skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
About this:

"No. Just no. Please stop spreading FUD like it's candy. Git only deletes commits after a GC, which won't erase commits from reflog and will keep unreferenced commits for at least a month before deleting them."

It is frustrating that you continue to take your advanced skills for granted. It is frustrating that you can not see what should be an obvious fact: that your skills are above average and therefore it is a mathematical fact that most people have less skill than you, and their lack of skill is a real world business situation that needs to be dealt with realistically. And more so, for the rest of your career your skills will continue to develop, so the gap between you and the average will continue to grow, and therefore the damage that you can do will continue to grow, if you fail to recognize that you are above average.

I can assure that I've seen data lost forever because of "git rebase". It doesn't matter that someone with your skills could have saved the situation. You were not there, therefore your skills don't matter! It is very important that you see this, or you will never be able to give accurate advice to business leaders.

If the leadership of a company decided to hire people with a skill level of x, then they should not also use a technology that requires a skill level of x + 1. You can reasonably tell them "For what you are trying to do, you should hire people with a skill level of x + 1." That is exactly what I did in the situation that I describe here:

https://www.amazon.com/Destroy-Tech-Startup-Easy-Steps/dp/09...

But sometimes the business leadership will disagree with you. They may have terrible reasons, but if you can not get them to change their minds, then you need to deal with the consequences of their bad decisions. At which point it makes sense to advocate for a technology that only requires a skill level of x.

[ EDIT TO ADD ]

I'll point out that you are demonstrating a classic case of the Dunning–Kruger effect. In particular:

"the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others."

That is, you have above average IQ and skill, therefore you perceive things to be easy, which are in fact not easy for the average.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

You are an elite programmer. Try to avoid acting like the kind elite programmer that I criticized in "Business productivity has been undermined by the hubris and power-grabbing of elite computer programmers".
Hmm. If you can mine 15 trillion hashes per second you are likely to find one bitcoin after 486 days (derived from numbers on this site www.cryptocompare.com). The human rate of hashing is .67 hashes per day. Based on a price of $1 million for one bitcoin, that would translate to a break even salary of one million-billionth of a penny per hour. Probably be hard to find good people at that rate.
This is some brilliantly satisfying pure evil.
>why not just hold the real dollars?

Some exchanges don't accept fiat, so if you want to trade USD/BTC you settle for USDT/BTC.
Prices only move because of successfully filled orders. It is extremely unlikely that the bid side of the orderbook is completely empty. The worse case is that longs may get liquidated substantially below their liquidation price, depending on the exchange, loss is either socialised or paid thru the insurance fund. At no point would the exchange be bankrupt.

Coinbase/gdax is a joke of an exchange and handles nowhere near the volume of bitmex or bitfinex.
I completely understand this argument, and I've heard it many times before. I'm not entirely sure I agree with the fundamental premise though. I'm not convinced that encouraging economic growth is actually worth the required level of allowing rich guys to literally print money and use it for their own gains, which effectively what the entire central banking and banking system is and does.
I think we gave it the good ol hug of death
I'm not suggesting Bloomberg is accepting money, but individual writers would be a much softer target.

It's also possible that the writers are invested in Bitcoin themselves.
> Even with a content-centered web, there will be a need to find content and people, and new discovery engines and aggregators will emerge.

Sure, but why should we rely on a single middleman who at some point could abuse his power? Something like Google search could possibly work in a decentralized fashion.
This is precisely one reason I like Mercurial over Git. Hg has commands which are more meaningful than those of git.
GlobalFoundries is getting massive incentives to expand in New York State. The initial Saratoga Springs is just the first fab Cuomo has built for them. Currently, they're building another fab in Utica that's intended to rehabilitate it after its Rust Belt woes.

Similarly, Tesla/Solar City received a huge number of economic incentives to build a factory in Buffalo.

Naturally, since this is NYS there's also been a fair bit of corruption:

[1] http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Kaloyeros-in-fight-t...

I fully expect the state government to throw a bunch of incentives at Amazon as well for HQ2- there's a push in Rochester for someone to take over all of the Kodak/Xerox buildings after those two companies royally messed up.
“There will be a [Senate] vote” to reinstate net neutrality, Schumer says
Does anyone know if this is just marketing or if they've actually solved the technical problem. If they have solved it, what's the ETA (months, years, decades)?
Yes, this is another one that confuses developers. When you 'git add' a file, it's added to the staging area as it was at that time. If you make subsequent modifications after you've staged it, those are unstaged changes. And you can diff between them. So despite git add'ing a new file, you still have to 'git add' afterwards if you make changes to it.
macawfish is suggested distributed search indexes, which is a neat idea that YaCy [1] explores.

We're looking at adding a private search index in the browser itself. This index would be constructed by adding dat sites to your 'library,' and directing it to crawl the outbound links.

What's unique about this is, other than the private queries, we can establish trust relationships with all the data in your results. This is particularly useful for searching for users or software, since you want to trust those results. Dat is a cryptographic network - all sites, users, and apps are represented by public keys, and all data is signed - so your search results are a search against your personal Web of Trust.

When you search for "Paul Frazee," if you had previously added 'dat://beakerbrowser.com' to your library, then you'd see a result for "Paul Frazee (via beakerbrowser.com)". We can layer those signals too by matching URLs, so your result might be "Paul Frazee (via beakerbrowser.com, Alice, Bob)." Dat uses secure ledgers internally [2] so this is really a pretty decent form of key distribution, but of course it can be generalized to searching for all kinds of information. We just have to find out the limits of disk space usage.

I have more to say, but I'll add it with a reply to remain timely.

1. https://yacy.net/en/index.html

2. https://beakerbrowser.com/2017/06/19/cryptographically-secur...
This elegantly captures something I think I've always observed, but been unable to articulate, in all of the superintelligence literature and the AGI / AI safety line of thinking: There is an implicit set of unarticulated underlying assumptions, and biases, that form the foundation from which the rest of the argument is "logically" progressed or extrapolated/ inferred.
Letitsnow.js
[SATIRE] 4 Bad Office Pets
Unethical crony capitalism can destroy capitalism through the accumulation of wealth and centralization of power. What's the difference between 5 robber barons running the show and 5 members of the party vanguard?

I'd suggest if you are a serious fan of capitalism, you take the arguments seriously.
I'm talking about appearances. It does not matter if anyone's privacy was actually violated, what matters is the message the ad sends, and that message is "we're looking at the exact viewing habits of individual people".
> So, the headline is hyperbolic because the Kochs didn't make the decision, but ...

And by "hyperbolic" you mean "complete fiction". It's like saying "Soros is to blame for political violence in US" because some of Soros funds have found way to Antifa groups, which are known to be violent.

> Which implies that they did in fact want this

Opposing government taking over infrastructure? Sure did, they are known for their libertarian views. Opposing specific municipal project? They probably had no idea it exists. If they did, I could plausibly imagine they might oppose it, but it's not the reason to put words in their mouth and describe something they didn't as something they did.

> if you ignore all their other constant political gamesmanship for ends such as these.

By using term "gamesmanship" you imply there is something nefarious in voicing their opinion and supporting causes they consider just by means like donating their own money and trying to explain to people their point of view by using their own money. I wonder do you deny this right to every US person or just ones that disagree with you or just ones that have money and disagree with you?

> Seems like we are having our cake and eating it too.

Not sure what you mean by "cake" here. The situation is simple - Kochs are known libertarians and donate to tons of libertarian causes. TPA is one of the "small government" groups that got some money under it, through network of affiliates. They opposed specific municipal project, as they think it is better to be done privately and not by government. Wired tried to present this completely mundane political occurrence as a nefarious plan by a shady billionaires to deprive us of Internet (no doubt in service of their ultimate goal of enslaving us all). Shame on the Wired for doing this hack job. End of story.
The comparison to credit card theft is inappropriate; you are not exposing your private information in the same way you are with a credit card. When you pay for something online, you are transmitting your credit card number over the wire. When you pay for something with BTC, you are sending merely a signed transaction over the wire. When submitting a credit card or debit card number, you are trusting that the merchant or people that work for the merchant will not steal all the funds from your account, and that is why you need extra guarantees from your bank (granted, those guarantees are not always upheld https://nypost.com/2017/12/14/after-losing-familys-846k-inhe...). With BTC, it is not a requirement for an online transaction to expose credentials which allow an untrustworthy actor to drain your account. Similarly, you do not have as much risk from a Man-In-The-Middle attack with BTC.

For sure there are some untrustworthy exchanges as there are untrustworthy ICOs, but you have two options that are far better. You can rely on US Banking regulations and pay higher fees through Coinbase and Gemini, where your deposits are insured; or you can use a decentralized exchange like etherdelta that relies on atomic swap contracts.

As you mentioned, Monero (and potentially z-cash) are there as solutions to anonymity.
In OOP, a factory is a pretty common design pattern, and I'm a bit surprised you've never seen it in 15 years of software development... considering it's taught in schools these days. In a nutshell, a factory is a class who's purpose is to generate instances of other classes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factory_method_pattern).

The main reason they're used is to create objects without specifying the class of the object, however there are plenty of other reasons why they're common as well.

You start stretching it when you have FactoryFactory. This presumably would be a factory that creates factories. If I saw this in a code review, I would call it out, as it could most likely be refactored to be simpler. FactoryFactoryFactory is beyond silly.
Inadequate Equilibria by Eleizer Yudkowsky
What are the different limiting values for a^b (a->0, b->0) considering all paths in the a-b plane? If there are as many points generated as are generated by considering only "Manhattan" paths, then I think it's appealing to think of it as a sequence of single-variable limits.
> That too late thing is coming sooner than later.

Not saying it's not coming, but can you estimate the time frame? Otherwise, this statement basically contains zero information.
Good article.

Two things were not addressed though, which I think have a bigger impact than the things he mentions:

1 - scalability (e.g. transactions per second) of the bitcoin block chain is abysmally low. So low in fact, that today’s society would crumble on it as it currently exists;

2 - credit markets are not addressed. How do you loan money in a bitcoin world? Our society is built upon credit transactions, from buying houses to wasting money on gadgets with credit cards. If debt cannot be issued, then it will never amount to more than second place. Perhaps a medium of exchange for the Zimbabwe’s of the world, but not supplanting a modernized country’s currency.

[edited for spelling typo]
Bitcoin, gold, and stocks couldn't be more different. Gold has intrinsic value and stocks give you ownership in a value producing company.
No one is buying those tethers. Bitfinex is printing them and using them on their own exchange's margin trading market. They use it to wash trade the price up or down as desired. There is some evidence they have been wash trading down to trigger stop loss sell orders and buying the cheap coins. Then they wash trade up and sell.
That's the theory but studies haven't found that tips improve service.

(pdfs):

http://scholarship.sha.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?artic...

http://scholarship.sha.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?artic...

There are also issues where tipping can be biased due to racial or gender discrimination. Racial discrimination (I don't have a gender study handy): https://psmag.com/economics/racism-black-restaurant-waiters-...
If by "get too wild" you mean "achieve regulatory capture over the agencies and frameworks intended to prevent them from engaging in short-term profitable but long-term risky behaviors", then, sure.

But you can swap out currencies and still have that exact same problem. In some Bitcoin-based parallel universe, you'd just have a different set of companies hiring the same lobbyists and cutting the same political contribution checks, in order to achieve the same sort of favorable regulation and risk shielding.

This is the key problem that I think Bitcoin boosters fail to grasp: the government didn't bail out the banks because they're banks. The government bailed out the banks because they got themselves into a position where they could demand a bailout and get it. There's nothing about banking qua banking that allows this; you can do it (and historically it has happened) in other industries.

Blockchains don't fix that, because it's not a technological problem. It's a political and sociological problem, not amenable to quick technical fixes.
Why not neither?

The greatest danger to Civilization, in my not-so-humble opinion is tribalism. My country is better. My religion. My political philosophy. My color. My sex. My gender.

And I'll riot and kill if you don't agree.

Capitalism? Socialism? AI? Those won't overcome the stupidity of large populations of humans.
>"The handwave is the word "prefigure". How did IPv4 and NAT play any role in the dominance of Facebook, Airbnb et cetera?"

I don't see any handwaving in the word "prefigure" at all. The first middle men were arguably dial up ISPs. They literally brokered your connection to the internet. You got an IP from a dial up pool. Besides having a transit connection these companies had the pool of IP addresses you needed to be a node on the internet.

And so in some way that was the first "computer in front of your computer" business model. I think the author is drawing a through line from there and the business of brokering internet traffic. I don't believe they not saying that NAT enabled FB.
>Personally I don't really care if it takes 5% longer to get where I needed to go or not.

>Especially if I get the huge benefit of not having to drive.

>Driving risky really doesnt speed up your commute very much.

A car behaving will be like a student driver (or delivery truck) at every intersection at which it needs to pull into traffic could easily double or triple your commute time depending on your commute.

Pulling out into traffic should be something that a driver-less car can be much better at. If it isn't at least as good as the average perspective customer people won't buy it.

I would say this is particularly critical metric for taxi fleets since they do a lot of driving on city side streets. People will take taxi with the human if it's faster.
You don't give a reason for this:

But please don't teach them SVN

Why would you say this?

You also say:

If the company hires lower skill people, you can just guide choose a branching mode suited for their needs

If the company has lower skill people, why not go with the technology that requires less skill? This seems like an obvious step.
Was it one of those cheap RC helicopters that uses IR for control and the IR blaster on the remote was triggering some kind of IR sensor on the soap dispenser that is normally trigger by a nearby hand?
Agen Judi Poker Online Indonesia
But he's not donating to the church for "penance". He's helping save lives from malaria, and working on other projects to help the developing world! You can't dismiss that, and he's giving away so much of his money that it can't be considered a "fee". He's gonna 90% of it away by the time he's done.
I'm sorry but you can't possibly be serious. There is no sane motivation for a *FactoryFactoryFactory class. No problem on earth is complex enough to benefit from that much abstraction.
Also, any new emails you received since exporting your mailbox will not be available.
They were, but back then, that stuff seemed much more marginal, now it's seems front and center with even major players engaging in some bad behaviors.
Could you elaborate what you think those underlying assumptions are?
However they don't take commuter bus services, or drive, or ride a bike, or move closer to the office, or change job location, or change job times.

The media has driven this culture of people believing in 'rip off Britain'. If people were commuting 100 miles a day for the cost of a cup of coffee they'd still say it was a rip off (although oddly it would be the commute, not the £4 latte)
I like fugitive - it feels like cli git without having to leave the editor. GAdd adds the currently file/selected lines, GBlame pulls up git blame information the ability to reblame, GStatus show the status with the ability to jump to/stage/unstage files and so on.
Tried Magit for a while but it didn't play nice with evil.

Still hoping for a git repl that just does graph queries/transformations though.
>How did IPv4 and NAT play any role in the dominance of Facebook, Airbnb et cetera?

Very directly, I would say, by making the barrier to running your own low-traffic website too high. Modern social media is all about hosting content - microblogs, photos, etc. Geocities was an early workaround to an inability to host things, and it's worth remembering that MySpace was originally positioned as a kind of evolution of that with the social aspects bolted on - it (notoriously) allowed arbitrary HTML, so that you could make your own "homepage" on the internet. Facebook further evolved this, offering a much more restricted experience. Were it not for NAT, I would have expected an explosion in tiny self-hosted personal sites around the time that dialup was replaced by always-on cable connections, and before long we would probably have had various wordpress-like frameworks to do the social aspects. Which is not to say we wouldn't have eventually had a Facebook-like entity, but it would have faced much stiffer competition than it did, and people would perhaps have been less forgiving of its restrictions if they'd had an easily-accessible wild-west to compare it to.
Do you know if any of these exchanges are part of the index CME uses?
And the market cap is over a billion! I wish I could print a billion in monopoly money and exchange it 1:1 for real dollars...

https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/tether/
That's not capital in the sense of durable assets to be depreciated. That's an operational expense.
The author does not seem to be asserting that these services add no value, rather that similar value can be added by decentralized alternatives.
That's an interesting point: if I had to guess at an explanation, I'd say that "runaway capitalism" makes people miserable and in well-franchised societies the people will always demand that the government step in (see: so much of US history, the fact that this article was written).

However, if the people of a country are asking that too much be "given" to them (I.E. more than the country actually has), who's going to stop that? It surely won't be the same people that supported the bad administrators to start with. The only people who resist this bad end are the fiscal conservatives that always keep an eye on the budget, and if they aren't there to start with (preventing the monetary crisis from starting in the first place) then, well, nobody's going to rally the "radical fiscal conservative revolutionary front."
You should take a look at Rancher[1]. I think it has the right mix of raw access to Kubernetes and associated tools, but also addresses some of the requirements you have.

1: https://rancher.com

Disclaimer: I've been working in the container ecosystem for a number of years, currently at Rancher.
and why do you think people keep turning to socialism?
could it be because capitalism has a tendency to run amok?
How is atlassian's Sourcetree?
My bad, then it was "reverse" in Source Tree (or whatever it was).
Runaway capitalism, oh shit. So that does that mean:

- Global poverty will continue to decrease

- We'll get a variety of options to choose from whenever we want to buy something

- We'll get to choose how to spend our own money

- We'll get quick and diligent service

- If we don't like something, we can choose to stop buying it or working for them?

The horror!!!!!
Market makers will have to trade on these unregulated exchanges so that they can hedge. So all you have done is unload the risk to the MMs. Which means if the MMs operate on the same risk model as you. Then you can expect the futures products to be highly illiquid.
The time and effort you would spend in scanning the receipts would be better served by simply entering the data manually into a spreadsheet - that's what I do. it also allows me to pull in data for the electronic transactions and make a custom budget :)
Well they were kinda right. AOL was merely an early iteration of what we have now. Maybe another company will surpass FB but I am pretty sure from iteration to iteration it will be harder and harder to replace an incumbent since each round's winner will be more powerful than the previous one.

AOL, for instance, was mostly an American thing. FB, otoh, has global power.
The Koch brothers fund libertarian groups, so it shouldn't be surprising to find these groups are against ISPs funded through tax dollars.
Ask HN: How long did it take GEMINI to approve your ID?