skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> There's a large arbitrage opportunity right now. Futures are going for about $1,000 more than BTC itself right now and you can make risk-free* (assuming you know how to securely store your private key) profit. Doing so requires selling a future.

Not really. You have to post margin against your short position, which is costly and could rapidly lead to a margin call where you are forced to close your short position at the worst possible time (futures price surges, you are closed out in the futures but still long the cash Bitcoin, and then the spot price crashes before you can sell your cash position). Furthermore, there is a non-trivial cost of carry - properly securing your Bitcoin private key involves a costly cyber security infrastructure and operation. Then there is the massive counter party credit risk that you take on when facing the cash Bitcoin exchange (eg Mt. Gox). Finally, there are the unknown unknowns ... this is the first week of trading for a brand new type of futures contract created on the back of a bleeding edge technology bubble, things could go wrong in all kinds of unforeseen ways. So I would submit that a $1000 cash vs. futures spread is in fact not some huge arbitrage opportunity (or, in other words, there is no free lunch here in front of this steamroller).
Still parroting that old trope, huh? The quality of an engineer is rarely dictated by their tools. You can be an excellent engineer with a shitty language, or you can be a terrible engineer with a great language.

I'll be the first to admit that PHP certainly has it's share of really bad developers, but what language doesn't?
Not that we've solved those problems and needed a replacement.
Odd you're being downvoted, this is a reasonable question to ask
Commenting like this will get you banned on HN regardless of how much you know or how right you are. Please reread the site guidelines (linked at bottom of every HN page) and take them to heart from now on.
Conway's Game of Life in Q:

life:{3=a-x*4=a:2(sum -1 0 1 rotate\:,’/)/x}
Several things:

1. K (and the entire APL family) eschew many of the layers upon layers of abstraction that modern software engineering uses, whether they are justified or not. It turns out, that they are mostly not justified. K gently pushes you toward thinking in a lower level of "what's really happening here?"; I'm not sure I can give a good example here - but the world looks different after taking the red pill. e.g., it is not uncommon in K to represent a tree as an two arrays, one of data, and one of parent pointers. Once you shake the "but I must abstract this!" feeling, you realize it works better.

2. K gently encourages doing work on batches of data. That is, it is idiomatic (and easier) to write functions that operate on arrays, and return arrays of processed data, then writing functions that operate on one element at a time. In turn, this means that the resulting program more often than not works in stages where each stage processes its entire input before going to the next stage (which uses the output from this stage as its input). In the "old" C/C++/C#/Java/Python world, it is idiomatic to push each element through a pipeline before going to the next one.

3. K encourages building a set of orthogonal, non trivial operations and combining them in various ways, rather then building layer upon layer of abstraction. It gives an example by giving an extremely useful basis of functions. E.g. http://nsl.com/k/t.k implements a very fast, reasonably capable in memory database with aggregation, joins, projects and more. It takes all of 14 lines, all quite short. While you can't implement it in 14 lines of C, using the same principles you can probably do that in less than a hundred. Achieve the same in idiomatic C is going to be much harder and longer.

4. Finally, K gently encourages solutions which work well with modern memory and storage hierarchies. E.g., it encourages linear scan operations that touch all elements of an array over random access ones that touch only 1/10 of the elements. Instinct and idiom in other languages will guide you towards the latter, but the former is often much faster.
Con democracy argument: the first democracy is at most 2500 years old. For hundreds of thousands of years the human race blossomed without democracy.

The reason the internet was pretty good without any rules for the first 20 years is because big commercial interests didn't understand it until relatively recently, they didn't see the opportunities to exploit the exclusive access to the subscriber's home. They understand it now.

Only in the past 10 years or so have we come to need reasonably-priced and stable internet almost as much as we need electricity or water.
Missing sarcasm qualifies for a downvote? Last I checked getting sarcasm in this medium is quite hard.
The last mile approximator.
The mayor has only so much power over the city. As someone involved in the YIMBY movement, I think we mostly considered him an ally.
It's a pretty firm scientific consensus that mankind is having an outsized impact on the changing climate. It would be disingenuous to report otherwise.

Sure, we could be exacerbating natural cycles, but according to the large volumes of data we do have it's pretty clear that humans are a major contributing factor.
I did graduate research in an area of experimental physics that was quite close to state of the art quantum computing research. It was very exciting, but all the research was pretty much in extreme conditions that aren't really usable for a realistic computing device (ultra-high vacuum, nanokelvin temperatures, high magnetic fields or laser trap confinement, etc.). From the looks of it this paper is in the same vein. Good progress, but the gate isn't quite "open" yet.
The Library of Congress Twitter firehose archive never got off the ground: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/08/can-t...
Kate Steinle unfortunately can't share her story.
The Amazon Machine
that's awesome on getting to 171. I just recently hit 6. But, the first 2 were mine.
Uber Canada Hacked
Cards are broken on safari on the iPhone. Otherwise very valuable! Thank you.
I think this is a WONDERFUL idea, and executed incredibly well. This is a big help to me as I consider asking good questions a flaw in my interviewing game, and I'm aware that it has lead me to miss some really glaring flaws. I love the UX, too. All around great!
I can't be changing the example if I'm quoting you.

I am not discussing the presence of fast lanes right now, which have their own problems. I'm talking about the literal prevention of accessing specific data because your ISP decides you aren't allowed to access it.

Without net neutrality, if my ISP sees I'm trying to access a political site that they don't like, they could just make half of all those requests fail. If they like a particular political candidate for office in my area, then they can prevent me from accessing all the other candidate's sites or reading a news story about a positive thing the other candidate did.

This is absolutely enabling censorship and yes we are discussing different examples but I do not need to demonstrate how your example is censorship when another example (that you said was a possibility!) does, if I am trying to demonstrate how this enables censorship. This is not a case of (All things prevented by net neutrality) but (There exists a thing prevented by net neutrality) that enables censorship.
I find the description of the RSA math pretty confusing. And I'm saying that with a minor in math and a CS degree specializing in security; I've don't this before, just not in a while.

For example:

>In order to generate e, we'll need to find a random prime number that has a greatest common divisor (GCD) of 1 in relation to ϕ(n).

How can a prime number have any divisor that isn't 1, let alone a gcd? Either that's mistaken, or it's unnecessary to state.

There's also no explanation of what purpose the totient value is. The author simply states it's needed, but not what value it provides.

In short, it feels like it's written for people who already know the answers, not for people trying to learn.
Libraries "weed" books all the time, and most of them are pulped. Which is about like burning them, only the carbon doesn't end up in the atmosphere. So this is probably not the best comparison.
If the ISP customer is able to specify which link to use and be charged accordingly, that's not necessarily a violation of the spirit of net neutrality. If a bad ISP implemented this and made the slow path absurdly slow, well then you just always use the fast link and it's the equivalent of the ISP just charging you more. It's not harmful to the Internet, and I believe current regulations allow it.

If the server the customer is connecting to is able to specify which link to use and the server pays the bill for that usage, that's a different matter. If a bad ISP implemented this and made the slow path absurdly slow, servers would be forced to use the fast link in order to access the ISPs' customers, and now the ISP is forcing Netflix et. al. to fork over money just to be able to access their customers. That will hurt the Internet, and current regulations do not allow it.
RSA is a bad idea in key exchanges as well.
By comparison in APL:

life←{↑1 ⍵∨.∧3 4=+/,¯1 0 1∘.⊖¯1 0 1∘.⌽⊂⍵}
The Macbook Pro has a fan. I think the same problem applies with a Xeon in the mix. I see those devices as a trend and an indication that Apple might have a problem judging the thermal of a new device. The iPhone 6 story is particularly relevant because it shows the way they might be inclined to "solve" any issues that come up.
In the last decade or even century, yes. But we have very little idea what the actual norm is in terms of fluctuations over the course of a few decades in the context of millennia because we don't have data at that granularity for the vast majority of history.
It might be against terms of service, but I very much doubt it's illegal.

Ten minutes of Googling shows nothing about running servers from my home being illegal.

How would they know you're hosting a server? I mean, practically speaking a server is just a computer you leave running 24/7.

Please could you provide some evidence of your statement, otherwise I don't think it's quite true.
100v in japan at either 50hz or 60Hz depending on where you are!
And the reason for the lack of competition is, again, the government with its enforcement of ISP monopolies. Why don't they stop micromanaging the markets there as well?
To understand Net Neutrality you first need to have an understanding of how the internet works. The internet is basically composed of a bunch of different networks. These networks interconnect with each other (see Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) for more details).

There are basically three different kinds of networks:
1) Networks that primarily host content; azure.
2) Networks that primarily do transit; level three.
3) Consumer Terminating Networks; Comcast.
I admit this is a generalization, and some networks fit multiple of these categories, but lets not get too bogged down in the details here, as I don't think it's necessary to understand net neutrality.

Given these types of interconnected networks lets go through an example. Let say a consumer wants to watch Netflix. The consumers pays Comcast to access Comcast's network and get some bandwidth. Netflix pays their hosting network, and possibly a transit network for bandwidth. Comcast either directly, or through another networks connects to Netflix's hosting network. Neither Netflix or Comcast necessarily pays anything to these in-between networks. This works because these in-between networks trade about the same amount of traffic (see Peering). This is basically net neutrality; you pay Comcast for some bandwidth, Netflix pays their host and the content flows freely.

Without net neutrality Comcast can change you, Netflix, or both more to connect to each other. It can make Hulu free to connect to. It can make youtube inaccessible unless you get the super premium package. No one is just paying for bandwidth anymore, someone is paying for individual services on top of bandwidth. This allows Comcast to either pick the winner by making their services cheaper, or lets the company which pays Comcast the most be most available to their customers.

So what it really boils down to is, are you paying for bandwidth that you choose how to use, or not.

Personally, I'd rather just pay for bandwidth.
Eventually, NFS ends up freaking out and consumes all I/O on the client machine until it is rebooted. I suspect that this occurs when the underlying network is saturated, but don't have evidence of such. CentOS 6/7, NFS v3/v4, tuned every setting I could think of, and spent dozens of hours Googling and reading.

It may be worth mentioning that we had decent throughput with NFS. Roughly 10 writes per second (from 100kb-250mb) and 20 reads per second (IIRC).

We use rclone to do a daily backup from primary -> secondary cloud file store, and use a little wrapper function in app to switch which host we're pulling files from so it's not too hard to failover during an outage.

I do agree with you about vendor lock-in though, it's nasty stuff. At the end of the day it comes down to time allocation. I'm a one-man ops show with too many other things to do than to wake up with a Pingdom alarm at 3AM because of NFS.
"Single dollars" is still a nosebleed-high fee for a simple electronic value transfer. Consider that pricing on something like an ach transfer is quoted in fractions of a percent (so like 75 cents for $100 USD sent - and caps out entirely at some low value like $5 per transaction regardless of the payment size.
We have oceans of data around a lot of things that supposedly scientific-minded people prefer to ignore.

There's also the fact that agenda-based science (not saying that's what this is) can easily produce an ocean of data, e.g., showing that tobacco doesn't cause lung cancer.

EDIT: To the downvoters, I shouldn't have used "Big Tobacco". I would prefer not to name other areas of research to try and keep this non-political. I am only pointing out that data and its interpretation are two very different things, and the incentives matter.
Your quote is a great example of Pai strategically shining Net Neutrality in a negative light. In the current day and age there is plenty of concern around and overreaching government so hey, lets make the argument that this vote is about giving the government less control of the internet!

Except that's not what this vote is about. The government currently says that ISP's must treat internet traffic equally. This is a good thing and is hardly micromanaging. Without it, an ISP is able to kill their competition and extort other companies.

Examples:
In 2005 the FCC ordered an ISP to stop blocking VOIP calls on their network. The ISP had their own phone service, so they started to block VOIP services on their network in order to force customers to use their phone product. Without NN, this is okay.

In 2005 the AT&T CEO claimed that "Anybody who expects to use our pipes for free is nuts!". ISP's want to demand a cut from every website just to reach their customers. Without NN, this is okay.

In 2012 AT&T decides to block FaceTime on its mobile networks for subscribers unless they enter into a “Mobile Share” plan. Without NN, this is okay.

There are more examples available, these all came from http://whatisnetneutrality.org/timeline.

The internet should really be nothing more than a dumb pipe. Your ISP should be doing nothing more than connecting you to the internet. They should not have a say in what websites you go toor what services you can use. They should not be able to force websites to pay for access to their customer base. The ISP should provide you X Mbps for Y GB of bandwidth and that's it.
Show HN: Try Puppeteer – A New Chrome Headless / Puppeteer Playground
As part of wrangling Google Chrome's Puppeteer into something usable for a SaaS product I created a sandbox/playground for myself. Now I launched it for everyone.

It is heavily inspired by Google's Eric Bidelmann's https://try-puppeteer.appspot.com/ but I guess my version is more stable and throws in some nice examples and the ability to take multiple screenshots. I will also actively maintain, monitor and develop it. See also https://github.com/GoogleChrome/puppeteer/issues/1555
Git is not a mission critical data store. Corruption should cause a bad day, not a disaster.
I don't think it would work. A 4k screen has 8Mp, that's less than a cell phone camera. The artefacts will likely be obvious to those who know where to looks.

Printing may be a better option with regard to resolution but because the print color gamut is different, simple analysis can probably give away the trick really easily.

Furthermore, assuming EXIF informations are signed along with the rest of the picture, you also make all the metadata match the picture. A sharp picture and bright daylight is not consistant with a slow shutter speed for instance.
From what I've read it's much closer to 100% than it is to 50% in terms of what percentage of the current warming since 1950 can be attributed to humans.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97...
You are correct, of course, but in the case of a twitter thread, the author themselves has (perhaps begrudgingly) already broken their train of thought into bite-size pieces. In fact, the commenter you were responding to already did so and you chose to elide the back half of that point to make a quick rhetorical point, rather than engage with them. The twitter thread model has its benefits in this regard.
Yeah, young is probably the wrong choice of words on my part. "Premature" would have been better.
You can configure any Mac to boot into native Windows (and/or Linux and/or MacOS).
Of course power users will figure out ways around the restrictions. What we're fighting for is the general consumer use case and what eliminating neutrality does to the innovative potential of the Internet. Eliminating neutrality will entrench existing players in the marketplace. New internet-connected startups will not only have to compete on product, they'll also be artificially disadvantaged by the gatekeepers.

These new startup's customers' packets can be deprioritized by the customers' ISPs unless the new startup pays a bribe.

The bribe that existing big players (Facebook, Netflix) need to pay will be significantly less (or even zero) because of the leverage of their large customer base and brand recognition. The ISP may face blowback from its users for degrading service to those existing players. The fledgling startup doesn't have this leverage, so the ISP can extort it.
What we’re seeing is that most weights are actually spurious. This in effect reveals the underlying circuitry. I did network pruning on gene regulatory networks using an evolutionary algorithm (mathematically identical to artificial neural networks.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2538912/
Wow, pension funds should not be doing currency speculation. That's bad.

The problem with crypto-_currency_ is that it's not a productive asset. A share of a business pays dividends over time and thus has intrinsic value (and _some_ speculative value), while a currency does not. A currency transaction is a zero-sum game, which is good because it minimizes friction.

Buying cryptocurrency with the expectation of increases isn't investment, it's _speculation_.
When you were hiring developers was Toptal the only platform that you used to hire developers? Did you choose it because you were on it previously? Did you try any others?
Alabama Elections who is going to win?
> Especially if you aren't a social butterfly.

The best way to get those 10 enthusiastic users, without being a social butterfly (in a traditional sense), is to manufacture them through inclusion. For example, find a subreddit that is relevant to what you're doing, and sell a batch of users on being early adopters (a certain type of people love that). Then give those people credit, attention, and make them feel like their input matters and that their contribution to the thing matters. Basically, make it personal for them, cultivate that experience. For a lot of people those last few concepts can be very rewarding, they'll become your first cheerleaders (and just one of those on eg Reddit can spark something). I've observed that people who are not traditional social butterflies, can still often function at a decent social level on sites like Reddit (at least enough to do what I've described).
Become a better creator with this one simple trick
I liked this article. A clear question, simple experiment and simple answer.

Those milliwatt draws though seem a bit high, and this was for pre skylake. I'd like to know how Windows compares, and I expect it still does better.
Simon Sinek has an interesting hypothesis about the cause of the breakdown in politics in his book "Leaders Eat Last". I'm giving a very brief summary, but in that book he suggested that most US federal politicians used to live a lot of their careers in Washington DC, attend similar social events and send their children to the same schools, which helped them relate to each other (across party lines). It is suggested that the closeness created decency and civility between them, but now that a lot of them still live in their home states, they no longer see the opposition as similar to themselves, and it's become a "us vs them" kind of thing for everything.
Watching this whole thing really has me scratching my head. Honestly - the value of BTC in a decade is anyone’s guess.

For me, I have a modest holding (in terms of its USD value today as compared to my other investments). After much wrestling, I’ve decided to just let it sit and be done with it. If it crashes back to pennies, oh well. If it goes to the moon, I’m glad I had a piece of the action.

As much fun as it seems, I’ve made the deliberate decision to not try to game / day trade it. It’s been possible to try to make money like that in Vegas for many years and that’s never been that interesting to me, either.
I meant udders here but that's probably obvious.
The cult-like “hodl” culture in the Bitcoin community exacerbating the already limited supply of Bitcoins (if it were a stock, it would be a “low-float” stock, which results in increased vol) has served as the perfect breeding ground for a bubble.

As Bitcoin becomes extremely mainstream, those who hodl Bitcoin with religious fervor are increasingly becoming a smaller minority. Eventually it’ll reach critical mass and there will be enough disloyal Bitcoin ownership to cause a panic at the first significant sign of selling.
You remember it, so it clearly worked.
We've already asked you twice to stop trolling, so we've banned this account. We're happy to unban accounts if you email us at hn@ycombinator.com and we believe you'll start following the guidelines.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Needs a (2001) tag, but fascinating demonstration with get marketing.
I worked at a startup where we had a “waiting list” model - a page where you gave us your email and you’d get an invite later.

The CEO thought this was a good way to build up anticipation, and make sure things were fully polished before opening the floodgates.

We got a few waves of attention, which meant we had about 30k emails on the list at some point.

Of course, this large number put more pressure on us to “get things perfect before we launch”, and it was over a year before the CEO decided it was time to let everyone in.

But by the time we did, people had lost interest, and our conversion rate was abysmal. While a bit buggy and unpolished, the product was still very functional a year before, and had we just let people in we’d probably have gotten very valuable feedback a year early.

(I left the company a long time ago, and it is now in zombie mode)