skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Free speech protects you from the government restricting you from saying something

No. The First Amendment (in the United States) protects you from the government suppressing your speech. Government suppression is far from the only free speech issue.

> Obligatory XKCD: https://xkcd.com/1357/

Yeah, that was when I stopped reading XKCD.
Not OP, but I'd say it's different because in running, your performance is mostly based on yourself. In boxing and basketball, you have an opponent trying to prevent you from executing your plan.

I'm not judging better or worse and I hate the "is golf a sport" arguments.
Cultural dominance, in the form of media, entertainment, social media stardom etc is controlled by a relatively small group of gatekeepers who exercise a tight grip on their respective Overton windows.

Cultural grassroots swells of a certain flavor on Twitter and YouTube in particular were quickly handicapped when they started to go viral. I think the cultural/political discrepancy reflects this.
VoLTE is only between your phone and your carrier; if you're calling someone on another carrier as far as I know it still goes over legacy garbage with a shitty codec (or worse, an analog link, with in-band signaling).
Anil makes the classic mistake of this cloistered coastal elite which is to paint everyone on the other side as murderers, rapists, Nazis and misogynists -- his own take on Hillary's "basket of deplorables." If the world was everything Anil thinks it is then he would be right: we would be best off limiting speech because everyone is a violent maniac just waiting to be activated.

In reality however, racist murderers rapists and Nazis are a minority, and the majority of people who hold views in opposition to Anil's are not criminals. They're people who support same-sex marriage but don't want any gays living on their block. They're people who don't go to Nazi rallies (yet) but think it's dangerous that no one's talking about how most crime is committed by blacks.

The quickest way to turn these people into real extremists is to bar them from public discourse. Because they value their opinions as much as you value yours, and they're not going to stop talking about these things -- if they're not allowed to discuss their ideas in public, they're going to discuss them with a Nazi instead, which will lead to their radicalization.

When they're part of the public sphere you have the opportunity to engage them, entertain their ideas, present counterpoints, and generally treat them like a human being with whom you merely have differences of opinion -- this is the path to changing hearts and minds, or at least getting them to peacefully coexist.

When they're not their speech goes underground into an echo chamber and being cut off from the rest of society really does foment extremism.

Unless Anil plans on running for governor of CA and seceding from the Union, he needs their hearts and minds -- otherwise they'll keep on voting for guys like Trump, who's President in no small part merely because he was willing to tell sanctimonious guys like Anil to go f*ck themselves.

One of the original long reads on this matter is Federalist No. 10 and it's just as relevant today.
What do you propose? Just not doing anything that matters over a wire? Seems like we're back to 1850 for little evident benefit.
Complexity theory's interest in determining if there is a polynomial time algorithm to solve any npcomplete problem
Hah first thing that came to my mind too.
Banking did exist, but not in a form that is likely to be at all palatable to modern society. The breakdown of currency would have devastating impacts on social trust.
So you can not start running any code session on the SGX at ALL without this Remote Attestation call to Intel? That seems silly, considering the SGX has two 128 bit keys on board (one known to Intel, and one known only to the SGX).
Natural selection at work
The issue is that VoLTE only works for calls made to the same carrier's subscribers, as soon as you call someone on another carrier it will go through a shitty interconnect with a bad codec (usually a variant of G711 which is a joke in 2017).
You can read more history from NSB's mime page on his home domain:

http://www.guppylake.com/nsb/mime.html

Including a video of the " ...Telephone Chords, the world's premier (=only) all-Bellcore barbershop quartet, singing about MIME."

(note: auto-plays)
Us vs. them is not just mindset, it is in evolved biology. Overcoming biology is nonsense.

Nevertheless, an intelligent person must be aware of workings of ones biology and physiology and try to correct his behavior.

It is same like riding a bicycle - difficult to learn but once the skill set is acquired it becomes a habit. Meditation is the another name for it.
Nor does law enforcement, for that matter. Operating a Stingray-like device to capture cellular user information is very, very illegal in the United States without proper authority to do so. Even capturing open Wi-Fi that you do not control is legally perilous and has divided courts on its legality, which seems counterintuitive on its face given the simple physics of radio, but is a fact.

It’s stupidly simple to run afoul of the CFAA and federal wiretapping laws, not to mention the expectation of privacy standard in California.
I think you are on to something, but I don't think it's the final answer. Your explanation sounds true, but it doesn't really explain how greater pressure on P6 speeds things up.

I'm working with a slightly modified loop that counts down rather than up, so that the loop has slightly fewer instructions. I've switched to using an "add to memory" to reduce the instruction count further. None of these seem to directly affect the speed of the loop, but here's the fastest loop I have:

.p2align 3
1:
addq %rax, counter(%rip)
dec %rax
jmp 2f
2:
jne 1b
rep ret

On Skylake, it executes in 0.497 s. If I remove the "jump to the next instruction", it slows to 0.646 s. This agrees with your explanation. But here's the part I don't understand, and that may undercut your theory: if I change the first line to be ".p2align 4" (that is, if I increase the minimum alignment from 8 to 16) the speed is the same whether or not I have the extra jump. Even more confusingly, it's always the slower speed!

Here's what port usage looks like for the two different cases (both with the same instructions, just different alignments):

Fast Slow
INSTR_RETIRED_ANY | 1600095750 | 1600095846
CPU_CLK_UNHALTED_CORE | 1643927320 | 2192886305
UOPS_DISPATCHED_PORT_PORT_0 | 645482071 | 774370373
UOPS_DISPATCHED_PORT_PORT_1 | 653347597 | 782702101
UOPS_DISPATCHED_PORT_PORT_2 | 299084760 | 298170998
UOPS_DISPATCHED_PORT_PORT_3 | 300474456 | 292800108
UOPS_DISPATCHED_PORT_PORT_4 | 1410210909 | 1994332142
UOPS_DISPATCHED_PORT_PORT_5 | 406138100 | 791887776
UOPS_DISPATCHED_PORT_PORT_6 | 989257513 | 1338919000
UOPS_DISPATCHED_PORT_PORT_7 | 200496146 | 209093087

From the first line we see that both Fast and Slow have the same number of instructions executed (which makes sense, since both are executing the same instructions), but down below we see very different numbers of µops dispatched! I'm not sure what to make of this, but I think this shows that it is not (solely?) a front end issue.
"in that silence grow the seeds of resentment and anger"

You mean like women have felt for thousands of years? And look where it got them. Just ignoring it and hoping that the creepy guy would pick on someone else didn't work. What did work was standing up, saying what happened to them, and forcing people to stop groping them or making inappropriate comments to them for fear of losing their jobs.

For damn sure no one like Judge Kozinski or Al Franken was going to be changed by reasoned, impassioned debate about the nature of personhood. What prevents future young women from being harassed by them and other creepy powerful men is seeing people like them losing their jobs. Seeing consequences for what they've done and said is what is protecting minorities from being hurt, and it is morally repugnant to allow other people to be hurt.
The pain is excruciating and almost unbearable... I hope it NEVER ends.
Except pragmatically, one is a conclusion based on observation and the other is driven by a willful need to make reality meet emotional needs.

Religious people, by and large, do not respect observation as much as dogma. There's no commonality to be found with that.
It's worse than meaningless because it distracts from more damaging issues because "Wow! Heavy!"

If I have 10kg of mercury and I dump it in a river, that measures 10kg of toxic waste.

But if I have pile of 10 million kg of rock that contains 1kg of mercury, it's reported as a million times worse for 1 tenth the toxin.
>3. Bitcoin remains the main store of value

I think this is probably right. And I would add 2 things

(a) The size and the hash power of BTC give it a HUGE advantage. If you want "immutable proof that you own this specific decentralized block" then BTC is the only game in town. And that comes at a cost (hence high fees because of lots of electricity, computers, ASIC fabs, etc).

(b) Secondly (and I realize this analogy has been beat to death...but), Gold didn't want Silver to exist. The gold industry naturally wanted to monopolize every transaction, but like Bitcoin, it turned out that their very strengths were also simultaneously their weaknesses.

Its an immutable law of economics that BTC isn't going to be able to be all things to all people, so I think its natural that among their various options, they will choose to be the "Store of Value". Ultimately thats the equivalent of being a reserve currency. By capturing the store of value corner, it means that alternatives like ETH, LTC, DASH, IOTA, et al will be valued against and perform a support function to Bitcoin. In a sense, by being the Store of Value, the other cryptos perform support roles that further entrench your position.
> The currency is designed to utilize an Intel processor component known as Software Guard Extensions, or a "secure enclave."

Binding yourself to an implementation like this seems like mega big centralization. There's several decentralized coins that could solve some of these same problems.
> If you load the task manager, the disk usage is 100% for hours.

Load the performance monitor (button on the Performance tab in task manager), go to Disk and see what process is doing it. You may have something like full disk indexing going.

Regarding Windows.old,isn't that supposed to auto - clear after ~30 days? Also, the first two articles on a search for "remove windows.old" appear to confirm my expectation that the disk cleanup tool will remove it, possibly without even running it as administrator. Frankly this sounds like it's getting into "respect mah authoritah" territory.

For the games, are those preinstalled? I haven't seen such, but most of the Win10 systems in dealing with so far are either upgrades or business class machines. If you're getting Enterprise systems preinstalled with 4gb of games someone needs to talk to your supplier.
I have a lot of issues with your post.

> He really doesn't seem to understand the difference between free speech and being free of consequences, and as a result he's in danger of suppressing free speech. He wants people to be able to say controversial things without there being blowback, but the only possible way to accomplish that is by suppressing the free speech of people who disagree. You're either for free speech- which includes the right to criticize ideas- or he's arguing that specific people's speech (the person with the "novel physics idea" for example) are more important than others.

Sam's article is a criticism of the form of criticism received when on the "losing" side of a controversial topic. The criticism is not of the opinion (which leads to actual discussion) but of the person. That criticism of the person tends to be over-the-top.

Pushing back against this over-the-top criticism will open up free speech by letting people who are scared to share their opinions for risk of extreme consequences (being fired?).

> His example of China, one of the worst human rights violators who has been known for violently suppressing free speech, is just a continuation of that. He's happy because as a privileged person with money China is super excited to hear his ideas, but he's also ignoring the fact that China literally jails and kills people who speak out with ideas that their government doesn't like.

I think you're making Sam's point for him. He feels more comfortable in a place as bad as china for speech than San Francisco. What does that imply? China's treatment may not be equal, but this is not the implication. The implication is in how uncomfortable he feels in SF.

> He completely ignores the damage done by hate speech. Just completely ignores it. If you were to read this blog as is it seems like he thinks people being driven out of companies, schools, education programs, and development communities by bigotry and sexism were never going to contribute or that their losses aren't as important as the ideas being lost to people uncomfortable being called out for bigotry.

You are ignoring the damage of calling someone a bigot for sharing their opinion. I think we both have a point here, and a further discussion would be interesting.

> The blog seems to put a higher value on innovation and corporations than it does people.

I'd assert it's putting a higher value on the quality of society which he asserts is improved when controversial topics are free to be discussed without risk of extreme personal attack. People make up society (and corporations btw), so it can be assumed that assertion of higher value applies to them as well.
Yes i also find this high school level white paper pretty weird. Also no roadmap, no github, only 3 person team.

But Moxie Marlinspike though...
An no word about price volatility? Even if btc were scalable it is unusable for commerce. Pegging to fiat should be #1 goal of a new blockchain that wants to solve problem. All others arejust sophisticated gambling platforms.
Lets upvote a postive article on crypto, not always the negative ones.
Windows and Android KeePass apps interoperate well over Dropbox.
> What if your "controversial opinion" harasses and alienates other people?

> as a victim you ARE entitled to share your story. You are entitled to tell people "hey this person did something bad and it hurt me."

An employee at a SV company writes on a forum that he's not a fan of diversity quotas and equity. Then, someone reads it, and claims that they feel harassed and alienated by that quote. They tweet an angry message accompanied by a screenshot of the forum post. Then, a twitter mob forms, calling the employee a Nazi. He's conflated with real racism now, though he originally was talking about diversity quotas and equity. Because his language was "harmful", the victims have their justification; by any means necessary they must remove this hateful Nazi.

The employee gets fired for PR reasons. Other employees stay away from those topics, self-silencing for fear of retaliation like the 1st employee received. Ideas are stifled; democracy is weakened.

Can you see how your chain of logic leads to this?
You want KeePassXC https://keepassxc.org/
> ...valid opinions deserve discussion.

And, pray tell, who gets to decide which opinions are "valid"? How do we find out in advance which opinions we are permitted to discuss?
If your post is being downvoted it is not because of its content, but because it brings absolutely nothing of substance to the conversation, breaking HN’s posting guidelines.
Litecoin has the same small-block commitment.

> If you want centralized chinese government controlled crypto, there's bcash.

That's the pot calling the kettle black. Bitcoin core is China-coin.

The economics of mining mean that there will always be centralization. Mining will centralize where there is free or cheap electricity (ahem, China). Mining will centralize on the hardware of the single manufacturer with the most cost-effective asics (ahem, China). It inevitably centralizes as other miners will fall behind revenue-wise, and not be able to invest enough to provide meaningful hashpower over time.

The small-blocks-prevent-centralization line of thinking is just closing the barn door after the horse is out.
You're describing Bitcoin. Ethereum doesn't work like that.
> It’s not guaranteed by the First Amendment that people can’t be fired or blacklisted for their opinions, but when Communists were blacklisted from the film industry, that was seen as a disgrace—despite the fact that, in the 1950’s, the activities of the Communist Party were a much greater threat to American (and, in general, Western) society and values than the kinds of things people get in trouble for saying now.

They still are, for that matter. People today seem to be extremely worried about the so-called "KKK" and "Nazi" groups, most of which consist of about five yokels meeting in somebody's garage. They're nasty pieces of work on an individual basis, certainly, but hardly an existential threat to the country as a whole. There haven't been any real Nazis in close to 70 years, and there hasn't been a real KKK for about a hundred.

Communists, on the other hand, not only racked up a far higher body count than Nazis and the KKK combined, they still control entire countries, with standing armies and nuclear weapons.

If we're going to start ejecting people from the public sphere on the basis of their ideas being dangerous, pragmatism would seem to dictate that we start with Marxists.
Do you mean the diversity visa program is offensive? Or the h1b visa program? Or just immigration in general?
Many reasons. If you want to analyze the events and method calls happening on a smart contract you need to review the whole blockchain.

A more obvious use case is reviewing all the transactions related to your address.
The rest of the world needs to bypass the US with its internet routing.
The big issue with multinational companies is that this isn’t that simple anymore.
Do you know what he thinks of 1Password? e.g. I've seen this comment [1] on 1Password, but do you know what his actual thoughts are? He's not fond of it, but does he have anything concrete to say about it as to why? I have friends using 1Password and I would like to be able to tell them and give them concrete reasons to switch to KeePass if there are security issues with it.

[1] https://twitter.com/taviso/status/760231214812844032
Sounds a good idea for an app lol, you fill out a little section for each skill, feed it job listings and it spits back out your sentences that match the buzzwords of the day that HR drones are looking for. It could even sort to present the sentences in order matching their appearance in the job ad and maybe intermix some non buzzword specific sentences to make it seem more real.
Seems to remind of "Greyball".

How Uber Deceives the Authorities Worldwide [0]

[0] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/03/technology/uber-greyball-...
[2] is the one of the most recent criticisms of the Big Five method, which is the crux used in [1]. If [2] cited every paper that used the Big Five method incorrectly as biological factor analysis, it would be in the hundreds.

Number of citations is terrible metric to defend a paper because the reason [2] has less citations is because [2] was published 3 years ago, while [1] was published almost a decade ago.

Appeals to popularity are logic fallacies for a reason.
I have changed the code to be 50% now that some time has passed and unfortunately there have been no reviews.
Uber keeps providing the material.
You're correct, Ethereum uses account balances. You don't have to keep track of inputs and outputs, just check that the balance is sufficient.

Since each block header has a merkle root of the block's state, you can just get all the block headers to check PoW, get the current state, and validate transactions and states as many blocks back as you feel you need to make sure a miner hasn't faked the current state.

Here's an old article by Vitalik on the subject:

https://blog.ethereum.org/2015/06/26/state-tree-pruning/
Can you still mine BTC from the trunk, so long as you do it solely for your own purposes?
What is the benefit of KeePassXC over KeePass[X]?

I just tried it and the lack of plugin or sync support was a deal-breaker for me. I have plugins for syncing to cloud storage, for browser integration, for OTP generation, etc., none of which it seems to support?
Not vaporware but vaporidea. They never solved incentive model to open channel so it is more like real software no one will touch.
My favorite resources are now all slightly dated; I haven't really kept up with the cutting edge as I've moved away from design and towards development.

---

Web:

A List Apart, especially the articles section - https://alistapart.com/articles

CSS Zen Garden - http://www.csszengarden.com/

Magic Ink - Information Software and the Graphical Interface, by Bret Victor - http://worrydream.com/#!2/MagicInk

---

Print:

Flexible Web Design: Creating Liquid and Elastic Layouts with CSS, by Zoe Mickley Gillenwater

The Zen of CSS Design: Visual Enlightenment for the Web, by Dave Shea and Molly E. Holzschlag

Transcending CSS: The Fine Art of Web Design, by Andy Clarke
Oh, it's not quite that bad. You can run SGX code and work with encrypted data, including generating attestation messages. It's just that there's no way to verify those attestation messages yourself; you have to ask Intel to do it.

It's also worth noting that SGX can run in two modes. There's "debug mode", which provides absolutely no security because a debugger has complete access to the state of the enclave. And then there's "release mode", which requires a key that you can only obtain by signing a commercial agreement and NDA with Intel.
> The way you've formulated this makes it seem like people who think political correctness is important also must espouse branding people as heretics for no reason.

The "for no reason" part here is actually throwing me off. Not sure what you're implying.

I've made the statement that discussion on the topic is preferable to branding, even in the case where people feel alienated.
There's a difference to me between truly abusive comments and offensive opinions. I wouldn't argue in favor of workplace sexism (at least my definition of it), but if someone gives their genuine opinion then it should be tolerated to the extent that we should listen, allow them to speak, and then engage in dialog if we disagree. If they're making abusive comments for the sake of hurting another person, that is an entirely different matter. I don't think that's what the author had in mind either based on the examples given in the first blog post.
It wouldn't be hard to start a company that builds a radio that buffers every reasonably-strong signal for instant switching...
Digital can be maddening because it alternates between crystal-clear and OFF

You mean between 1 and 0?
Brendan Eich was pressured to and then did resign for taking action to remove the ability for homosexuals to marry.

He was not fired, and he didn't "say" controversial things about marriage. Again: he took action to remove (the time line was: gay people can marry in California, prop 8 removes that, prop 8 is ruled unconstitutional) rights from people.
Is Bitcoin Cash fast because of greater capacity or with low competition to get into blocks?

Better options for cheap + fast transactions: Litecoin or Raiblocks. Litecoin has a great history and community is ready and willing to innovate. Raiblocks has a good story too: doesn't waste the currency's OPEX on proof-of-work, accounts don't face contention on serialized resources like a linear blockchain and delivers no-fee transactions. No crazy experimental-and-vulnerable-to-differential-cryptanalysis like IOTA.
At least China is doing that.
It's not always true of every game, but I think it's safe to say these games start with Kojima. Without him they wouldn't get made. Just like it takes a band to make music but often it's only the lead artists name you know, because without them the band wouldn't have formed in the first place.