it's competitors name and then supplanted them? "YouNow" just sounds like a typical YouTube-Without-The-Google type of app.
What are your thoughts re: Stellar? I'd personally rather see them succeed than Ripple.
I'd caveat this by saying that corrupt democrats do exist; not every democrat is pure and truthful. Far from it, a good swathe of them are likely just politicians with their own self interest. The left is very much not sunshine and rainbows.

However, you are correct in noting that the parent commenter desperately wants to paint both sides as biased, guilty, and debased, in order to excuse the wrongdoings of the cause he fervently supports.

"If I can convince myself that everyone did what we did, then there's nothing wrong if we continue to do it!"

Ah, projection; the mark of the politically insecure.
Late response, but figured I'd mention that we have new variables now that we didn't always. Pitch FX, fielder location, etc. Not that it makes a huge different, but playing daily and averaging out over time, it can really affect matchups (again, over a large enough sample size).
The Guardian is the only British newspaper that genuinely makes me laugh. Every now and then it gets so tied up in knots with its internal contradictions that it intellectually implodes.

Corbyn's been the main cause of that recently. Even the leftie journalists were starting to get a bit twitchy that he might actually do something leftie.

As I'm writing this, the UK edition is leading with Prince Harry marrying (presumably republicans can like royals). It's running alongside an opinion piece stating that the marriage will change Britain's relationship with race forever. Not entirely clear why other than there has to be a gender/sexuality/race angle (just because). So that story's shaping up nicely.
Counter-conjecture based the anecdata I observe around me: Most people that a) live in a country which doesn't have English as the major language and b) work in a professional field (IT, many fields of science) or have an interest (lot of niches) that primarily publish/communicate in English regularly search in different languages.
Yeah, it's more like body composition than 'weight loss', most people want more muscle / less fat, and then eat a diet that produces more fat and less muscle.

People act as if Arnold got his body by once accidentally picking up a barbell, then eat a bunch of food that immediately gets converted into fat and wonder why running on a treadmill to destroy their muscle & eating sugar to produce fat isn't giving them the results they want.
Ah, yeah I was thinking more generally than VR. The R&D efforts at Oculus to reduce latency from GPU to viewport indicate that network rendering isn't going to work unless you anticipate and buffer the set of every frame the user could possibly require shortly ahead of time; technically possible for low-fidelity graphics I guess but very inefficient (although now that I'm thinking about it you would have to include all possible states of all non-static game assets as well, which creates a combinatorial explosion; I don't see how it could possibly work).

Regarding cloud gaming, Nvidia has a service in beta, but Amazon seems well positioned for a monopoly in this space (for both developer and consumer use cases) and I'm surprised they haven't been pushing hard for it. I've been using Paperspace heavily for cloud gaming for the last six months and it's a very compelling value proposition. All things considered I'd still rather have a dedicated custom PC, but I can't justify spending $2,000 up front for something that is already good enough at $0.60/hr on demand. You can imagine how big the market could be if instead of selling loss-making consoles you could just push a smart TV app that connects to a cloud gaming service and eliminate the console upgrade cycle. It would also be much easier to lure users from other networks if they don't have to invest $300 in a console to switch. I don't know if it would be a losing proposition for Microsoft and Sony but it could be an entry point for a leaner competitor to get a leg up on the incumbents.
I would argue that the disillusionment in the Czech Republic not only the fault of the Americans, but also the fault of the former communists, who remained in power for the most part. During the privatization process the countries assets were sold to the corrupt ex-communists and westerners for pennies on the dollar. There is as much evil and profiteering from within as there is evil from outside.

Which NGOs are you talking about? What have these NGOs done to harm the countries?
Hahaha... not long after https://twitter.com/comcast/status/933396998958567442

-- edit: this is in the article.. I saw it after..
Isn't this the same question as "after you eat, where does the food go?" or "after you put gas in your gas tank, where does the gas go?"
I think they expected it wouldn't have much effect, since the client was also updated to delete the old (corrupted) log. Because the logs were always deleted after a success, and updates started with the oldest, the corrupted log would necessarily become the oldest.

By the time the DDoS was in effect, the corrupted logs had been deleted by the client. They would now always succeed (even with the old server code, or old client code) until they got a new corrupted log.
How We Reorganized Instagram’s Engineering Team While Quadrupling Its Size
Sounds entirely reasonable to me:

> [T]he Commission also should bear in mind that a more flexible approach to prioritization may be warranted and may be beneficial to the public. For example, a telepresence service tailored for the hearing impaired requires high-definition video that is of sufficiently reliable quality to permit users "to perceive subtle hand and finger motions" in real time. And paid prioritization may have other compelling applications in telemedicine. Likewise, for autonomous vehicles that may require instantaneous data transmission, black letter prohibitions on paid prioritization may actually stifle innovation instead of encouraging it. Commercial arrangements that entail prioritizing such traffic could ensure the low latency levels needed to achieve the high level of data quality necessary for such services to thrive.

VoIP really needs low latency. Buffering a Youtube video or downloading a torrent doesn't.

Selective prioritization could improve the former drastically, while having no noticeable effect on the latter.

Note I'm not taking a stance on the issue either way. Maybe it would be better to keep Net Neutrality and add provisions for latency-sensitive applications. Maybe it's better to nuke it and let the markets figure it out.

Either way, this is an important point and I'm surprised that the HN crowd doesn't discuss it more.
Malwarebytes 3.3.2 Crack 2018 Serial Key Free Download
These products seem to be aimed at syndication services like Cisco's Infinite Video, Comcast's Xfinity, and Ericsson MediaFirst. Missing are some frontend niceties, but that wouldn't be hard for someone to come in and offer something in front of that.
Software VPN managing all routes is perfectly fine to network traffic.

The network traffic is totally taken.

The problem here is OTHER SOFTWARE running on the computer that also has visibility into the OS. For example, browsers with p2p connections will enumerate all network interfaces - including your actual adapter's IP
I have promoted among friends this idea in place of the guaranteed income proposals. While perhaps similar in operation, Guaranteed Income sounds like a handout, while equity or an inheritance promotes the idea that this is about owning and benefitting from this great American experiment.
It's just another guardian clickbait. No shortage of that unfortunately.
You can request features over at https://forums.aws.amazon.com/forum.jspa?forumID=269
> It's encouraging people to make their money be productive instead of stashing it under a mattress. That doesn't sound like a bad thing to me.

It is, because storing money under a mattress is equivalent of investing in money itself. As OP said too, it is like you lent your money to all the other investors in the economy (because you taking that money out of the economy reduces the prices of capital goods, which means they can now acquire it for cheaper). This results in wealth creation, which you benefit from when you take the money out from under the mattress.

This of course, can only work as an active investment strategy if you have a fixed or predictable money supply. For an inflationary currency such as any fiat currency, you will just get screwed.

This works great for cryptocurrencies for instance, people keep talking about how nobody has any incentive to invest in Bitcoin projects if just holding it will make it go up. Well, when bitcoin holders hold bitcoin, bitcoin economy still grows, and the purchasing power of their bitcoin goes up.
Since we do not have political equity, asking for economic equity is more than a stretch. Our republican system of government is gerrymandered at multiple levels. States are a gerrymandering. The electoral college is a gerrymandering.

As a practical point, you won't get economic equity before political equity and them that have the political equity have no reason to redistribute it fairly.
Mitnick would disagree.
Just make a UBI pegged to GDP. No need for stock/equity.
> assets = liabilities + net income

That's a non-equation, of course. Assets and liabilities are in dollars and net income is in dollars-per-unit-time.

Naturally, any conclusion arising from algebraic rearrangement of that non-equation will also be non-sensical.
Only the bad forex brokerages. The good ones (ECN) take commission instead.
Fat can break down into ketones which can be passed out via urine (i.e. leave the body without being oxidized to H2O and CO2).

This is noted in the article, in the caption under the second figure.
Get scared. you can be arrested, tried, and convicted, all for dealing non existent drugs where the driving force behind it all was the law enforcement scam that put it all in place and dropped hints.

I know some distrust Cato, but please read the following and tell me, how do we protect ourselves from such as this without dragging it out in the open?

https://www.cato.org/blog/stash-house-stings-when-government...

So we best hope the Supreme Court decides there was over reach in gathering cell data because its apparent some district courts are more than willing let law enforcement create a crime and manufacturer criminals as needed
Open up some window from the Mac OS menu bar. Now use the keyboard to switch away from it. Try to switch back with it to it with the keyboard. It doesn't work unless you have some third-party window management tool to fix the problem.

I have tried and I can give you a whole catalog of features that don't work with the keyboard.
It sounds interesting in theory but I'm worried that this will create additional tensions between countries if each country did this.

I think that part of the reason why the threat of war is much lower now than it was in the past is because patriotism is at an all time low.

Another problem is that this already exists in the form of the US dollar. The better America does economically, the more the US dollar will be worth relative to other currencies. Maybe if the Fed stopped manipulating the money supply, people would actually be able to see the value of the USD increase predictably when the economy does well.

I totally agree with attempts to redistribute USD to its citizens to even things out.

Nonetheless, I think that cryptocurrencies will solve the problem of inequality without the need for government intervention.
The 8-10% returns are the long term average, after all crashes are accounted for. You don't have to be a stuntman to attain those numbers. Literally all you have to do is put your money into an index fund and sit on it for 20+ years
Yes. Nowhere near as good as AlphaGo, but yes it would do better.

When Deep Blue beat Kasparov at chess, the program was not significantly better than what had been state of the art for the previous decade. They just threw enough hardware at it.

For chess programs there is an almost linear relationship between your search depth and effective ELO rating, and search depth went up by a constant with each generation of Moore's law.
Discouraging savings is actually the point. We should tax money that sits idle and provides tax benefits to money invested.

If you can build wealth around being active rather than just reaping the benefit of interest of interests then that should be encouraged rather than just grabbing and keeping.
Risk is defined by what can be lost. If you bought a $200 video card early on and spent $200 on electricity mining than your risk was $400. Contrarily someone right now buying a single bitcoin is going to be risking a lot more than just that.
You should be putting away way more than $2k per month. I know it's the Bay Area and all, but that's still $120k

I make $70k in the midwest and save $3k/month. That's $3k after taxes, insurance benefits, rent, food, etc..
Online, dynamic music synthesis. pure comes from pd I think, puredata, which has as default an unoptimized graphical language. pure can deal with real-world musical problems much better.
Both sides perceive the outgroup as the source of all evil in the world. You could replace left/right and republican/democrat in your comment and there would be people on the other side who sincerely believe it as much as you do.

Neither claim is accurate.
It also doesn't work, because you cannot impose democracy. Imposed democracy isn't democracy.
That festival's fun as hell, but yea there's a major culture difference there, not just governmental.

What shocked me was when they still did it the same year as the Formosa Fun Cost explosion [1], seems the Taiwanese bounce back pretty well.

[1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formosa_Fun_Coast_explosion)
GDP is the wrong thing to peg UBI to. It's a pretty meaningless measure of economic activity.

If you support UBI, why wouldn't you support reducing the age requirement on social security to 18+? Social security already exists, we don't need to re-invent the wheel. Obviously we'd need to change the eligibility requirements so that you didn't need to pay in. Now we just need a story about where the money will come from to finance it for the long-haul.
ICOs still feel like the wild west. They feel way more riskier than contributing to a "validated" funding round. That said, VC rounds obviously are no guarantee of good judgement either.
> I’d like feedback on the following idea.

> I think that every adult US citizen should get an annual share of the US GDP.

Sure thing, sama. I hope you saw it[1]: https://medium.com/@simon.sarris/after-universal-basic-incom...

Without addressing these issues, UBI could look like a nightmare even if we're all on board.

I think he's committing the usual assumptions:

1. That what people struggling and suffering in the US need is money, and not some other thing that they've also lost, that may be more important.

> imagine a world in which every American would have their basic needs guaranteed

2. That those struggling would be content if they had the $ part figured out.

3. That such disbursements would ultimately lead to less inequality, and not more.

etc

Just as you can find Silicon Valley techies who think Soylent is the only sustenance a person will need, intellectuals tend to think everyone could be as content as they would be living life in their heads or inventing their own destiny. Most people need to be doing something to feel satisfied and UBI addresses this just as poorly as disability checks. Cue drug epidemics.

> And we should consider eventually replacing some of our current aid programs, which distort incentives and are needlessly complicated and inefficient, with something like this.

Tread very carefully, Sam. As I mention in the anti-UBI article, thinking you can replace case workers who do very real, inefficient, difficult tasks like getting medicaid patients to just sign up and show up at a doctor at all is not easy. You will not eliminate poverty just by giving everyone money, especially if you do it by eliminating the pesky overhead of case workers at the same time. UBI looks great because its easy to explain, but we probably need a basket of hodge podge solutions to meet the needs of the poor. The poor and their needs, I promise you, are much more diverse than the Silicon Valley rich and theirs. Be very careful not to think the poor think precisely like you, just minus money. E.g. what works for a top 1% IQ engineer who lost his job will not work for a senior citizen drug addict who has had trouble holding a conversation with another human for the last 5 years due to his isolation.

[1] Because dang messaged me about it being re-upped on HN so I assume somebody at YC eyeballed it.
This is really just the same as saying they raised money to pay creators, but that wouldn't sound so innovative. One way or the other, it's people investing in this startup (or currency if that's what you want to call it) that pay the content creators.

What I wonder what will happen as more content creators join the pool, thus diluting the value of a "prop". Is the idea that this will also draw more consumers, thus balancing out the value of the prop ? How is the total market cap determined ? How will it grow ?
I have been burned too much in trying to get into ALTs because Bitcoin is still rocketing. As long as bitcoin is rocketing, you lose money by trading BTC in for anything else.
A lot of people work very hard without even the remotest possibility of getting rich. Scientists or aid workers would be an example. Money is not the only motivator for people.
I don't want that world either. But achieving it is a wet dream for a business.

The challenge that Elon Musk et al are warning us about is what role will humans have after we achieve this dystopia.
North Korea's early warning system
Oh, no. We tried that in Russia one hundred years ago.

At first it was good. More opportunities for the little men, yay!

Second generation was like: why do I have to work this complicated job? Strive? Mathematicians live no better than janitors. Overcrowded not-so good resorts with bad attitude (remember, no one have incentive to be polite, servicing others, since there is little money to get from eath individual customer. Almost everyone have same wealth)

Third generation is almost total stagnation. Everyone is just sitting in queue of some sort, waiting for hand-out from the almighty government.

Sometimes for years.

Production is forgotten, redistribution rules the world.
Some people gave up on that section (week 5 of 10) and went on with the rest of the course. That seems to work out OK.

(I felt a little bad about these reactions because I'd helped with that code. In its defense, I've also been told by a couple of people that they gained a lot by working through it.)
Alas, cement production releases a lot of CO2. Maybe seal yourself in glass (made with entirely renewable energy, of course)?
The premise of deregulation was that it would lead to increased infrastructure spending. And it has: the late 1990's and the 2000's saw massive investment into cable and wireless. People assumed at the time the money would go into fiber, but demand exploded in wireless so investment went there instead.

The RBOCs promised they would roll out fiber, FCC and PUCs promised they would enforce that, and we assumed any of them had any integrity. Whoops! Then, with the 1996 act, RBOCs traded lots of competitive requirements for the right to reconsolidate into Ma Bell (which at this time they have mostly completed, only now with substantial monopoly of the wireless market in addition to that of the wired one). Again we assumed integrity on the part of any of them. More importantly, lots of wealthy investors assumed that. The two decades since then have been a clinic on how a monopolist who owns the regulators can steal billions from the rest of us. "Too bad about all that money you spent setting up that CLEC... You can forget about us obeying (or the regulators enforcing) any of those leasing or interconnection rules... We'll give you ten cents on the dollar for your now-worthless network and customer base."

Is it any wonder that ATT, SBC, VZN monopolized the wireless market? At the very moment that the market was expanding and big infrastructure investments needed to be made, we had just given them hundreds of billions of dollars! Their abuse of the landline market financed their capture of the wireless market. How could anyone else compete with that? More to the point, who would be stupid enough to try, after getting their asses kicked on the wired side, in direct violation of the 1996 Act? The problem with treating changed circumstances as some sort of extenuation for all the broken promises and unenforced laws, is that the changed circumstances were intentionally engineered by Ma Bell, regardless of the lies they told.

Fool us a dozen times, shame on us.
Investing is risky, that's just the nature of it. Most SV startups fail. Failure isn't a bad thing, it's just the process of figuring out what works and what doesn't.
Or Boston which has all the same things except it has seasons.
An annual bonus just for being an American.
I think that might be a different cave, but your points stand.
Something like 20-25% of Syrians have internet access. I saw a 40% figure for Venezuela and a 15% figure for Zimbabwe. Many internet-literate people are not comfortable with bitcoin; how would you get a meaningful number of people who have never used the Internet comfortable putting their family's net worth in some arcane instrument with a reputation for use in money laundering and crime?

Why would a person with low wealth invest their life savings into a highly volatile, recently developed instrument, when they can just buy jewelry, gold, etc

For the latter use case fewer objections readily come to mind, but this supports the reputation as a tool for those who are barred from capital markets due to illegal activity (whether real or politically contrived illegal activity)