skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
So what's the end-game here? Future society needs to schlep a history of current societies banal social media content along with?

This feels religious; Oh, just upload it all to digital Heaven! I'll never "die" and people can continue to revere me and my cats forever!

Just because we can doesn't mean we should care about preserving every bit and byte. Especially since the computing infra for that has real environmental costs.
The line isn't as sharp as you might think.

Certain private spaces are considered "public" in some regards, such as right of access and some free speech rights (e.g. handing out pamphlets in malls).

Also some "public" spaces are privately owned (e.g. the park where Occupy Wall Street got its start was supposedly open to the public as a condition of getting some building permits, yet the landowner spent money evicting the occupiers).

The casino isn't free to bar people of certain races, and it may have other restrictions as well. Though spying is presumably unrestricted :-(.
Many top schools (e.g., Harvard) are essentially free (both in terms of tuition and from loans) for children of families making under roughly $100,000.
Totally Kenya's mobile payment system evolution from SMSing minute refill codes, to an actual legally recognized form of payment is the original Blockchain in my mind :)
But that is exactly my point, in that market , there is demand and need for innovation that means crypto (while inflated right now) is here to stay.
People who call Bitcoin a 'Ponzi scheme' , type of plant or apply whatever reduction on a very complex and innovative product are just mind boggling to me.
> C was also king of the zero cost abstractions.

Seriously? That's news to me. Only C zero cost abstractions I know of are based on external code generators. Or some macro abuse, but that's rather limited way to create abstractions.

But then again, when you really need to understand everything that is going on, abstractions are often not helping you.

(I write kernel drivers and bare bones embedded, where memory measured in kilobytes, not megabytes.)
Quantum computing will not replace your word processor, and we don't need it for things like building websites, apps, or really most software...of course, there are potential applications in AI, but that aside it's not generally applicable in that sense. However, when it comes to scientific computing, or the development of new technologies, materials, medicines, etc...it's potential applications within those domains are likely transformative. Without going into too much detail, everything you see around you(chemicals, compounds, etc) can be broken down within the theory of QED(quantum electrodynamics) ultimately, and quantum computers can do calculations for QED/quantum chemistry much better than classical computers...so the question becomes...what can you do now that you can simulate reality much more accurately? These are likely to be the most important applications for the next 5-10-15 years.
The perfect crime. /s
US banks are protected via FDIC insurance. In a similar manner your stocks are protected by SIPC insurance. They don't insure you against loss in value to the stocks. But if the firm winds up going bankrupt and somehow looses your stock, the CEO absconds with the money, they get hacked, etc, then you'll be protected up to $500,000.
CCW citizens are very often the people who take down such shooters. Your comment seems to imply otherwise.

A recent example is the Texas church shooting that happened recently, where an armed citizen with a non-concealed firearm in that case, wounded and then chased down the shooter, unfortunately after he had already killed multiple people. Sadly, nobody in the church was armed, as even CCW holders who frequently go armed will not think to do so at church.
They got US cable distributors because they were insanely popular for years even though that kind of distribution wasn't available.
Most loans are private and not given by the federal government; subsidized loans from the government are actually very limited.
> sell us out to big corporations by not implementing proper features in protocols like HTTP/2 so we can get tracked

What are you referring to here?
> Translate idiomatic Go into concise Javascript that works in every browser. Use Go's type system and world-class tooling to build large web applications with confidence.

Thanks, but for type system we already have type script. Secondly, the post powerful Golang feature which is you know co-routines can't be translated to javascript
A local currency should be beholden to local regulation.

A global decentralized currency should be beholden to every local regulation in which it is used, since the users fall under that jurisdiction - if it's not compatible with local regulation, then it should stay away from that locality and the people there.

In particular, ICOs should care about USA regulation if they want to attract money from people in USA; they can freely ignore SEC iff they keep their activities outside of USA and don't attempt to market their "investment" to customers in USA.
The IRS wants to be paid in cash, not illiquid stock.
A person with a gun is statistically more likely to shoot up a place than a person without a gun.
Anyone else get this when using the test server feature?

Host xyz.zyx added to queue.

It can take a few minutes till the test is finished. This page will be automatically reloaded.

But then the page never actually reloads?
Now try sending some of that money to a third world country and see how much they get between the fees they pay western union and the thugs waiting outside to 'tax' you.
From sale to end point .. where'd my money go ? lol
Why does Apple think it's OK to basically weld these units shut?

You don't have / spend the extra for a bigger disk or memory and your screwed. You will need to buy a new one...
Casinos have been tracking you for a while now. Think of how many cameras are around you at any given moment.

https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Passcode/Passcode-Voices/201...

https://www.blackjackinfo.com/just-how-smart-is-the-eye-in-t...
Disney Is Building the Streaming App to Rule Them All
Mint 18.3: The best Linux desktop takes big steps forward
Astronomers are set to scan an 'alien' comet for sign of extraterrestrial signal
Bitcoin Cash scales far better than Litecoin.
All meaningful progress comes with some risk. You can argue that the status quo is worth preserving but some of us will never agree with that.
Google has more servers, AI experts, engineers, experience, ...

They should in theory be able to provide far better de-personalized search results than DuckDuckGo.
Probably, this is one reason why a lot of the ICOs are being scrutinised.

A small number of investors buy up the tokens, the ICO then sells out in record time and looks like it’s some kind of amazing hot tech.

As soon as the tokens become tradeable, the value is immediately several times higher (due to the hype) and the original investors cash out a large portion of their investment.

Due to the immense amount of capital they can then rinse and repeat on every token sale and spread out their portfolio across the entire crypto space. If a token does skyrocket they’re invested enough to still profit.
>Sure there are lots of people who are buying crypto because they think they'll make loads of money but a significant portion of us are in it because we dislike the infantilizing ways the current banks hold us hostage.

Sure, but if someone scoops your crypto coins, or you leave them in an exchange that's hacked, you basically have no way to get it back.

This is trading a serious amount of security granted to us by world governments for convenience. It also increases your cognitive load of handling your crypto safely.

That bank sounds terrible, and it can vary from branch-to-branch which is frustrating.
Nice Threads
Law firms websites put where their attorneys went to law school (always) and where they were undergraduates (usually); take a look at where they went sometime.
That is not correct; rebase per se doesn't rewrite history.

Rebase is basically just cherry picks. You can rewind a branch and then cherry-pick, so that the picks are non-fastforward. That's rewriting history. Cherry picking without rolling back is fastforward, and so doesn't rewrite history.

The Gerrit review system on top of Git is based on cherry-picking; it doesn't rewrite history.

If some developers are collaborating on a feature which is on a branch, they could agree from time to time to rebase that branch to a newer mainline.

Whether or not that is done by a history rewrite simply hinges on whether the same branch name is used for the rebased branch or not. The rebase is what it is: if you plant that rewrite as the original branch name, then you have a non-fastforward change. If a new branch name is made, then it isn't a rewrite.

Merging a feature branch onto a trunk can always be done in a fastforward way using rebase/cherry-pick.

Rebasing is provably simpler than merge. Merge depends on complications in the git object representation which could be removed while rebase remains what it is. If you only ever rebase, you never see a commit with multiple parents; the feature is superfluous and turns git histories into hairballs.
>However, note that the official client comes with "blocklists" which may be used for censorship.

If IPFS ever does take off, this is crucial to avoiding the reputation stink as "that piracy thing" which bittorrent currently enjoys.
> they're like lottery tickets that are only mostly, but not completely, up to chance

> if you know some quantitative finance [...]

> a simpler approach is to do a rough back-of-the-envelope calculation [...]

You're looking at this as if you're calculating the odds of winning the lottery and doing backwards math to figure out the viability. That's only half of the picture.

There are a lot of circumstances that do happen and can't be put into a math equation.

1) If a company is striking gold and you have significant options they can fire you before the rest of your options vest to get more stock back into the pool. See: Zynga

2) If the company needs to grow fast but doesn't have enough stock to offer new employees they can ask you to relinquish stock back into the pool to help hire more employees. If you refuse, go back to #1. There was a good post on HN where someone was being strong armed like this.

3) Dilution will happen. You can't account for how founders and investors will dilute things because there's a lot of tricks that can happen here.

4) At the end of the day, you're counting on the company to go public or be sold. The problem is that founders turn down huge acquisitions all the time, only to have the company -- and your stock -- become worthless. See: Digg and the would-be-millionaire employees that ended up with fat debt from exercising.

There's plenty of ways that your stock can go bottom-up that have nothing to do with the success of a company.
For chat
hi
Lots of preferred stock does not carry the right to be transferred (or to be transferred free of other restrictions, e.g. a right of first refusal). SPV transfers are a convenient, if mutually-overlooked, workaround. Their existence is rarely explicitly negotiated.

Are you assuming that most corporate M&A lawyers don't know a basic holding structure taught the first week of the M&A class in law school? SPVs are not mutually overlooked workarounds, they're usually not worth the hassle in most situations. When they exist, they do so because the use of an SPV to hold the stock of the issuing company was explicitly negotiated as part of the investment because the securities law, tax, financing, and other considerations for stock held through an SPV, especially through a pass-through SPV like an LLC, can be very different from stock held directly. This is especially true for startups or other privately held companies with relatively complex ownership structures. (The use of SPVs is not negotiated for publicly traded companies, because the company's permission isn't required to acquire their stock.)
https://givehongbao.com/campaigns 404?
If it means people who welcome scams with open arms all go off to an island somewhere, then yes this is a good thing.

I love how quickly people forget history then come crying to daddy government when they get the paddling they so richly deserve from a silver tongue devil who parted them with their money.
Why can't people make their own choices and purchase any cancer drugs they choose, regardless of whether the FDA has vetted them at ludicrous expense?

Why can't people make their own choices and buy poultry off the back of a van rather than from an FDA-inspected distribution chain?

Why can't people make their own choices and dine at restaurants that can offer lower prices in exchange for not undergoing inspections, or, for that matter, city building code inspections? Believe it or not: having invested in more than one local food venture, those expenses are intimidating and a blocking issue.

You can believe all regulations are pointless and that the market would handle those issues better than the state. I don't agree, but you'll have an intellectually coherent argument.

Otherwise, you should find an argument specific to the particular regulation that's troubling you today.
@Astura Estonia are actively enforcing their policy around X-road, the US (where I reside) is full of loopholes exploited by big tech platforms
Who are the powers that be that benefit from fatter pipes + content distribution?
Adguard 1.5 Build 404 Full Crack for Mac Full Registered
This really does feel firmly hypothetical.

Well I do want my information private, it would have to be 100%. What's the point in paying Facebook or Google for privacy when every other website I encounter, even if for something as simple as shopping or reading a personal blog, is working to build and share a profile of me?

I also can't help but feel some amount of distrust seeing companies like Microsoft ask $200 for a product, then inject ads and force telemetry. Paid or not, if companies can sneak in some way to increase the bottom line, some will.

This isn't even to mention that they've clearly drank their own Kool-Aid about personalization being a "feature."

To me, this feels like an issue issue that business isn't suited to deal with and that requires regulation.
How often does that scenario happen?
Yes, in theory Ethereum is the better way. I was a strong believer in the "flippening" and exited some of my BTC position based on that belief.

But ... it may be a long time before that theoretical superiority translates to practical. Ethereum has been plagued by a hard fork and semi-regular thefts that exploit hard-to-write contracts, plus the Parity bug:

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/11/with-...

None of this inspires confidence. Only after ETH can go for a while without these nightmares can it regain its well-deserved spot in the lead. (And imho that would involve a migration to a less error-prone language.)

The closest Bitcoin had was the database code in a client implementation that had to be fixed (and had major consensus).
More layers allowed us to explore exponentially more network architectures. And if you look at a lot of advances in deep learning, particularly in convnets, the architecture is actually key - as important or more than the weights themselves. I guess another thing is that more layers give a disproportionate increase in performance. Some of it is hardware but there have definitely been advances in the theory; people aren't getting these new results from 10, 20 yr old networks that have been made larger.
Economics and innovation are two of the least zero-sum things I can think of.
A particular instrument might blur the lines in terms of how it's packaged and promoted, but the underlying activities aren't blurry at all. People who acquire an asset in the hopes that its price will rise so they can resell it on a secondary market are speculating ("investing"), full stop.

Obviously, this isn't the first time we've had offerings ostensibly taking these forms. People used to buy comic books in the hopes of their appreciation. Ty sold Beanie Babies to people who were stockpiling them for eBay.

The reason Ty didn't get in trouble, but Munchee did, was that Ty was never stupid enough to record videos extolling the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity people had to 9x their investment in restaurant review coupons. Again: a very significant component of the SEC's concern is about marketing and promotion.
I can't speak for the parent but he did say "cannot really". I would assume due to that he's aware you can write a research project in it. At one point, I thought Windows was to move to .Net even and MS backed out in the end.

Back to Go, for anyone else reading this thread and wondering what Rob Pike thinks it is, evidence of them removing "systems programming" off their website is here. He explicitly states that he regrets it and that Go is not an OS writing language[0]. Andrei Alexandrescu offers a litmus test shortly after with a property of a systems programming language that Go also fails. If the creator of a language says it's not a systems programming language, I'm not sure how it can be argued by outsiders that it is.

If there's more damning evidence that Go is not a systems programming language, I couldn't imagine what that would be. A shortlist of systems programming languages that would pass any litmus test would include C, C++, D and Rust.

[0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBbv1ej0fFo&feature=youtu.be...
Yeah, it would be great also if supermarkets would accept a fraction of the stock, in return for baby food. But I'm not sure why they would be willing to do that.
Microbundle: zero-configuration bundler for tiny modules
Well one thing is Litecoin has a much larger supply (3.24x according to Coincap). In terms of market cap & supply as of today a $15k Litecoin is equivalent to ~$50k Bitcoin. The market cap of Litecoin alone would be 0.84 Trillion. It's possible I suppose but I think you'd need some pretty serious institutional buying (or gaming of the system which only lasts so long).
Because people who are smart enough to think of that aren't stupid enough to have silly password requirements.
I was a heavy Typescript user and a big fan. I personally found Go's type system and overall ecosystem to be much easier to grok, especially when it came to interacting with 3rd party packages. If you read through https://mat.tm/joy/#why you'll read more about my perspective there.

Actually to my surprise, goroutines and channels can be modeled quite well in Javascript! Right now the compiler uses async/await but for 1.0, I think it's possible to compile it down to ES3.
The war for wearables is over, and Apple won
I would make all of those arguments so I guess I’m intellectually coherent:)
> This has been discussed many times on HN. The purpose of the law isn't to prevent "poor people" from doing anything. The purpose of the law is to prevent companies from making unregistered sales of stock to people who aren't (1) saavy enough to evaluate the risks of their investment or (2) wealthy enough to survive a financial loss if the investment does not bear fruit.

This is all true, however laws should be judged by their effect, not by their purpose. This law effectively allows rich people to do things that poor people can't. It also may protect un-saavy investors, although I would argue that an un-saavy investor will inevitably find some other way to lose their money regardless of the accredited investor law. They're probably buying bitcoins right now or something.
OP's comment is exactly right, and I've noticed a trend in the Financial Times over the past several years to jump increasingly on social activism bandwagons. The way they've lionized Ellen Pao, for example, a figure who has turned exploitation of these bandwagons into a personal brand, has been incredibly frustrating to watch.
That page will 404 since there's no campaign (campaigns are at addresses like: https://givehongbao.com/campaigns/support-jimmy-wales-of-wik...

If you want to create a campaign (free of charge) visit: https://givehongbao.com/create
> we already have type script. Secondly, the post powerful Golang feature which is you know co-routines can't be translated to javascript

FYI GopherJS (the original Go -> JavaScript transpiler) has full support for goroutines. So "can't be translated to javascript" isn't quite right.
Their natural predators are sea turtles, so there's one big upside!
Isn't ws:// also a new-ish protocol that is not supported yet by many browsers natively at least?
Technically the "you" in your statement is not the same person/people as "the people buying Macbooks or using Linux directly". But I see what you mean. Hopefully you also see what I mean - that nobody in their right minds would think that PuTTY is trying to be bash+ssh. PuTTY is the ssh part of that combination, and there are plenty of options to cover for the bash part too.

PS: From the fact that you refer to Visual Studio as "VS.Net", I take it that you haven't been in Microsoftland for a while. No serious developer uses these "play-buttons" to do their automated testing and/or deployment.
Wouldn't a while loop be a better option there?

From what I understand the point of a for over a while is that you will iterate for a certain known number of times. But if you aren't doing that (break) isn't the while a better option so you can encapsulate the break in the condition as opposed to random locations in the block.
Large investors bought stock. Small investors (employees) bought stock. Price went up. Price went down. The former could get cash for their shares, the latter could not. Price kept going down.

You don’t need to be an M&A lawyer to see why that’s problematic.
> Thanks, but for type system we already have type script.

The post describes how the author has used, and liked, TypeScript but still wants Go's type system.

> Secondly, the post powerful Golang feature which is you know co-routines can't be translated to javascript

Why can't it be translated? A 5-second search of the git repo found this test case specifically checking whether goroutines are translated correctly:

https://github.com/matthewmueller/joy/blob/bb4ad647369331b55...
The next time you buy some stock, thank the Q language for making it happen.
Vertical and horizontal here seem quite confusing. The absorptive polarizer with vertical lines drawn on it passes through photons passing through PBS, which game calls horizontal. So either the polarizer lines have negative logic (indicating what is absorbed, not passed through), or there is some inconsistency. Similarly, the horizontal polarization is represented as photon bouncing up and down ("vertically") if it travels right. This can get confusing.

I wonder if some polarization arrow can be drawn somehow, like: https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTAlDUU...
كيف التعامل مع الناس
This is a security vulnerability in Safari, and should be reported and assigned a CVE as such.
Fruit cake! The gift everyone loves to throw away!
Hey sorry for the oversight there, I'll be documenting this in further in the next few days, but for now you can head over to: https://github.com/matthewmueller/joy/issues/56 to read more
I wouldn't dismiss the butterfly effect so quickly. She was certainly early in this wave, and the cumulative inertia has to be part of why things ended up as they are.