skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not only that. The problem is that you can't just say "see I found a route A-D through B and C: ABCD"

You actually have to be able to say: "See, I found a route A-D through B and C: ABCD and all nodes are sufficiently funded to execute the payment."

And that's the big unsolved issue. Can you make an algorithm that will reliably do the latter while keeping the network decentralized?

I think this is very hard, as the channel states between individual nodes will change for each payment, and that's entropy that somehow needs to be synchronized.

Of course, simple centralized solutions like making B and C big enough ("banks") to deal succesfully with almost any payment are possible.

But solving this problem is pretty damn hard, and I have yet to see a satisfying solution to this. Note that satisfying absolutely must include being decentralized.

Because else, we can as well do the simple and sane thing and scale just on-chain, which also ensures that the miners get their fair share of the pie and makes it less likely that the bottom falls out because there's lots of layers, each taking a cut, to the system.

Now, don't get me wrong: I am fine with LN and I think it might have good use in the micro/nano-payment space. Regular, simple payment channels (like BCH and BTC have since the beginning) might fully cover that use case as well. Who knows. In any case, LN as the (and the only) solution to scaling is not going to work out.
It doesn't have to literally be equivalent to paying off people's mortgages for them. It could have been in the form of buying up housing that was in default or foreclosed upon. The government was in the perfect position to profit off of the crisis while allowing people to keep living in their homes. I realize this is simplistic because of the unemployment associated with the crisis, but a 12 or 18 month lease with discounted rent would have been one potential solution. The government would be unloading the housing stock 3-5 years later, depending on when it looked like the market was starting to recover but not all at once so as not to flood the market.
What do you use to browse the web? A self compiled version of curl? wget?
Maybe American culture is a bit different than everywhere else. If so, enabling this different to continue might be a good idea. Diversity and all that.
“Once you form a habit, habit starts forming you”
Do we really need an update to a web browser every 6 weeks?

A web browser should display information FULL STOP. When the new HTML standard comes out, implement it. Until then just provide security fixes.

It's really not that hard or expensive (500 Million USD should be enough).

Stop changing the UI, adding crap that should be addons (that's why there's addons), adding adverts, adding spyware ("telemetry"), etc.

---

Curiously all the Mozilla developers and apologists who are so enthusiastic about defending Firefox (and down voting critical comments) have taken the day off...
Hey ccleve, thanks for the suggestions, we will definitely offer samples for popular frameworks like Vue, React, Angular and others.

We have thinked about an on-premise version but in that case you loose all the benefits of a serverless cloud solution, and you have to do the maintenance & scaling yourself. Moreover there is no lock-in with Cloud Backend, at any time to can import and export your database to MySQL, you can also export your whole API with source code.

Btw, it's not only a DB API, you can also create your own functions in node.js, python, c#, java and more to come (PHP very soon)

The idea behind Cloud Backend is to offer an instant backend creation without any maintenance required and an attractive price for small to medium projects :)
Here is the closest I've seen to a statement: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/lookingglass.
I don't think the explanation that "The Mr. Robot series centers around the theme of online privacy and security" is what the users were looking for...
Stealth turns 40: Looking back at the first flight of Have Blue
It's not unreasonable for companies to avoid litigation by settling. Given that the timeframe of this coincides with Uber's darkest periods, it may have been operating out of a position of weakness.
That's horrible. When I saw pocket suggestions, I thought, that it's made by Firefox, and it's a new feature which preserves my privacy, and not a commercial company. I removed Firefox, from my computer, and returned to Chrome.
Obviously target houses below 400k or what have you.

If you can target tax breaks to wealthy and companies, you can target benefits to other groups.
It was quantum. Firefox got faster than Chrome with it.
So you think that he'll be fired next week without Google verifying the allegations?
Why does a new owner make them untrustworthy?!
The show Mr. Robot rails against corporate greed, corrupt government officials, and other unethical practices that's rife in our society. In a twist of fate, in one episode someone at E Corp gets arrested for secretly installing malware in products without the user's knowledge. He is prompted arrested by the FBI after a tip-off from Elliot.

They create a global revolution over this behavior. To do what's just. For the people to have a say once again.

It is highly ironic that USA Network and Mozilla did the exact opposite of what the show is all about and promoted it this way. In fact, Mozilla's principles about creating a no-fuss browser runs counter to this very behavior.
leave them without Jobs as they left us, use crypto, a crypto address is like a bank account.
I've donated/paid more than $50 to open source projects that are less useful to me than Firefox. So yes, I would. While I know that Mozilla accepts donations, I don't think they've ever asked me for one.
Tax policy is generally bad over the past 40 years of very low top tax bracket rates which need to be much higher.

U.S. diverging income inequality trajectory
https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BBGK...

Western Europe diverging income inequality trajectory
https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BBGK...

Full article.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/this-is-what-happene...
This a great quote:

But convicting bankers—or any other white-collar workers whose decisions at work have ostensibly damaged the economy—is difficult because while it is easy to identify systematic wrongdoing, it's much harder to pin blame, at least in the way a court might approve of, on an individual within that system.

So you can find a bigger issue with collective behavior but it becomes difficult if everyone is doing it.
The problem is that the mental gymnastics of both sides are so full of holes they are absurd.

The left - we're just going to force everything to be correct and just, including of course, and most importantly, who has money for what. Needless to say, historical societies went quite far in this, and to say it didn't happen is an understatement.

The right - just give more money to people who already have it, and clearly hoard it (that's what lowering taxes does), and they will make everything just and correct. Needless to say, historically this has been done and to say things did not in fact become fair and just is an incredible understatement.

Neither works. Obviously.
Everyone keeps coming with the money problem. But... how about they maintain a browser, with browser functions only? No PDF-JS, no Pocket, no Hello, etc. Just core browser functions and features.

Yes, it might mean scaling back, which is one of the swear words in a growth-oriented belief, but that way, the money should be enough - it was enough for a decade, what changed?
There are plenty of open source companies. The company I founded is built on open source principles many of them inspired by Mozilla. It's a bigger challenge, because it restricts your freedoms as a company in favour of the user's freedoms. However Mozilla's mistakes are not due to the open source nature of the company at all, they are due to mismanagement.

They are due to poor understanding of your own userbase. Poor communication with users and employees. Complete lack of judgement.

These are sticks Mozilla puts in its own wheels. It's hard to make money, but it's easy to know what not to do. Simply asking your employees: "Is this a good idea?" would have yielded a clear "Fuck no". That they did not do that (or did, but chose to ignore it) is a terrible sign, open source or not.
And Al Capone went to jail for tax evasion. The prosecutors use what tools they have at their disposal to get the desired outcome. Sometimes, it is an overall good, and sometimes it is not.
Social proof via reviews (of products, restaurants, anything) is a great idea if you can assume good intent. Back in the good ol' days of the Internet this seemed plausible for some reason, but now there's real money to be made and that's out the window.

Amazon and Yelp and the like may be better or worse at stemming the tide of fakery, but asking them to be better isn't going to fundamentally help. The whole idea is broken.
> needs a corporation's backing behind it (or a government's)

You touch on an interesting point, maybe Firefox should be soliciting donations from governments who are concerned about the US surveillance state instead of relying so heavily on search ad revenue and being forced to turn to things like this to make a buck.
This article completely fails to mention several other potential factors:

- some states have reduced or removed subsidies to home owners for new solar installations

- solar installations are expensive and take years to pay themselves back (and ultimately become a net gain); but homeowners are staying in one home for shorter periods than in the past, making long-term planning less attractive

- some utilities have pressured local governments to block or make difficult new solar installations because of (real or perceived) problems with pushing a lot of power back into the grid from the endpoints (homes)

- political misinformation campaigns have convinced some simple folk that solar is bad (or is un-patriotic since some regions, such as Texas, are so deeply connected to oil and gas)

How much of a role these other factors have played is up for debate, but I think it's rather disingenuous of Reuters to not even mention some of these.
A real fork might be impossible, but a soft fork that just disables features like this should be possible.
what's wrong with being Chinese owned? feels like you're painting with a broad brush. :)
That’s a pretty understated ‘if’
The first BPF programs (original tcpdump use case) were always proprietary-compatible. If you think about it, there is nothing linux-specific about networking, and any code the user writes to tweak the data that is traversing their machine should be theirs to write, and doesn't taint the kernel. The same can be said for iptables/nft rules (you don't have to GPL your firewall configuration). Therefore, the BPF hooks that deal with packets (XDP, tc, socket) are not GPL-restricted and will remain so in the future.

Where GPL comes in is when you use BPF to introspect the kernel. It is quite possible to use BPF programs with the kprobe hook to extract data about how the kernel itself works, and the opinion of the kernel developers on this is that such use cases are within the realm of GPL protection.
Yes I am. But I am a small minority.
Many FOSS projects compete with proprietary software without compromising their FOSS principles. There's nothing wrong with Mozilla wanting to make money, but if Mozilla is indeed a for-profit enterprise then they should clearly say so, so users know what to expect. Deceiving the public about their real intentions, that's not acceptable.
If they can't do that without compromising their own product they deserve the fallout they get.
Alternatively, it's pretty amazing that a nearly pure FPU task with small data that should live well in cache is only about 5x slower when written in straightforward JavaScript.

This is the kind of code that in previous generations would have expected to see a 20-100x penalty in perl or python.
Glowing Auras and ‘Black Money’: The Pentagon’s Mysterious U.F.O. Program
Why aren't the politicians?
Judge Jed Rakoff has an interesting article on the same subject, which brings to bear his experience as the former chief of the securities fraud division of the southern district of new york’s US Attorney’s Office: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2014/01/09/financial-crisis-....
Maybe I'm missing something, but why even use Patreon, just ask for donations directly from people. As for the original question though, just because you have a job doesn't mean you shouldn't be rewarded for your open source work as well.
I meant more the idea that we have a financial system that allowed this to happen. Since the repeal of the Glass–Steagall act there's been greater and greater instability and more opportunities for banks to reap large sums of money. Eating away at these protections allows for more exploitation basically.

In terms of protections from prison, basically controlling the firms that are meant to police them seems sufficient. No real accountability from the financial crisis seems to show that...
I guess a better statement is that in complex systems one cannot predict what is possible. One can only try and see what is possible by doing. Most people here might be computer people so need to see the world in very precise, math like, constructs to produce code that works, but most of reality is not like that.
Same, I had it as my default browser for a few weeks and it was a huge improvement, but ultimately I had to switch back to Chrome.

No default zoom or pinch-to-zoom were my biggest pain points, then performance (mostly comparable with Chrome, except videos consistently spike the CPU above 100%), and the last straw was the ridiculous number of OS X kernel panics I was getting. Beyond that, a lot of little enhancements would make a huge difference, like support for pasting without formatting, support for whatever clipboard APIs Google Docs needs, U2F support, and top-level await in the console.

I generally love the new Firefox and got my configuration in a state where I was sad to leave the UI/UX for Chrome's, but there were too many downsides to the point where it was becoming an obstacle to doing my job. Really hoping these issues can all be sorted out relatively soon.
“Real illuminated REST”? The REST spec?

It’s an architectural style defined by Roy Fielding’s thesis (who also was the editor of HTTP/1.1 RFC). It attempted to describe the Web’s architecture in neutral terms and how it was derived by combining previous styles.

Some people took this and crafted a quasi religion out of it, but that’s partly because vendors in 2002 were all lined up trying to replace the web with a CORBA equivalent and then almost succeeded with SOAP/WS-*. People got strident to fight the dollars that were lined up. It’s easy to forget there was no powerful web/internet community with social media and blogging platforms in those days, it was all mailing lists and a couple of conferences vs. Marketing budgets, sales teams, and agenda-wielding engineers on standards bodies from Microsoft, IBM, BEA, Sun, HP, etc.

All RESTful means is that something is attempting to conform to the style. There never was a spec.
The fact it ought to be an extension that pocket users could add by visiting addons.mozilla.org but instead it was rolled into the core browser.

People assume Pocket offered Mozilla a lot of money, as there's really no other reason Pocket shouldn't be an extension.

People are naturally nervous when browsers start deploying third-party code in exchange for cash. Especially when auto-update mechanisms are used.

Some would see that as an important line to cross - will they be able to resist the much larger sums they'll be offered to "help users see more relevant ads" and "help users keep safe from viruses"?
It makes a fine browser extension. It ABSOLUTELY does not make good embedded code.

There is no good reason for it to be "core functionality" in a browser, other than the fact that Moz://a got a fistfull of dollars and foisted it upon us.

EDIT: For example, what would be a good use of core functionality, is if Moz://a included IPFS resolution and native support. That is a protocol level support, and thus would need native support rather than plugins. Plugins do indeed work, but require significant workarounds. For example, native could be ipfs://hash whereas the plugins need to specify http://127.0.0.1:8080/ipfs/hash
Maybe we need a stable browser without surprises. Less cutting edge. Maybe.
It's surprising that people are surprised by these things. Mozilla is not on a slippery slope. That was true years ago, but it proceeded unmitigated. By now, though, these things are the natural result of that decay.

There's a lot of power in branding, apparently. People keep saying things like, "Mozilla is a good company at heart", and I'm at a loss. Mozilla 2017 is nothing like the Mozilla that existed when the Foundation was established, or when the Mozilla Manifesto was adopted. Tons of key people left in a few different waves: first when Google pulled them off the project to go build Chrome, and then lots more who trickled out over the years during and after the Kovacs/FirefoxOS era. What remains is (a derivative of) the codebase + the name "Mozilla" + and, like, Mitchell. But that's it. Keep calling it the same thing, though, and somehow folks act like we're talking about the same thing.

Mozilla imploded—or rather, got Netscapified—years ago. To believe that Mozilla or Firefox is your old friend who's still helping you fight the good fight is incredibly naive and can only come from someone who hasn't actually been paying attention and is easily fooled by (trivially contradicted) surface-level details (like a name). I mean, it's not even like some philosophically tricky ship-of-Theseus problem. Mozilla is dead, people, and this isn't news.
He's right. But muscles can also break from overuse. Just be careful, ya'll.
With all due respect, rendering PDFs is something I consider core browser functionality.

Pocket, most certainly not, though it's nice I suppose. Hello was... I don't know what it was. Checking if the market is there at all? Not something I expected to be in a browser.
Robo-signing definitely was illegal, and everyone involved in it (especially the supervisors) should have been jailed for fraud.

The Quinn family who blew up Anglo-Irish bank eventually did get short jail sentences in addition to their personal bankruptcy: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-20167760
In the US it's easy to build charges off of nothing. Not committing a crime is no barrier to arrest, deprivation of property and punitive actions outside the normal scope of settled statute.

There's nothing stopping bankers from being locked up for their social crimes other than a lack of will or politesse on the parts of the people.
This is indeed comically sad after the nice Quantum boost.

It was a poor taste joke at the wrong time.. Mozilla is gonna regret this.
Let us not forget that the best part about going to a movie was never the big screen. It is shared emotion. Despite complaints about others sometimes disturbing us, I think we enjoy a funny moment more when we hear others laugh, a thrill more when we hear others gasp, and a spectacle more when we hear others cheer.
how can you do crunches in the bed?
Note that if you are on the bad credit list, you aren’t allowed to fly or take the train. I guess this is so you can’t flee from your debts.
IANAL

My understanding is that proof of intent to break the law is not the legal standard needed to move forward with prosecution[0]. It's being used as cover for insufficient political will to prosecute a powerful protected class - Wall Street executives.

https://www.leagle.com/decision/199634380f3d2631296 § II A
If you have a 90° angle that would be called a “wall” not a “slope”.
That correlates with the sudden switch from Firefox to Chrome in Germany: http://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/desktop/germa...

If there is causality, Cliqz wasn't just a controversy, it was a loss that the benefit of Quantum will have a hard time counteracting.

We will have to see what drop, if any, the Robot controversy brings.
"the extent to which driverless, electric, shared vehicles will change this equation"

Yes, I think it's agreed that such a system could/will change things dramatically. Let's assume that it is possible. The questions then are 1) when will the transition take place, and 2) how do we improve the current system until it happens?

If it takes 50 years, then it's rather pointless to wait before making big changes, or even to plan for such a transition. (By comparison, the US interstate system is only 60 some-odd years old.)

It's quite clearly not next year.

Nor would it be easy for cities like Miami and Amsterdam to go underground, if tunnels are what's needed to make such a transportation system work.

"A driverless, electric, shared, and tunnel-augmented vehicle ecosystem is probably the perfect mass transit system."

You may be missing a qualifier - perhaps "personal"? - in your description. The word "vehicle" includes buses, trams, and trains, so this summary includes many current subway and tram systems, except without a driver.

P.S. It's hard to predict if something really will cause a big change. I remember in the 1990s when Dean Kamen talked about the Segway as being the next transportation paradigm, "John Doerr speculated that it would be more important than the Internet" and "Steve Jobs was quoted as saying that it was "as big a deal as the PC"" (quotes from Wikipedia). When it came out, it turned out not to be a big change. I think e-bikes - an update of 1800s technology - have had a bigger impact than Segway.
The bill, go read it.
I am much more wary about buying from Amazon than most of my peers, who easily click and buy on a whim or out of habit. I went to buy a toy at a brick and mortar, and compared the price to Amazon while there - $12.99 in the store and $27.xx at Amazon! I think they've marketed them to be the low price leaders but that's definitely not the case.

I'm also concerned about counterfeit products - I don't care as much about reviews because I'll usually have researched beforehand or already know what I want. However with brand name items, I always wonder if it's the real thing and as a result have stopped buying shoes, etc from Amazon. I also don't buy anything from Amazon that goes in my body or on my body (supplements, cosmetics/hygiene, etc). I stick with brick & mortar or the online storefront.

It's unfortunate, because Amazon is fantastic as a concept, unfortunately my trust in them does not extend to most items. I'd rather pay more and be confident in the product. I think whatever they are doing is working for them and they have no incentive to change because the vast majority of customers are not so discerning.
How do we pressure our governments to do something? The US and EU already ban weapons sales to Myanmar but other countries are happy to step in and profit in their place, e.g. Israel providing training and selling weapons and vehicles to the very troops carrying out this genocide.
You're not alone in experiencing a similar issue on HN while using a VPN.
The highest nominal tax rates in Europe are around 30%, but that is misleading. The actual real tax rates are somewhere from 5% to 10%, because every country has these "ifs and buts" clauses, that they use to lower corporate taxes, and effective act as a tax haven, while pretending they are not.

Where do I sign up for those? Because my small businesses all pay the UK's published corporation tax rate of 19%, and the shareholders now get hit with a further dividend tax on the remainder.
Better 3D Printing Through Holography
What’s the difference between “grit” and the traditional understanding of perseverance?

Isn’t perseverance carrying on in the face of obstacles or without reinforcement anyway?